# INTRIGUE IN IRAN: U.S./Israel Murder Iranian Nuclear Scientist...



## paulitician

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVdIgi3KZjk&feature=fvst]Iranian Nuclear Scientists Bombed - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## jillian

you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes. 

right?

pathetic.


----------



## paulitician

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsshaGYD8M8]Car bomb kills Iranian &#39;nuclear scientist&#39; - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## paulitician




----------



## California Girl

If Obama is behind this.... 'well done, Mr President'.


----------



## paulitician

jillian said:


> you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes.
> 
> right?
> 
> pathetic.



Yet they want them or already have Nukes themselves.


----------



## theHawk

jillian said:


> you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes.
> 
> right?
> 
> pathetic.



Then why isn't one of those Arab countries being accused of this murder?


----------



## paulitician




----------



## occupied

Why do you jump to conclusions and lay the blame on the US and Israel just like Ahmawhatchacallit?


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac

First of all there is 0 evidence that anyone in particular is linked to this bombing. 

Secondly your chosen leader wouldn't have even considered such actions. 

Title is very misleading at best.


----------



## WatertheTree

paulitician said:


> Iranian Nuclear Scientists Bombed - YouTube



THE WAR HAS BEGUN.  We have troops moving into the area for a 'training mission' with Israel  Russia knows what is going on and they are moving forces to defend Syria.  China is talking shit to us now.


Are you people prepared for another global conflict?


----------



## paulitician

His wife was also critically injured in the attack.


----------



## DiamondDave

WatertheTree said:


> paulitician said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian Nuclear Scientists Bombed - YouTube
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE WAR HAS BEGUN.  We have troops moving into the area for a 'training mission' with Israel  Russia knows what is going on and they are moving forces to defend Syria.  China is talking shit to us now.
> 
> 
> Are you people prepared for another global conflict?
Click to expand...


If this is the case... and we're talking hypothetically... you know any 'conflict' would happen right before election time, right?


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac

WatertheTree said:


> paulitician said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian Nuclear Scientists Bombed - YouTube
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE WAR HAS BEGUN.  We have troops moving into the area for a 'training mission' with Israel  Russia knows what is going on and they are moving forces to defend Syria.  China is talking shit to us now.
> 
> 
> Are you people prepared for another global conflict?
Click to expand...


Shouldn't you return to your fake moon landing investigation?


----------



## ekrem

California Girl said:


> If Obama is behind this.... 'well done, Mr President'.



And if the Iranians start to assassinate US scientists, or engage in sabotage of US's nuclear facilities you'll start your blame-game of the "evil Iranians"?


----------



## Katzndogz

California Girl said:


> If Obama is behind this.... 'well done, Mr President'.



If obama knew, he would have undoubtaby given the details to Iran and stopped the attack.  A man that would give the codes to control our drones to the Iraninans and Chinese is capable of anything.


----------



## California Girl

ekrem said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Obama is behind this.... 'well done, Mr President'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if the Iranians start to assassinate US scientists, or engage in sabotage of US's nuclear facilities you'll start your blame-game of the "evil Iranians"?
Click to expand...


If they were stupid enough to try that, I'd say we bomb them back to the stone age.... which would be about a decade in Iran's case.


----------



## ekrem

California Girl said:


> If they were stupid enough to try that, I'd say we bomb them back to the stone age.... which would be about a decade in Iran's case.



Your smiley is an attestation to your disrespect to human life. 
In my book there' is no difference between an American or Iranian, you make hardly any argument against why Iran shouldn't seek nuclear weapons given the mindset of its adversaries.


----------



## Douger

California Girl said:


> ekrem said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Obama is behind this.... 'well done, Mr President'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if the Iranians start to assassinate US scientists, or engage in sabotage of US's nuclear facilities you'll start your blame-game of the "evil Iranians"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If they were stupid enough to try that, I'd say we bomb them back to the stone age.... which would be about a decade in Iran's case.
Click to expand...


Been watching Rush Limbaloney again CG ?
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23Ws0Xy4QjE&feature=related]The Real Iran the US Doesnt Want You to See - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## California Girl

ekrem said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If they were stupid enough to try that, I'd say we bomb them back to the stone age.... which would be about a decade in Iran's case.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your smiley is an attestation to your disrespect to human life.
> In my book there' is no difference between an American or Iranian, you make hardly any argument against why Iran shouldn't seek nuclear weapons given the mindset of its adversaries.
Click to expand...


My smiley is an attestation to my sense of humor. Stupid question, stupid response. In my book, there is a huge difference between a sane country with a sane leader, to a jack shit bunch of jihadists, led by a clinically insane whackjob. I would prefer that clinically insane whackjobs not have the ability to destroy the world that the rest of us inhabit.


----------



## California Girl

Douger said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ekrem said:
> 
> 
> 
> And if the Iranians start to assassinate US scientists, or engage in sabotage of US's nuclear facilities you'll start your blame-game of the "evil Iranians"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If they were stupid enough to try that, I'd say we bomb them back to the stone age.... which would be about a decade in Iran's case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Been watching Rush Limbaloney again CG ?
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23Ws0Xy4QjE&feature=related]The Real Iran the US Doesnt Want You to See - YouTube[/ame]
Click to expand...


Again, for the terminally stupid.... I can't watch Limbaugh, even if I wanted to - which I don't.


----------



## Douger

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_J6ijR1VWw&feature=related]Iran Isn&#39;t Sand, Camels and Sheep - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## ekrem

theHawk said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes.
> 
> right?
> 
> pathetic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why isn't one of those Arab countries being accused of this murder?
Click to expand...


This is a discussion-board, people will hold-up to their beliefs if it supports their arguments.
There are circles who want confrontation with Iran and it getting "bombed to the stone-age". They use this Arab argument in line with their wish without questioning probability of likelihood of their claims. 
"Oh look even the Arabs have nothing against another conflict in Muslim world, so let's bomb them". 

No Arab country will participate or support any aggression against Iran. If a country does, they will be "Arab-Spring"ed  out of their palaces by their citizens.


----------



## jillian

theHawk said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes.
> 
> right?
> 
> pathetic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why isn't one of those Arab countries being accused of this murder?
Click to expand...


because israel gets accused of everything... including 9/11... it's a facile way for anti-semites to enjoy themselves.


----------



## ekrem

California Girl said:


> My smiley is an attestation to my sense of humor. Stupid question, stupid response. In my book, there is a huge difference between a sane country with a sane leader, to a jack shit bunch of jihadists, led by a clinically insane whackjob. I would prefer that clinically insane whackjobs not have the ability to destroy the world that the rest of us inhabit.



Your sense of humor about getting people bombed into stone-age is indeed an attestation.
But, I don't see it as an attestation of humor but as an attestation of you being an idiot.


----------



## paulitician

ekrem said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Obama is behind this.... 'well done, Mr President'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if the Iranians start to assassinate US scientists, or engage in sabotage of US's nuclear facilities you'll start your blame-game of the "evil Iranians"?
Click to expand...


That's different. To most Americans,it just is. Years & years of Militarization propaganda have clouded their judgement. It is sad but it is what it is.


----------



## WatertheTree

*Israel; The terrorist state.  Proud new member of the axis of evil.*


----------



## ekrem

paulitician said:


> That's different. To most Americans,it just is. Years & years of Militarization propaganda have clouded their judgement. It is sad but it is what it is.



She's an idiot who ran across the board to discredit people who criticized bombing Al-Qaeda into power in Lybia, just because her self-chosen home-country was one of the 2 to push this campaign through. 

She should devote her energy into cooking or cleaning the house instead of philosophizing about bombing people into stone-age.


----------



## High_Gravity

Good, fuck them.


----------



## High_Gravity

Katzndogz said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Obama is behind this.... 'well done, Mr President'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If obama knew, he would have undoubtaby given the details to Iran and stopped the attack.  A man that would give the codes to control our drones to the Iraninans and Chinese is capable of anything.
Click to expand...


You have to be completely intoxicated to make posts like this.


----------



## High_Gravity

ekrem go fuck some more sheep and shut the fuck up faggot.


----------



## JStone

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxAKFlpdcfc]Applause - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## JStone

High_Gravity said:


> ekrem go fuck some more sheep and shut the fuck up faggot.



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FS5Xpdu4ELE]Sex with Animals in Islam - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## JStone

*US Drone Attacks In Pakistan*
*Drone attacks in Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia*


----------



## JBG

I'm so saddened by the killing of this virtuous scientist. Since the incineration of neighboring people is a clear benefit to the average Iranian, he was doing so much to advance the welfare and living standards of Iranian people.

He will sorely be missed. I'm saying the Jewish prayer of mourning for him at Temple this Friday.


----------



## GHook93

Say what you want about the Big O, but he has no problem taking out Islamic scum!


----------



## JBG

GHook93 said:


> Say what you want about the Big O, but he has no problem taking out Islamic scum!


I gues he likes to eat his own.


----------



## theliq

California Girl said:


> If Obama is behind this.... 'well done, Mr President'.


Don't think so Cali,this has Israel written all over it.But will be interesting Irans response......let the fireworks begin.tl


----------



## theliq

JBG said:


> I'm so saddened by the killing of this virtuous scientist. Since the incineration of neighboring people is a clear benefit to the average Iranian, he was doing so much to advance the welfare and living standards of Iranian people.
> 
> He will sorely be missed. I'm saying the Jewish prayer of mourning for him at Temple this Friday.


 Sorry but remove the Australian FLAG,as we are not to be associated with the dealing of the US,ISRAEL or GREAT BRITAIN,thanks. tl


----------



## theliq

jillian said:


> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes.
> 
> right?
> 
> pathetic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why isn't one of those Arab countries being accused of this murder?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> because israel gets accused of everything... including 9/11... it's a facile way for anti-semites to enjoy themselves.
Click to expand...

Come off it Jillian,Israel are great exponents of this type of thing..worldwide....and another thing.....where is it and why is it ANTI-SEMETIC to have this pathetic one liner that you use all the time when folk are commenting on reality.

You may go around with your head up your Ass but your comments don't mean anyone else does.......it's just your ploy to try to prevent people from highlighting the facts because it involves Israel.

Anyway YOU are ONE OF THE WORST ANTI-SEMITES on here with your total vilification of the Palestinians,who too are a Semetic peoples.

And please none of your idiot negging thanks,I have just heard enough of your idiocy.

I'm theliq........of course I am        AS NORMAL I DID GET THE USUAL MORONIC NEGO,OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN'T TEACH AN OLD DOG NEW TRICKS tl 14.01.2012


----------



## RetiredGySgt

ekrem said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Obama is behind this.... 'well done, Mr President'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if the Iranians start to assassinate US scientists, or engage in sabotage of US's nuclear facilities you'll start your blame-game of the "evil Iranians"?
Click to expand...


Provide some credible evidence the US had anything to do with it? For that matter provide Evidence Israel did either.


----------



## theliq

JStone said:


> *US Drone Attacks In Pakistan*
> *Drone attacks in Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia*


Change the record Stoney,its BLOODY BORING ALL THE TIME.steve


----------



## RetiredGySgt

theliq said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then why isn't one of those Arab countries being accused of this murder?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because israel gets accused of everything... including 9/11... it's a facile way for anti-semites to enjoy themselves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Come off it Jillian,Israel are great exponents of this type of thing..worldwide....and another thing.....where is it and why is it ANTI-SEMETIC to have this pathetic one liner that you use all the time when folk are commenting on reality.
> 
> You may go around with your head up your Ass but your comments don't mean anyone else does.......it's just your ploy to try to prevent people from highlighting the facts because it involves Israel.
> 
> Anyway YOU are ONE OF THE WORST ANTI-SEMITES on here with your total vilification of the Palestinians,who too are a Semetic peoples.
> 
> And please none of your idiot negging thanks,I have just heard enough of your idiocy.
> 
> I'm theliq........of course I am
Click to expand...


So provide proof Israel did it. Or do you just KNOW it.


----------



## theliq

RetiredGySgt said:


> ekrem said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Obama is behind this.... 'well done, Mr President'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if the Iranians start to assassinate US scientists, or engage in sabotage of US's nuclear facilities you'll start your blame-game of the "evil Iranians"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Provide some credible evidence the US had anything to do with it? For that matter provide Evidence Israel did either.
Click to expand...

Retired..US ...NO, ISRAEL more likely,in fact more than more likely.tl


----------



## theliq

RetiredGySgt said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> because israel gets accused of everything... including 9/11... it's a facile way for anti-semites to enjoy themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> Come off it Jillian,Israel are great exponents of this type of thing..worldwide....and another thing.....where is it and why is it ANTI-SEMETIC to have this pathetic one liner that you use all the time when folk are commenting on reality.
> 
> You may go around with your head up your Ass but your comments don't mean anyone else does.......it's just your ploy to try to prevent people from highlighting the facts because it involves Israel.
> 
> Anyway YOU are ONE OF THE WORST ANTI-SEMITES on here with your total vilification of the Palestinians,who too are a Semetic peoples.
> 
> And please none of your idiot negging thanks,I have just heard enough of your idiocy.
> 
> I'm theliq........of course I am
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So provide proof Israel did it. Or do you just KNOW it.
Click to expand...

 I wiil BET my HOME ON IT.....as long as YOU DO THE SAME.    its called putting your money where your mouth is.tl


----------



## RetiredGySgt

theliq said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Come off it Jillian,Israel are great exponents of this type of thing..worldwide....and another thing.....where is it and why is it ANTI-SEMETIC to have this pathetic one liner that you use all the time when folk are commenting on reality.
> 
> You may go around with your head up your Ass but your comments don't mean anyone else does.......it's just your ploy to try to prevent people from highlighting the facts because it involves Israel.
> 
> Anyway YOU are ONE OF THE WORST ANTI-SEMITES on here with your total vilification of the Palestinians,who too are a Semetic peoples.
> 
> And please none of your idiot negging thanks,I have just heard enough of your idiocy.
> 
> I'm theliq........of course I am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So provide proof Israel did it. Or do you just KNOW it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I wiil BET my HOME ON IT.....as long as YOU DO THE SAME.    its called putting your money where your mouth is.tl
Click to expand...


Until you provide credible evidence you are a fool.


----------



## theliq

RetiredGySgt said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> So provide proof Israel did it. Or do you just KNOW it.
> 
> 
> 
> I wiil BET my HOME ON IT.....as long as YOU DO THE SAME.    its called putting your money where your mouth is.tl
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Until you provide credible evidence you are a fool.
Click to expand...

 O well more of the same from you,but we will see who's right......me again no doubt......but I note that YOU are not prepared to take the challenge......Why would that be I wonder.

Many have tried to take me on,all defeated of course,and YOU are merely just another notch in a long,long line. theliq not worried just HAPPY.By the way YOU HAVE NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE AT ALL IN AND BY YOUR STATEMENT,NO CREDIBILITY WHAT SO EVER.A point you should analyse before you open your mouth,which is pretty FOOLISH don't you think?


----------



## High_Gravity

theliq said:


> JBG said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm so saddened by the killing of this virtuous scientist. Since the incineration of neighboring people is a clear benefit to the average Iranian, he was doing so much to advance the welfare and living standards of Iranian people.
> 
> He will sorely be missed. I'm saying the Jewish prayer of mourning for him at Temple this Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but remove the Australian FLAG,as we are not to be associated with the dealing of the US,ISRAEL or GREAT BRITAIN,thanks. tl
Click to expand...


Fuck you, Australia is an ally of the US, the UK and Israel, get over it faggot.


----------



## JStone

theliq said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wiil BET my HOME ON IT.....as long as YOU DO THE SAME.    its called putting your money where your mouth is.tl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Until you provide credible evidence you are a fool.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> O well more of the same from you,but we will see who's right......me again no doubt......but I note that YOU are not prepared to take the challenge......Why would that be I wonder.
> 
> Many have tried to take me on,all defeated of course,and YOU are merely just another notch in a long,long line. theliq not worried just HAPPY.By the way YOU HAVE NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE AT ALL IN AND BY YOUR STATEMENT,NO CREDIBILITY WHAT SO EVER.A point you should analyse before you open your mouth,which is pretty FOOLISH don't you think?
Click to expand...


I thought your New Year's resolution was to try to form a coherent thought, freak.


----------



## JStone

theliq said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Come off it Jillian,Israel are great exponents of this type of thing..worldwide....and another thing.....where is it and why is it ANTI-SEMETIC to have this pathetic one liner that you use all the time when folk are commenting on reality.
> 
> You may go around with your head up your Ass but your comments don't mean anyone else does.......it's just your ploy to try to prevent people from highlighting the facts because it involves Israel.
> 
> Anyway YOU are ONE OF THE WORST ANTI-SEMITES on here with your total vilification of the Palestinians,who too are a Semetic peoples.
> 
> And please none of your idiot negging thanks,I have just heard enough of your idiocy.
> 
> I'm theliq........of course I am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So provide proof Israel did it. Or do you just KNOW it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I wiil BET my HOME ON IT.....as long as YOU DO THE SAME.    its called putting your money where your mouth is.tl
Click to expand...


Betting your trailer isn't much of a bet


----------



## JBG

theliq said:


> Sorry but remove the Australian FLAG,as we are not to be associated with the dealing of the US,ISRAEL or GREAT BRITAIN,thanks. tl


I'm sorry but are you AU's PM? The last PM that thought the way you did dd not fare well at Malcolm Kerr's hands on November 10, 1975.


----------



## theliq

High_Gravity said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JBG said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm so saddened by the killing of this virtuous scientist. Since the incineration of neighboring people is a clear benefit to the average Iranian, he was doing so much to advance the welfare and living standards of Iranian people.
> 
> He will sorely be missed. I'm saying the Jewish prayer of mourning for him at Temple this Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but remove the Australian FLAG,as we are not to be associated with the dealing of the US,ISRAEL or GREAT BRITAIN,thanks. tl
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you, Australia is an ally of the US, the UK and Israel, get over it faggot.
Click to expand...

 Allied YES but with certain conditions,we don't believe in systematic murder Gravity,or urinating on dead foe for that matter........................ Our are Military are regarded as worlds BEST,its called disipline,so NO more Fucking Faggot Thanks or my Mrs will have to give you a good thrashing with that leather whip of hers.tl


----------



## theliq

JBG said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but remove the Australian FLAG,as we are not to be associated with the dealing of the US,ISRAEL or GREAT BRITAIN,thanks. tl
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry but are you AU's PM? The last PM that thought the way you did dd not fare well at Malcolm Kerr's hands on November 10, 1975.
Click to expand...

 You are talking of the reviled DRUNKARD Mr Kerr,Yes I am Australian but NOT YOU OBVIOUSLY because you would have know that it was Sir JOHN Kerr and he put Malcolm Fraser into power.NOW GET RID OF THE FLAG as we are much different in every way to the other three.tl


----------



## theliq

JStone said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> So provide proof Israel did it. Or do you just KNOW it.
> 
> 
> 
> I wiil BET my HOME ON IT.....as long as YOU DO THE SAME.    its called putting your money where your mouth is.tl
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Betting your trailer isn't much of a bet
Click to expand...

 Sorry to dissappoint Stoney but its a three storey home on the beach front(value A$2.5 million,but I have 3 others plus a load of Commercial Property and Land).All started with a $200 base.

Now I could teach you how to get out of the gutter if you so wished.

I'm theliq,I don't deal in Bull Shit......That I leave to others,but I am interested in seeing my latest deal with Retired though......but I'm a big man on reflection and would never take anyone's home off them,so I recind my bet with the Army Sargent Retired.  latest Australia 1v0 US/Israel


----------



## JStone

theliq said:


> JStone said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wiil BET my HOME ON IT.....as long as YOU DO THE SAME.    its called putting your money where your mouth is.tl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Betting your trailer isn't much of a bet
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry to dissappoint Stoney but its a three storey home on the beach front(value A$2.5 million,but I have 3 others plus a load of Commercial Property and Land).All started with a $200 base.
> 
> Now I could teach you how to get out of the gutter if you so wished.
> 
> I'm theliq,I don't deal in Bull Shit......That I leave to others,but I am interested in seeing my latest deal with Retired though......but I'm a big man on reflection and would never take anyone's home off them,so I recind my bet with the Army Sargent Retired.  latest Australia 1v0 US/Israel
Click to expand...


You forgot to take your anti-psychotic medication like the nice nurse asked you to do.

Maybe, after, you'll be able to form a coherent thought, freak


----------



## theliq

JStone said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JStone said:
> 
> 
> 
> Betting your trailer isn't much of a bet
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry to dissappoint Stoney but its a three storey home on the beach front(value A$2.5 million,but I have 3 others plus a load of Commercial Property and Land).All started with a $200 base.
> 
> Now I could teach you how to get out of the gutter if you so wished.
> 
> I'm theliq,I don't deal in Bull Shit......That I leave to others,but I am interested in seeing my latest deal with Retired though......but I'm a big man on reflection and would never take anyone's home off them,so I recind my bet with the Army Sargent Retired.  latest Australia 1v0 US/Israel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You forgot to take your anti-psychotic medication like the nice nurse asked you to do.
> 
> Maybe, after, you'll be able to form a coherent thought, freak
Click to expand...

 Usual CHRONIC ONE LINER Stoney but freakism ain't my bag,but you seem well enough ploughing that trail,best of luck with your furrowing,Gee the gentle cool sea breeze is in early,shame you ain't here,you could stay for lunch.steve


----------



## Dr Grump

jillian said:


> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes.
> 
> right?
> 
> pathetic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why isn't one of those Arab countries being accused of this murder?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> because israel gets accused of everything... including 9/11... it's a facile way for anti-semites to enjoy themselves.
Click to expand...


99 percent sure Israel did it...

Feel sorry for the guy as a human being - you know, off to work, has a family etc. But not if what he was trying to do was to become successful...


----------



## JStone

Dr Grump said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then why isn't one of those Arab countries being accused of this murder?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because israel gets accused of everything... including 9/11... it's a facile way for anti-semites to enjoy themselves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 99 percent sure Israel did it...
> 
> Feel sorry for the guy as a human being - you know, off to work, has a family etc. But not if what he was trying to do was to become successful...
Click to expand...


Off to work to commit genocide, jackass.  Motherfucker and his family got what is deserved.  Daddy won't be home, tonight


----------



## JBG

JStone said:


> Off to work to commit genocide, jackass.  Motherfucker and his family got what is deserved.  Daddy won't be home, tonight


Couldn't agree with me more. And SunniFaggot, neg me again!


----------



## Jroc

Israel did us and the rest of the world a favor.


----------



## hjmick

It's just as likely that the scientist had outlived his usefulness, the Iranian government decided to take him out just in case he talked and took the opportunity to try and pin it on the U.S. and Israel...


----------



## geauxtohell

I love how we just automatically get blamed for this.  

Apparently a paranoid mind and the accusations of the regime automatically make us culpable for this act.  

(Even though assassinations are against our laws).


----------



## Trajan

paulitician said:


> Iranian Nuclear Scientists Bombed - YouTube



I happen to think they did it, that is someone in the Iranian intel service.


----------



## JBG

hjmick said:


> It's just as likely that the scientist had outlived his usefulness, the Iranian government decided to take him out just in case he talked and took the opportunity to try and pin it on the U.S. and Israel...


I happen to think, and hope, Israel did it.


----------



## JakeStarkey

theliq is a loon, a thelip loon, a thicklipliq loon.  Loony but funny.

Israel probably did it, and maybe with CIA knowledge and help, and if so, well, good for them.

No reasonable thinking person believes that the Iranians can compete with the Mossad or the CIA in this type of warfare.  Who they going to hire, the Bulgarians?


----------



## JBG

JakeStarkey said:


> No reasonable thinking person believes that the Iranians can compete with the Mossad or the CIA in this type of warfare.  Who they going to hire, the Bulgarians?


Well the Bulgarians almost nailed the Pope.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Many, many years ago, and still failed.  Were they the folks with the poison tip needs on umbrellas plus crazy gunmen?


----------



## theliq

JBG said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> No reasonable thinking person believes that the Iranians can compete with the Mossad or the CIA in this type of warfare.  Who they going to hire, the Bulgarians?
> 
> 
> 
> Well the Bulgarians almost nailed the Pope.
Click to expand...

 Get us off that BULL SHIT FLAG tl


----------



## thetor

JakeStarkey said:


> theliq is a loon, a thelip loon, a thicklipliq loon.  Loony but funny.
> 
> Israel probably did it, and maybe with CIA knowledge and help, and if so, well, good for them.
> 
> No reasonable thinking person believes that the Iranians can compete with the Mossad or the CIA in this type of warfare.  Who they going to hire, the Bulgarians?


Are you a weirdo or what,you say theliq is a Loon,yet he/she has been consistent in his/her statements and you agreed with him/her saying Israel murdered this man.

Am I missing something here??or are you a LOON TOO.tor


----------



## JakeStarkey

thetor said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> theliq is a loon, a thelip loon, a thicklipliq loon.  Loony but funny.
> 
> Israel probably did it, and maybe with CIA knowledge and help, and if so, well, good for them.
> 
> No reasonable thinking person believes that the Iranians can compete with the Mossad or the CIA in this type of warfare.  Who they going to hire, the Bulgarians?
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a weirdo or what,you say theliq is a Loon,yet he/she has been consistent in his/her statements and you agreed with him/her saying Israel murdered this man.
> 
> Am I missing something here??or are you a LOON TOO.tor
Click to expand...


  What I am saying is theliq is being silly with the facts.  Yes, I think the CIA and Mossad were in cahoots on this.  Yes, I think they did the right thing.  Yes, this is better than war.  And, no, Iran is not capable of killing our scientists here.

Are you clear about it all, grasshopper?


----------



## paulitician

So assassinating foreigners we don't like is now acceptable? Everyone hopping on that bandwagon? Ok. But just remember,it works both ways.


----------



## JakeStarkey

"we don't like"?  I don't like you, but I don't want you murdered.  If someone were building an atomic weapon that you would use against America or Israel, then, yes, I would reconsider that position.


----------



## georgephillip

"Buried deep in the archives of America's intelligence services are a series of memos, written during the last years of President George W. Bush's administration, that describe how Israeli Mossad officers recruited operatives belonging to the terrorist group Jundallah by passing themselves off as American agents. 

"According to two U.S. intelligence officials, the Israelis, flush with American dollars and toting U.S. passports, posed as CIA officers in recruiting Jundallah operatives -- what is commonly referred to as a 'false flag' operation."

False Flag - By Mark Perry | Foreign Policy 

Elites in Iran, Israel and the US all require a distraction from the onrushing global economic collapse.

Why not another war?
It's not like the 1% will sacrifice their children or treasure.


----------



## theliq

JakeStarkey said:


> thetor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> theliq is a loon, a thelip loon, a thicklipliq loon.  Loony but funny.
> 
> Israel probably did it, and maybe with CIA knowledge and help, and if so, well, good for them.
> 
> No reasonable thinking person believes that the Iranians can compete with the Mossad or the CIA in this type of warfare.  Who they going to hire, the Bulgarians?
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a weirdo or what,you say theliq is a Loon,yet he/she has been consistent in his/her statements and you agreed with him/her saying Israel murdered this man.
> 
> Am I missing something here??or are you a LOON TOO.tor
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What I am saying is theliq is being silly with the facts.  Yes, I think the CIA and Mossad were in cahoots on this.  Yes, I think they did the right thing.  Yes, this is better than war.  And, no, Iran is not capable of killing our scientists here.
> 
> Are you clear about it all, grasshopper?
Click to expand...

Goodness you really are the PITS,so what you NOW advocate is that its OK for a foreign power to go around assassinating other countries citizens,eg: so by your standards it's OK for say,A YEMINI to assassinate Mitt Romeny for instance.........Sorry Pal,it is YOU WHO ARE THE LOONY.

Anyway it was Israel who murdered this scientist,as the US do not assassinate in this way,the US share information but the US do not murder in this manner.

You need to get your facts correct before you start accusing folk,me in this case as being loony because if you can't deal with these piquant situations you end up becoming a bit of a Bore.theliq NOT LOONEY,..NEVER BORING..but right as always


----------



## theliq

JakeStarkey said:


> "we don't like"?  I don't like you, but I don't want you murdered.  If someone were building an atomic weapon that you would use against America or Israel, then, yes, I would reconsider that position.


 YOU ARE A COMPLETE HYPOCRITICAL MORON,YOU SAY "I WOULD RECONSIDER THAT POSITION",Yet you say you are happy about the assinassion,previously.....and the future remifications worldwide!!!!!!!.Not too smart really ARE YOU,but then you never were.theliq Nothing Amusing about YOU that's for sure.


----------



## JakeStarkey

theliq is loony.  read the posts above and see the lack of internal consistency.  whether theliq, or Iranians, or whomever were building an atomic weapon to use against us, then, yes, assassination is absolutely acceptable in place of widespread war.

theliq is not even amusing anymore,simply tedious and hollow.


----------



## Two Thumbs

paulitician said:


> Iranian Nuclear Scientists Bombed - YouTube



Are you seriously saying it WAS us or Israel?

Are you really taking Ahnadinerjacket word on this?


----------



## Sunni Man

Two Thumbs said:


> paulitician said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian Nuclear Scientists Bombed - YouTube
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you seriously saying it WAS us or Israel?
> 
> Are you really taking Ahnadinerjacket word on this?
Click to expand...

Of course it was either us or the Israeli's.

Who else is throwing a hissy fit over Iran's benign nuclear program?


----------



## thetor

JakeStarkey said:


> theliq is loony.  read the posts above and see the lack of internal consistency.  whether theliq, or Iranians, or whomever were building an atomic weapon to use against us, then, yes, assassination is absolutely acceptable in place of widespread war.
> 
> theliq is not even amusing anymore,simply tedious and hollow.


Funny how you react after he/she theliq punched you in the face twice,i think you were well sorted by him/her,now you run away,he/she is one hard SOAB,i don't blame you Jake.tor


----------



## JakeStarkey

Most of the civilized war is upset with Iran's program, Sunni Man.


----------



## OldUSAFSniper

An Iranian nuclear scientist had two guys on a motorcycle pull up, attach a bomb to his car, and then detonate it while they drove off.  The Iranians have no freakin idea who did it, but of course, they believe that since the US is the "great satan" that we are somehow responsible for it.

God, I wish.  However, if you think back to the killing of every high-profile terror target we have hit, there has been an in-depth analysis of the killing on news shows within 24 hours.  Even the high-profile terror leaders that we have captured have been analyzed from the soles of their feet to the tops of their heads in the public forum.  AND the bleeding left-wing members of this board have bled all over their keyboards about how horrible it is to 'torture' these poor innocent little citizens of the world in cold blood.

The Israelis on the other hand KNOW that to be successful consistently, you have to KEEP YOUR FREAKIN MOUTH SHUT.  It's a very small point, but if you're going to be succesfull at it in the future, you never open your coat and show them what's underneath.

This has Israeli written all over it.  God, you just have to love them people... talk about some serious players.


----------



## High_Gravity

Sunni Man said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> paulitician said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian Nuclear Scientists Bombed - YouTube
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you seriously saying it WAS us or Israel?
> 
> Are you really taking Ahnadinerjacket word on this?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course it was either us or the Israeli's.
> 
> Who else is throwing a hissy fit over Iran's benign nuclear program?
Click to expand...


The Arabs don't want Iran going nuclear either.


----------



## Sunni Man

High_Gravity said:


> The Arabs don't want Iran going nuclear either.


Some do; some don't.

Depends on which arabs you are talking about.


----------



## High_Gravity

Sunni Man said:


> High_Gravity said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arabs don't want Iran going nuclear either.
> 
> 
> 
> Some do; some don't.
> 
> Depends on which arabs you are talking about.
Click to expand...


Well the Saudis and Gulf Arabs definently don't, a nuclear Iran changes the whole dynamics in the region.


----------



## Truthseeker420

jillian said:


> you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes.
> 
> right?
> 
> pathetic.



So that makes them hypocrites?


----------



## Sunni Man

High_Gravity said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> High_Gravity said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arabs don't want Iran going nuclear either.
> 
> 
> 
> Some do; some don't.
> 
> Depends on which arabs you are talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well the Saudis and Gulf Arabs definently don't, a nuclear Iran changes the whole dynamics in the region.
Click to expand...

The U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan is what changed the dynamics of the Middle East.

Before our misguided invasion/occupation.

Both of those countries were ruled and controlled by Sunni's.

Now they are both dominated by Shia governments and friendly with Iran.


Prior to our invasions/occupations; Iran, the only Shia nation in the world, was isolated and alone.

But due to our meddling, Iranian/Shia influence and power in the region has increased a thousand fold. We open pandora's box and now we are going to have to live with the consequences.


----------



## High_Gravity

Sunni Man said:


> High_Gravity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some do; some don't.
> 
> Depends on which arabs you are talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well the Saudis and Gulf Arabs definently don't, a nuclear Iran changes the whole dynamics in the region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan is what changed the dynamics of the Middle East.
> 
> Before our misguided invasion/occupation.
> 
> Both of those countries were ruled and controlled by Sunni's.
> 
> Now they are both dominated by Shia governments and friendly with Iran.
> 
> 
> Prior to our invasions/occupations; Iran, the only Shia nation in the world, was isolated and alone.
> 
> But due to our meddling, Iranian/Shia influence and power in the region has increased a thousand fold. We open pandora's box and now we are going to have to live with the consequences.
Click to expand...


Well Iraq has a Shite government in power but the Afghans are still Sunni though correct? either way you definently make a valid point, our invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan definently helped Iran since they were enemies of both the Taliban and Hussein regime.


----------



## Sunni Man

High_Gravity said:


> Well Iraq has a Shite government in power but the Afghans are still Sunni though correct? either way you definently make a valid point, our invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan definently helped Iran since they were enemies of both the Taliban and Hussein regime.


President Hamid Karzai, the Afghan government, and the military are all Shia.

During the invasion we backed the Shiite dominated Northern Alliance who barely controlled 10% of the far northern areas of Afghanistan.

After the invasion we then put them in charge of the newly formed government.

And in charge of the whole country and military.


Afghanistan is 80% Sunni according to the CIA World Fact Book.

The Taliban are Sunni and will never allow themselves to be ruled and dominated by the Shia.

That's why there will never be peace and stability once we leave Afghanistan.


----------



## High_Gravity

Sunni Man said:


> High_Gravity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well Iraq has a Shite government in power but the Afghans are still Sunni though correct? either way you definently make a valid point, our invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan definently helped Iran since they were enemies of both the Taliban and Hussein regime.
> 
> 
> 
> *President Hamid Karzai, the Afghan government, and the military are all Shia.*
> 
> During the invasion we backed the Shiite dominated Northern Alliance who barely controlled 10% of the far northern areas of Afghanistan.
> 
> After the invasion we then put them in charge of the newly formed government.
> 
> And in charge of the whole country and military.
> 
> 
> Afghanistan is 80% Sunni according to the CIA World Fact Book.
> 
> The Taliban are Sunni and will never allow themselves to be ruled and dominated by the Shia.
> 
> That's why there will never be peace and stability once we leave Afghanistan.
Click to expand...


Hmm I did not know Karzai was Shite.


----------



## JBG

Sunni Man said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> paulitician said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian Nuclear Scientists Bombed - YouTube
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you seriously saying it WAS us or Israel?
> 
> Are you really taking Ahnadinerjacket word on this?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course it was either us or the Israeli's.
> 
> Who else is throwing a hissy fit over Iran's benign nuclear program?
Click to expand...




JakeStarkey said:


> Most of the civilized war is upset with Iran's program, Sunni Man.


If Sunni-turd really is a Sunni he shouldn't be happy with Iran's program either. Or maybe he's a piece of Shi'ite as well.


----------



## High_Gravity

TheAssLiq and his sock puppet TheTor are a bunch of ass clowns.


----------



## JakeStarkey

thetor said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> theliq is loony.  read the posts above and see the lack of internal consistency.  whether theliq, or Iranians, or whomever were building an atomic weapon to use against us, then, yes, assassination is absolutely acceptable in place of widespread war.
> 
> theliq is not even amusing anymore,simply tedious and hollow.
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how you react after he/she theliq punched you in the face twice,i think you were well sorted by him/her,now you run away,he/she is one hard SOAB,i don't blame you Jake.tor
Click to expand...


 I corrected the tor and the assliq for their stupidities, and all they can do is run around and go "wah"  

If they act like adults, we can go that way or they keep getting paddled. 

Up to them.


----------



## JBG

High_Gravity said:


> TheAssLiq and his sock puppet TheTor are a bunch of ass clowns.


Yeah. Lickass can't even get his Australian history straight.


----------



## Sunni Man

JakeStarkey said:


> Most of the civilized war is upset with Iran's program, Sunni Man.


Except for the U.S., Israel, and parts of Europe.

Most of the world doesn't care.


----------



## JakeStarkey

neener neener   you silly goof.  An atomic Iran is everybody's care.


----------



## Sunni Man

JakeStarkey said:


> neener neener   you silly goof.  An atomic Iran is everybody's care.


Iran is a peace loving nation and hasn't attacked another country in over 300 years.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Sigh.  All here can google Nader Shah, the Afsharid dynasty, the Zand dynasty, and the Qajar dynasty into the early 20th century.  Bloodthirsty Sunnis and Shi'ites, plenty of killing, plenty of wars, not only with each other but also with the Turks, the Russians and the Brits.


----------



## High_Gravity

Sunni Man said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> neener neener   you silly goof.  An atomic Iran is everybody's care.
> 
> 
> 
> Iran is a peace loving nation and hasn't attacked another country in over 300 years.
Click to expand...


LMAO! I wouldn't go as far to call Iran a "peace loving" nation.


----------



## georgephillip

"The U.S. Congress in December passed a defense authorization bill that included provisions *intended to bring down the Central Bank of Iran.* 

"Although President Obama expressed reservations, he signed it into law. This latest U.S. sanctions package is openly intended to deprive Iran of its oil revenues. 

"By prohibiting other countries from dealing with Iran's banks, it is intended to prevent Iran from selling its oil. *That is the equivalent of an act of war* -- a financial blockade of Iran's oil ports that would deprive Iran of more than half its budgetary revenues."

Iran, U.S. need a crisis exit ramp - CNN.com

Since Bubba launched his election year (1995) sanctions against Iran's oil industry, Iran has progressed from not a single centrifuge turning to today's 8000+ centrifuges spinning out a substantial stock of low-enriched uranium.

"This is the very definition of a failed policy."


----------



## toomuchtime_

paulitician said:


> Iranian Nuclear Scientists Bombed - YouTube



According to the Sunday Times:

"Two targets were always in Mustafa's mind," Reza Najafi, a friend, said. "To fight Israel and to become a shaheed (martyr). He achieved both his targets."

Sunday Times: Mossad agents behind Iran scientist assassination - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

So killing him was not so much murder as assisted suicide.


----------



## Mr. President

Iran needs to understand that the world powers will not allow them to have a nuclear weapon.  Also, there is no evidence that places responsibility on Israel or The United States for the killing of this scientist.  Maybe Iran did it to try and gather world sympathy.  Yeah because there is just as much evidence supporting that theory!


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> "The U.S. Congress in December passed a defense authorization bill that included provisions *intended to bring down the Central Bank of Iran.*
> 
> "Although President Obama expressed reservations, he signed it into law. This latest U.S. sanctions package is openly intended to deprive Iran of its oil revenues.
> 
> "By prohibiting other countries from dealing with Iran's banks, it is intended to prevent Iran from selling its oil. *That is the equivalent of an act of war* -- a financial blockade of Iran's oil ports that would deprive Iran of more than half its budgetary revenues."
> 
> Iran, U.S. need a crisis exit ramp - CNN.com
> 
> Since Bubba launched his election year (1995) sanctions against Iran's oil industry, Iran has progressed from not a single centrifuge turning to today's 8000+ centrifuges spinning out a substantial stock of low-enriched uranium.
> 
> "This is the very definition of a failed policy."



Indeed, it would have been much better if the sanctions could have been ratcheted up more quickly or if we had bombed out Iran's nuclear program years earlier, but there was never sufficient international support for crippling sanctions before and there was not enough domestic support for military action, however, the good news is that if Obama implements the current sanctions, they will be crippling, likely destabilizing the Iranian government and perhaps bringing about regime change, and there is now sufficient domestic support for military actions if Iran is foolish enough to give even the slightest provocation.


----------



## toomuchtime_

Mr. President said:


> Iran needs to understand that the world powers will not allow them to have a nuclear weapon.  Also, there is no evidence that places responsibility on Israel or The United States for the killing of this scientist.  Maybe Iran did it to try and gather world sympathy.  Yeah because there is just as much evidence supporting that theory!



Or it could have been done by the various Arab nations that oppose Iran's nuclear weapons program or by Iranian dissidents who have been denied access to the political process but who oppose the current regime of terrorists and assassins and who want improved relations with the west or by the Kurds in norther Iraq whose villages are regularly shelled by Iran or by the Arabs in southern Iran who complain that they are discriminated against and oppressed by the regime or by the Sunni terrorist groups in Pakistan who have regularly attacked and assassinated Iranians in the government or the Revolutionary Guard.


----------



## georgephillip

toomuchtime_ said:


> Mr. President said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iran needs to understand that the world powers will not allow them to have a nuclear weapon.  Also, there is no evidence that places responsibility on Israel or The United States for the killing of this scientist.  Maybe Iran did it to try and gather world sympathy.  Yeah because there is just as much evidence supporting that theory!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or it could have been done by the various Arab nations that oppose Iran's nuclear weapons program or by Iranian dissidents who have been denied access to the political process but who oppose the current regime of terrorists and assassins and who want improved relations with the west or by the Kurds in norther Iraq whose villages are regularly shelled by Iran or by the Arabs in southern Iran who complain that they are discriminated against and oppressed by the regime or by the Sunni terrorist groups in Pakistan who have regularly attacked and assassinated Iranians in the government or the Revolutionary Guard.
Click to expand...

Or it could have been done by Jundallah at the behest of Israel with payment provided by US taxpayers.

"Buried deep in the archives of America's intelligence services are a series of memos, written during the last years of President George W. Bush's administration, that describe how Israeli Mossad officers recruited operatives belonging to the terrorist group Jundallah by passing themselves off as American agents. 

"According to two U.S. intelligence officials, *the Israelis, flush with American dollars and toting U.S. passports,* posed as CIA officers in recruiting Jundallah operatives -- what is commonly referred to as a 'false flag' operation."

False Flag - By Mark Perry | Foreign Policy


----------



## georgephillip

toomuchtime_ said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The U.S. Congress in December passed a defense authorization bill that included provisions *intended to bring down the Central Bank of Iran.*
> 
> "Although President Obama expressed reservations, he signed it into law. This latest U.S. sanctions package is openly intended to deprive Iran of its oil revenues.
> 
> "By prohibiting other countries from dealing with Iran's banks, it is intended to prevent Iran from selling its oil. *That is the equivalent of an act of war* -- a financial blockade of Iran's oil ports that would deprive Iran of more than half its budgetary revenues."
> 
> Iran, U.S. need a crisis exit ramp - CNN.com
> 
> Since Bubba launched his election year (1995) sanctions against Iran's oil industry, Iran has progressed from not a single centrifuge turning to today's 8000+ centrifuges spinning out a substantial stock of low-enriched uranium.
> 
> "This is the very definition of a failed policy."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, it would have been much better if the sanctions could have been ratcheted up more quickly or if we had bombed out Iran's nuclear program years earlier, but there was never sufficient international support for crippling sanctions before and there was not enough domestic support for military action, however, the good news is that if Obama implements the current sanctions, they will be crippling, likely destabilizing the Iranian government and perhaps bringing about regime change, and there is now sufficient domestic support for military actions if Iran is foolish enough to give even the slightest provocation.
Click to expand...

"The past several weeks have seen a sharp increase in the three-decade war of words between the United States and Iran. Iran has held maneuvers in the critical Strait of Hormuz, combined with threats to interrupt commerce there. 

"The United States has lost its third drone over Iran, and unnamed parties are conducting an unprecedented covert campaign of cyberwar and assassinations inside Iran. Iran says it has broken up a U.S. spy ring and *has condemned a U.S. citizen to death.*"

If Iran had just lost its third drone over Texas, would that qualify as good news or bad?

What possible threat (with or without nuclear weapons) does Iran pose to the US homeland?
More or less than Saddam Hussein?

The international support for crippling sanctions you mentioned has more to do with the slow-motion meltdown of the global economy than any legitimate fear of "mad mullahs." Whenever economies crash, elites start pounding the drums for wars they seldom die in.

Time to drop a daisy cutter on Wall Street?

Iran, U.S. need a crisis exit ramp - CNN.com


----------



## JakeStarkey

America has every right to fear "mad mullahs".

Any who doubt it mentally feeble, academically ignorant, morally insane, or malignantly motivated.


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The U.S. Congress in December passed a defense authorization bill that included provisions *intended to bring down the Central Bank of Iran.*
> 
> "Although President Obama expressed reservations, he signed it into law. This latest U.S. sanctions package is openly intended to deprive Iran of its oil revenues.
> 
> "By prohibiting other countries from dealing with Iran's banks, it is intended to prevent Iran from selling its oil. *That is the equivalent of an act of war* -- a financial blockade of Iran's oil ports that would deprive Iran of more than half its budgetary revenues."
> 
> Iran, U.S. need a crisis exit ramp - CNN.com
> 
> Since Bubba launched his election year (1995) sanctions against Iran's oil industry, Iran has progressed from not a single centrifuge turning to today's 8000+ centrifuges spinning out a substantial stock of low-enriched uranium.
> 
> "This is the very definition of a failed policy."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, it would have been much better if the sanctions could have been ratcheted up more quickly or if we had bombed out Iran's nuclear program years earlier, but there was never sufficient international support for crippling sanctions before and there was not enough domestic support for military action, however, the good news is that if Obama implements the current sanctions, they will be crippling, likely destabilizing the Iranian government and perhaps bringing about regime change, and there is now sufficient domestic support for military actions if Iran is foolish enough to give even the slightest provocation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "The past several weeks have seen a sharp increase in the three-decade war of words between the United States and Iran. Iran has held maneuvers in the critical Strait of Hormuz, combined with threats to interrupt commerce there.
> 
> "The United States has lost its third drone over Iran, and unnamed parties are conducting an unprecedented covert campaign of cyberwar and assassinations inside Iran. Iran says it has broken up a U.S. spy ring and *has condemned a U.S. citizen to death.*"
> 
> If Iran had just lost its third drone over Texas, would that qualify as good news or bad?
> 
> What possible threat (with or without nuclear weapons) does Iran pose to the US homeland?
> More or less than Saddam Hussein?
> 
> The international support for crippling sanctions you mentioned has more to do with the slow-motion meltdown of the global economy than any legitimate fear of "mad mullahs." Whenever economies crash, elites start pounding the drums for wars they seldom die in.
> 
> Time to drop a daisy cutter on Wall Street?
> 
> Iran, U.S. need a crisis exit ramp - CNN.com
Click to expand...


Iran presents a much greater threat to the US and western Europe than Saddam did in part because Israel blew up Saddam's nuclear reactor in 1981, despite tremendous opposition and condemnation of the action by most of the western world, and also because Iran has been hard at work developing its Shahab 6 missile that is capable f delivering a nuclear warhead to any city in western Europe and is currently developing its Shahab 7 missile that will be able to hit any city on the US east coast and several hundreds of miles inland with a nuclear warhead.  Iran already had its Shahab 3 missile which was capable of hitting any target in Israel, so an intent to threaten western Europe and the US with nuclear armed missiles is the only logical reason to develop the Shahab 6 or Shahab 7 missiles.

The crippling sanctions are a rational response to the obvious threat Iran's long range missiles and efforts to acquire nuclear weapons present to western Europe and the US.


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. President said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iran needs to understand that the world powers will not allow them to have a nuclear weapon.  Also, there is no evidence that places responsibility on Israel or The United States for the killing of this scientist.  Maybe Iran did it to try and gather world sympathy.  Yeah because there is just as much evidence supporting that theory!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or it could have been done by the various Arab nations that oppose Iran's nuclear weapons program or by Iranian dissidents who have been denied access to the political process but who oppose the current regime of terrorists and assassins and who want improved relations with the west or by the Kurds in norther Iraq whose villages are regularly shelled by Iran or by the Arabs in southern Iran who complain that they are discriminated against and oppressed by the regime or by the Sunni terrorist groups in Pakistan who have regularly attacked and assassinated Iranians in the government or the Revolutionary Guard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Or it could have been done by Jundallah at the behest of Israel with payment provided by US taxpayers.
> 
> "Buried deep in the archives of America's intelligence services are a series of memos, written during the last years of President George W. Bush's administration, that describe how Israeli Mossad officers recruited operatives belonging to the terrorist group Jundallah by passing themselves off as American agents.
> 
> "According to two U.S. intelligence officials, *the Israelis, flush with American dollars and toting U.S. passports,* posed as CIA officers in recruiting Jundallah operatives -- what is commonly referred to as a 'false flag' operation."
> 
> False Flag - By Mark Perry | Foreign Policy
Click to expand...


There is just no way to know.


----------



## georgephillip

toomuchtime_ said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, it would have been much better if the sanctions could have been ratcheted up more quickly or if we had bombed out Iran's nuclear program years earlier, but there was never sufficient international support for crippling sanctions before and there was not enough domestic support for military action, however, the good news is that if Obama implements the current sanctions, they will be crippling, likely destabilizing the Iranian government and perhaps bringing about regime change, and there is now sufficient domestic support for military actions if Iran is foolish enough to give even the slightest provocation.
> 
> 
> 
> "The past several weeks have seen a sharp increase in the three-decade war of words between the United States and Iran. Iran has held maneuvers in the critical Strait of Hormuz, combined with threats to interrupt commerce there.
> 
> "The United States has lost its third drone over Iran, and unnamed parties are conducting an unprecedented covert campaign of cyberwar and assassinations inside Iran. Iran says it has broken up a U.S. spy ring and *has condemned a U.S. citizen to death.*"
> 
> If Iran had just lost its third drone over Texas, would that qualify as good news or bad?
> 
> What possible threat (with or without nuclear weapons) does Iran pose to the US homeland?
> More or less than Saddam Hussein?
> 
> The international support for crippling sanctions you mentioned has more to do with the slow-motion meltdown of the global economy than any legitimate fear of "mad mullahs." Whenever economies crash, elites start pounding the drums for wars they seldom die in.
> 
> Time to drop a daisy cutter on Wall Street?
> 
> Iran, U.S. need a crisis exit ramp - CNN.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Iran presents a much greater threat to the US and western Europe than Saddam did in part because Israel blew up Saddam's nuclear reactor in 1981, despite tremendous opposition and condemnation of the action by most of the western world, and also because Iran has been hard at work developing its Shahab 6 missile that is capable f delivering a nuclear warhead to any city in western Europe and is currently developing its Shahab 7 missile that will be able to hit any city on the US east coast and several hundreds of miles inland with a nuclear warhead.  Iran already had its Shahab 3 missile which was capable of hitting any target in Israel, so an intent to threaten western Europe and the US with nuclear armed missiles is the only logical reason to develop the Shahab 6 or Shahab 7 missiles.
> 
> The crippling sanctions are a rational response to the obvious threat Iran's long range missiles and efforts to acquire nuclear weapons present to western Europe and the US.
Click to expand...

If Iran currently possessed the same number of nuclear warheads as Israel (or the late Soviet Union), is it logical crippling sanctions would be on the table? How is it the US and Western Europe survived a Cold War involving tens of thousands of nuclear warheads on both sides, yet Iran poses an existential threat to civilization as we know it?


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The past several weeks have seen a sharp increase in the three-decade war of words between the United States and Iran. Iran has held maneuvers in the critical Strait of Hormuz, combined with threats to interrupt commerce there.
> 
> "The United States has lost its third drone over Iran, and unnamed parties are conducting an unprecedented covert campaign of cyberwar and assassinations inside Iran. Iran says it has broken up a U.S. spy ring and *has condemned a U.S. citizen to death.*"
> 
> If Iran had just lost its third drone over Texas, would that qualify as good news or bad?
> 
> What possible threat (with or without nuclear weapons) does Iran pose to the US homeland?
> More or less than Saddam Hussein?
> 
> The international support for crippling sanctions you mentioned has more to do with the slow-motion meltdown of the global economy than any legitimate fear of "mad mullahs." Whenever economies crash, elites start pounding the drums for wars they seldom die in.
> 
> Time to drop a daisy cutter on Wall Street?
> 
> Iran, U.S. need a crisis exit ramp - CNN.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran presents a much greater threat to the US and western Europe than Saddam did in part because Israel blew up Saddam's nuclear reactor in 1981, despite tremendous opposition and condemnation of the action by most of the western world, and also because Iran has been hard at work developing its Shahab 6 missile that is capable f delivering a nuclear warhead to any city in western Europe and is currently developing its Shahab 7 missile that will be able to hit any city on the US east coast and several hundreds of miles inland with a nuclear warhead.  Iran already had its Shahab 3 missile which was capable of hitting any target in Israel, so an intent to threaten western Europe and the US with nuclear armed missiles is the only logical reason to develop the Shahab 6 or Shahab 7 missiles.
> 
> The crippling sanctions are a rational response to the obvious threat Iran's long range missiles and efforts to acquire nuclear weapons present to western Europe and the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If Iran currently possessed the same number of nuclear warheads as Israel (or the late Soviet Union), is it logical crippling sanctions would be on the table? How is it the US and Western Europe survived a Cold War involving tens of thousands of nuclear warheads on both sides, yet Iran poses an existential threat to civilization as we know it?
Click to expand...


Crippling sanctions are intended to prevent Iran from putting nuclear warheads on its Shahab 6 and Shahab 7 missiles and  becoming a nuclear threat to the US and western Europe.


----------



## JakeStarkey

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The past several weeks have seen a sharp increase in the three-decade war of words between the United States and Iran. Iran has held maneuvers in the critical Strait of Hormuz, combined with threats to interrupt commerce there.
> 
> "The United States has lost its third drone over Iran, and unnamed parties are conducting an unprecedented covert campaign of cyberwar and assassinations inside Iran. Iran says it has broken up a U.S. spy ring and *has condemned a U.S. citizen to death.*"
> 
> If Iran had just lost its third drone over Texas, would that qualify as good news or bad?
> 
> What possible threat (with or without nuclear weapons) does Iran pose to the US homeland?
> More or less than Saddam Hussein?
> 
> The international support for crippling sanctions you mentioned has more to do with the slow-motion meltdown of the global economy than any legitimate fear of "mad mullahs." Whenever economies crash, elites start pounding the drums for wars they seldom die in.
> 
> Time to drop a daisy cutter on Wall Street?
> 
> Iran, U.S. need a crisis exit ramp - CNN.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran presents a much greater threat to the US and western Europe than Saddam did in part because Israel blew up Saddam's nuclear reactor in 1981, despite tremendous opposition and condemnation of the action by most of the western world, and also because Iran has been hard at work developing its Shahab 6 missile that is capable f delivering a nuclear warhead to any city in western Europe and is currently developing its Shahab 7 missile that will be able to hit any city on the US east coast and several hundreds of miles inland with a nuclear warhead.  Iran already had its Shahab 3 missile which was capable of hitting any target in Israel, so an intent to threaten western Europe and the US with nuclear armed missiles is the only logical reason to develop the Shahab 6 or Shahab 7 missiles.
> 
> The crippling sanctions are a rational response to the obvious threat Iran's long range missiles and efforts to acquire nuclear weapons present to western Europe and the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If Iran currently possessed the same number of nuclear warheads as Israel (or the late Soviet Union), is it logical crippling sanctions would be on the table? How is it the US and Western Europe survived a Cold War involving tens of thousands of nuclear warheads on both sides, yet Iran poses an existential threat to civilization as we know it?
Click to expand...


Because the leaders of Iran are guided by religious zealots, who for a secular logic they have not the slightest need.  They want to punish Israel and the land for the Jewish curse they believed has cursed the land unless the land is purged by fire.  Several nukes would fulfill that desire nicely.


----------



## georgephillip

toomuchtime_ said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iran presents a much greater threat to the US and western Europe than Saddam did in part because Israel blew up Saddam's nuclear reactor in 1981, despite tremendous opposition and condemnation of the action by most of the western world, and also because Iran has been hard at work developing its Shahab 6 missile that is capable f delivering a nuclear warhead to any city in western Europe and is currently developing its Shahab 7 missile that will be able to hit any city on the US east coast and several hundreds of miles inland with a nuclear warhead.  Iran already had its Shahab 3 missile which was capable of hitting any target in Israel, so an intent to threaten western Europe and the US with nuclear armed missiles is the only logical reason to develop the Shahab 6 or Shahab 7 missiles.
> 
> The crippling sanctions are a rational response to the obvious threat Iran's long range missiles and efforts to acquire nuclear weapons present to western Europe and the US.
> 
> 
> 
> If Iran currently possessed the same number of nuclear warheads as Israel (or the late Soviet Union), is it logical crippling sanctions would be on the table? How is it the US and Western Europe survived a Cold War involving tens of thousands of nuclear warheads on both sides, yet Iran poses an existential threat to civilization as we know it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Crippling sanctions are intended to prevent Iran from putting nuclear warheads on its Shahab 6 and Shahab 7 missiles and  becoming a nuclear threat to the US and western Europe.
Click to expand...

Israel and the US are currently nuclear threats to Iran which is the only one of the three countries supporting a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East. It seems more likely crippling sanctions are designed to have the same effect of Iran's central bank as US interventions had on the central banks of Iraq and Libya; the New World Order has its sights set on Iran next.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Iran has no fear if it would state unequivocally that it respects Israel's right to exist within defensible borders, and if Iran vows to defend Israel against aggressors.


----------



## dilloduck

Crippling sanctions convinced Japan that bombing Pearl Harbor was a good idea.


----------



## JakeStarkey

A derivative analogy, but one that makes one think.


----------



## georgephillip

JakeStarkey said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iran presents a much greater threat to the US and western Europe than Saddam did in part because Israel blew up Saddam's nuclear reactor in 1981, despite tremendous opposition and condemnation of the action by most of the western world, and also because Iran has been hard at work developing its Shahab 6 missile that is capable f delivering a nuclear warhead to any city in western Europe and is currently developing its Shahab 7 missile that will be able to hit any city on the US east coast and several hundreds of miles inland with a nuclear warhead.  Iran already had its Shahab 3 missile which was capable of hitting any target in Israel, so an intent to threaten western Europe and the US with nuclear armed missiles is the only logical reason to develop the Shahab 6 or Shahab 7 missiles.
> 
> The crippling sanctions are a rational response to the obvious threat Iran's long range missiles and efforts to acquire nuclear weapons present to western Europe and the US.
> 
> 
> 
> If Iran currently possessed the same number of nuclear warheads as Israel (or the late Soviet Union), is it logical crippling sanctions would be on the table? How is it the US and Western Europe survived a Cold War involving tens of thousands of nuclear warheads on both sides, yet Iran poses an existential threat to civilization as we know it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because the leaders of Iran are guided by religious zealots, who for a secular logic they have not the slightest need.  They want to punish Israel and the land for the Jewish curse they believed has cursed the land unless the land is purged by fire.  Several nukes would fulfill that desire nicely.
Click to expand...

It's more likely the richest 0.1 of Iranians, including many high ranking military officers, control whatever madness the mullahs may have in mind. The rich are seldom suicidal in any country.

What's considerably more clear is how the US has been gearing up for the total destruction of Iran, with bombers and missiles ready to destroy 10,000 Iranian targets in a matter of hours. The firepower has quadrupled since 2003 and it's been accelerating since Obama took office.

The only existential threat this country is facing is on Wall Street and in the Pentagon.


----------



## dilloduck

JakeStarkey said:


> A derivative analogy, but one that makes one think.



We got brains--may as well play with em.


----------



## Sunni Man

JakeStarkey said:


> Iran has no fear if it would state unequivocally that it respects Israel's right to exist within defensible borders, and if Iran vows to defend Israel against aggressors.


LOL, like that's ever going to happen!!


----------



## georgephillip

JakeStarkey said:


> Iran has no fear if it would state unequivocally that it respects Israel's right to exist within defensible borders, and if Iran vows to defend Israel against aggressors.


When has Israel ever declared its borders?
The answer is never since that makes it much easier to steal your neighbors' land and water.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Sunni Man said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iran has no fear if it would state unequivocally that it respects Israel's right to exist within defensible borders, and if Iran vows to defend Israel against aggressors.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL, like that's ever going to happen!!
Click to expand...


Like Iran is not going to end in nuclear hellfire and flame if it ever uses the weapon.  Fact, bud.


----------



## JakeStarkey

georgephillip said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iran has no fear if it would state unequivocally that it respects Israel's right to exist within defensible borders, and if Iran vows to defend Israel against aggressors.
> 
> 
> 
> When has Israel ever declared its borders?
> The answer is never since that makes it much easier to steal your neighbors' land and water.
Click to expand...


Doesn't wash, son, and as long as the U.S. backs Israel against Iran, the latter is a bag of potato chips in the game of world politics.


----------



## Sunni Man

JakeStarkey said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iran has no fear if it would state unequivocally that it respects Israel's right to exist within defensible borders, and if Iran vows to defend Israel against aggressors.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL, like that's ever going to happen!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like Iran is not going to end in nuclear hellfire and flame if it ever uses the weapon.  Fact, bud.
Click to expand...

I believe that Iran wants them as a deterrent and not as an offensive weapon.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Sunni Man said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL, like that's ever going to happen!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like Iran is not going to end in nuclear hellfire and flame if it ever uses the weapon.  Fact, bud.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I believe that Iran wants them as a deterrent and not as an offensive weapon.
Click to expand...


Sure, like Hitler wanted only defensible borders.


----------



## dilloduck

JakeStarkey said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iran has no fear if it would state unequivocally that it respects Israel's right to exist within defensible borders, and if Iran vows to defend Israel against aggressors.
> 
> 
> 
> When has Israel ever declared its borders?
> The answer is never since that makes it much easier to steal your neighbors' land and water.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Doesn't wash, son, and as long as the U.S. backs Israel against Iran, the latter is a bag of potato chips in the game of world politics.
Click to expand...


land and water a bag of potato chips ?
Pure water and land will be priceless and the envy of all.


----------



## Sunni Man

JakeStarkey said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iran has no fear if it would state unequivocally that it respects Israel's right to exist within defensible borders, and if Iran vows to defend Israel against aggressors.
> 
> 
> 
> When has Israel ever declared its borders?
> The answer is never since that makes it much easier to steal your neighbors' land and water.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Doesn't wash, son, and as long as the U.S. backs Israel against Iran, the latter is a bag of potato chips in the game of world politics.
Click to expand...

The more time that goes by.

The more the U.S. will distance it's self from Israel.

And eventually leave Israel to fend for it's self.

Not today, not tomorrow, but someday in the future.


----------



## theliq

JakeStarkey said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like Iran is not going to end in nuclear hellfire and flame if it ever uses the weapon.  Fact, bud.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe that Iran wants them as a deterrent and not as an offensive weapon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, like Hitler wanted only defensible borders.
Click to expand...

WHAT A joke you are,ISRAEL ARE STEALING LAND MUCH LIKE THE nazis.


----------



## Sunni Man

JakeStarkey said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like Iran is not going to end in nuclear hellfire and flame if it ever uses the weapon.  Fact, bud.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe that Iran wants them as a deterrent and not as an offensive weapon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, like Hitler wanted only defensible borders.
Click to expand...

Your comparison makes zero sense.


----------



## georgephillip

JakeStarkey said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iran has no fear if it would state unequivocally that it respects Israel's right to exist within defensible borders, and if Iran vows to defend Israel against aggressors.
> 
> 
> 
> When has Israel ever declared its borders?
> The answer is never since that makes it much easier to steal your neighbors' land and water.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Doesn't wash, son, and as long as the U.S. backs Israel against Iran, the latter is a bag of potato chips in the game of world politics.
Click to expand...

If you're saying Iran is another victim of US/Israeli imperialism, I agree.

Do you agree the increasing threats of military action against Iran are in violation of the UN Charter and specifically a violation of Security Council resolution 1887 which calls on all states to resolve disputes related to nuclear issues peacefully and bans the use or threat of force?


----------



## JakeStarkey

I agree that neither you nor Sunni Man understand the real import of this struggle, one that Iran cannot win, one that can only end in devastation.  Most of the world has no trouble seeing similarities between the the Third Reich and the Imam islamofascism of Iran.


----------



## Sunni Man

JakeStarkey said:


> *I agree* that neither you nor Sunni Man understand the real import of this struggle, one that Iran cannot win, one that can only end in devastation.  Most of the world has no trouble seeing similarities between the the Third Reich and the Imam islamofascism of Iran.


Who do you agree with? Yourself??


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Iran currently possessed the same number of nuclear warheads as Israel (or the late Soviet Union), is it logical crippling sanctions would be on the table? How is it the US and Western Europe survived a Cold War involving tens of thousands of nuclear warheads on both sides, yet Iran poses an existential threat to civilization as we know it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Crippling sanctions are intended to prevent Iran from putting nuclear warheads on its Shahab 6 and Shahab 7 missiles and  becoming a nuclear threat to the US and western Europe.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel and the US are currently nuclear threats to Iran which is the only one of the three countries supporting a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East. It seems more likely crippling sanctions are designed to have the same effect of Iran's central bank as US interventions had on the central banks of Iraq and Libya; the New World Order has its sights set on Iran next.
Click to expand...


It may well be that the Iranian regime is crazy enough to believe either Israel or the US is a nuclear threat to the country, but whatever their reasons for for doing it, it is clear that Iran is developing long range missiles in order to threaten western Europe and the US with nuclear attack, and it would be irresponsible of western governments to allow them to realize this desire.


----------



## toomuchtime_

dilloduck said:


> Crippling sanctions convinced Japan that bombing Pearl Harbor was a good idea.



The US was incapable of applying crippling sanctions against Japan, however if it had before Japan became powerful enough to challenge us, WWII might have been avoided at least in the Pacific theater.


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Iran currently possessed the same number of nuclear warheads as Israel (or the late Soviet Union), is it logical crippling sanctions would be on the table? How is it the US and Western Europe survived a Cold War involving tens of thousands of nuclear warheads on both sides, yet Iran poses an existential threat to civilization as we know it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because the leaders of Iran are guided by religious zealots, who for a secular logic they have not the slightest need.  They want to punish Israel and the land for the Jewish curse they believed has cursed the land unless the land is purged by fire.  Several nukes would fulfill that desire nicely.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's more likely the richest 0.1 of Iranians, including many high ranking military officers, control whatever madness the mullahs may have in mind. The rich are seldom suicidal in any country.
> 
> What's considerably more clear is how the US has been gearing up for the total destruction of Iran, with bombers and missiles ready to destroy 10,000 Iranian targets in a matter of hours. The firepower has quadrupled since 2003 and it's been accelerating since Obama took office.
> 
> The only existential threat this country is facing is on Wall Street and in the Pentagon.
Click to expand...


No one is gearing up for the total destruction of Iran.  The US, Israel and others are just preparing to apply enough force, if it becomes necessary, to prevent Iran from threatening much of the western world with nuclear armed long range missiles.


----------



## toomuchtime_

JakeStarkey said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Iran has no fear if it would state unequivocally that it respects Israel's right to exist within defensible borders, and if Iran vows to defend Israel against aggressors.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL, like that's ever going to happen!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like Iran is not going to end in nuclear hellfire and flame if it ever uses the weapon.  Fact, bud.
Click to expand...


Probably not.  Iran's potential targets for its nuclear armed missiles would find it hard to justify the use of nukes when conventional weapons that would kill fewer innocents would suffice to destroy Iran's government and military.


----------



## toomuchtime_

Sunni Man said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL, like that's ever going to happen!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like Iran is not going to end in nuclear hellfire and flame if it ever uses the weapon.  Fact, bud.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I believe that Iran wants them as a deterrent and not as an offensive weapon.
Click to expand...


Only if they're stupid.  Israel was attacked by virtually the entire Arab world in 1973 despite the fact it was widely believed Israel had nuclear weapons and effective delivery systems, and China sent its soldiers swarming over the border into Korea to fight US troops during the Korean War despite the fact that the US had used nuclear weapons on an enemy just a few years before.  

There are no historical instances that support the idea that possessing nuclear weapons provides a deterrence against attacks with conventional weapons, and while a substantial second strike capability may provide some deterrence against a nuclear attack if it can utterly devastate the enemy, the strategic thinking of the US and USSR during the Cold War that if either side could gain a strategic advantage over the other, nuclear war could be won suggests that possessing a modest nuclear arsenal may provide no deterrence against a nuclear attack from an enemy with a superior nuclear arsenal.


----------



## Jroc

Sunni Man said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL, like that's ever going to happen!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like Iran is not going to end in nuclear hellfire and flame if it ever uses the weapon.  Fact, bud.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I believe that Iran wants them as a deterrent and not as an offensive weapon.
Click to expand...


Wrong Sunni boy ..



> Throughout time, there have been many evil madmen who cite their cause as reason to perform horrific acts upon his fellow man. In the recent past, Hitler comes to mind. Among other things, under the guise of ethnic cleansing (or the elimination of an inferior race) for the greater good. One example is Hitler, who killed many Jewish people in an attempt to eliminate through horrific gas chambers what he saw as an "inferior race."
> 
> Jump forward to present day. The madmans name is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran. He refers to Israelis and Americans are "Little Satan" and "Great Satan," since to radical Muslims, the term "Satan" refers to groups rather than a specific individual as Christians know. Christians know that a fallen angel, Lucifer, is Satan. To a lot of radical Muslims, Satan is groups of people, or countries, not an individual, hence the Satan labels hes given to Israel and the United States. Ahmadinejad's potential weapons are even more horrific than Hilter's gas chambers in that they are capable of killing millions in minutes. His goal in doing this is to hail the Shiite Muslim's messiah, the 12th Imam.
> 
> According to Islamic belief, an Imam is an anointed leader or ruler. Moreover, among the Islamic Shia, an Imam is believed to be a prayer leader or cleric who is anointed by the Islamic prophet Allah and a perfect example being able to lead mankind in every way. The 12th Imam, according to some Shia Muslims, is a great spiritual savior. This savior has a name; Muhammad al Mahdi.
> Mahdi was born around 868 A.D. at a time of large persecutions of Shiite Muslims. In order to protect him, his father, the 11th Imam, sent him into hiding. Mahdi appeared briefly in public as a child, but when his father died, he went back into the shadows. Even today, Shiites believe he continues to guide Muslims. Mahdis followers are often called Twelvers. Some devout Shiite Muslims believe him to be a direct descendant of the prophet Mohammed.
> 
> The president of Iran, Ahmadinejad, is a deeply committed Shiite Muslim and has spoken often and openly about praying for the return al Mahdi, his savior. But not in a way Christians speak about their savior Jesus Christ returning to earth, as you will soon discover. *Ahmadinejad believes that the 12th Imam is coming soon and that he is the chosen one. Chosen by Allah himself to hasten Mahdis return; which wherein is where the problem lies.*
> 
> Lets pause and recap for a moment. At the very least, we clearly have an unbalanced man, most likely a psychopathic killer, who is the leader of an oil rich nation where money is essentially endless.  His scientists are working around the clock to develop nuclear weapons. If unable to produce, he has the resources to purchase them along with biological weapons or E.M.P. devices from a friendly rogue nation. As a fanatical Muslim, he hates all non-Muslims especially Christians and Jews, which he openly states. Ahmadinejad is also someone who believes he has been told by the prophet Mohammed that he is the chosen one to hasten the return of the Muslims messiah by creating chaos throughout the world. Combine all of this with a world full of countries, except for Israel, who is unable or unwilling to stop this madman and we have all the ingredients of a very serious situation.





Iran, Ahmadinejad, & the 12th Imam


----------



## theliq

JakeStarkey said:


> I agree that neither you nor Sunni Man understand the real import of this struggle, one that Iran cannot win, one that can only end in devastation.  Most of the world has no trouble seeing similarities between the the Third Reich and the Imam islamofascism of Iran.


Really you spew such rubbish....the dynamics will change completely when China and Russia come down on Irans side.Israel will of course will use nuclear before anyone else.
                                                                   Yet they still deny they have them......they Iran etc., should be stripped of all Nuclear facilities and weapons NOWbecause t5hey are all MAD


----------



## theliq

Jroc said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like Iran is not going to end in nuclear hellfire and flame if it ever uses the weapon.  Fact, bud.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe that Iran wants them as a deterrent and not as an offensive weapon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong Sunni boy ..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Throughout time, there have been many evil madmen who cite their cause as reason to perform horrific acts upon his fellow man. In the recent past, Hitler comes to mind. Among other things, under the guise of ethnic cleansing (or the elimination of an &#8220;inferior race&#8221 for the greater good. One example is Hitler, who killed many Jewish people in an attempt to eliminate through horrific gas chambers what he saw as an "inferior race."
> 
> Jump forward to present day. The madman&#8217;s name is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran. He refers to Israelis and Americans are "Little Satan" and "Great Satan," since to radical Muslims, the term "Satan" refers to groups rather than a specific individual as Christians know. Christians know that a fallen angel, Lucifer, is Satan. To a lot of radical Muslims, Satan is groups of people, or countries, not an individual, hence the &#8220;Satan&#8221; labels he&#8217;s given to Israel and the United States. Ahmadinejad's potential weapons are even more horrific than Hilter's gas chambers in that they are capable of killing millions in minutes. His goal in doing this is to hail the Shiite Muslim's messiah, the 12th Imam.
> 
> According to Islamic belief, an Imam is an anointed leader or ruler. Moreover, among the Islamic Shia, an Imam is believed to be a prayer leader or cleric who is anointed by the Islamic prophet Allah and a perfect example being able to lead mankind in every way. The 12th Imam, according to some Shia Muslims, is a great spiritual savior. This savior has a name; Muhammad al Mahdi.
> Mahdi was born around 868 A.D. at a time of large persecutions of Shiite Muslims. In order to protect him, his father, the 11th Imam, sent him into hiding. Mahdi appeared briefly in public as a child, but when his father died, he went back into the shadows. Even today, Shiites believe he continues to guide Muslims. Mahdi&#8217;s followers are often called &#8216;Twelvers&#8217;. Some devout Shiite Muslims believe him to be a direct descendant of the prophet Mohammed.
> 
> The president of Iran, Ahmadinejad, is a deeply committed Shiite Muslim and has spoken often and openly about praying for the return al Mahdi, his savior. But not in a way Christians speak about their savior Jesus Christ returning to earth, as you will soon discover. *Ahmadinejad believes that the 12th Imam is coming soon and that he is the chosen one. Chosen by Allah himself to hasten Mahdi&#8217;s return; which wherein is where the problem lies.*
> 
> Let&#8217;s pause and recap for a moment. At the very least, we clearly have an unbalanced man, most likely a psychopathic killer, who is the leader of an oil rich nation where money is essentially endless.  His scientists are working around the clock to develop nuclear weapons. If unable to produce, he has the resources to purchase them along with biological weapons or E.M.P. devices from a friendly rogue nation. As a fanatical Muslim, he hates all non-Muslims especially Christians and Jews, which he openly states. Ahmadinejad is also someone who believes he has been told by the prophet Mohammed that he is the chosen one to hasten the return of the Muslim&#8217;s messiah by creating chaos throughout the world. Combine all of this with a world full of countries, except for Israel, who is unable or unwilling to stop this madman and we have all the ingredients of a very serious situation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran, Ahmadinejad, & the 12th Imam
Click to expand...

You are such an Asshole......theliq.....just cut the crap for a change.By the way YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A TERRORIST SCUMBAG and HYPOCRITE TO BOOT


----------



## eots

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu3qfB5Xgcc]Ron Paul Calls Out BS Poll on Fox News - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Sunni Man

Jroc said:


> Throughout time, there have been many evil madmen who cite their cause as reason to perform horrific acts upon his fellow man. In the recent past, Hitler comes to mind. Among other things, under the guise of ethnic cleansing (or the elimination of an inferior race) for the greater good. One example is Hitler, who killed many Jewish people in an attempt to eliminate through horrific gas chambers what he saw as an "inferior race."
> 
> Jump forward to present day. The madmans name is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran. He refers to Israelis and Americans are "Little Satan" and "Great Satan," since to radical Muslims, the term "Satan" refers to groups rather than a specific individual as Christians know. Christians know that a fallen angel, Lucifer, is Satan. To a lot of radical Muslims, Satan is groups of people, or countries, not an individual, hence the Satan labels hes given to Israel and the United States. Ahmadinejad's potential weapons are even more horrific than Hilter's gas chambers in that they are capable of killing millions in minutes. His goal in doing this is to hail the Shiite Muslim's messiah, the 12th Imam.
> 
> According to Islamic belief, an Imam is an anointed leader or ruler. Moreover, among the Islamic Shia, an Imam is believed to be a prayer leader or cleric who is anointed by the Islamic prophet Allah and a perfect example being able to lead mankind in every way. The 12th Imam, according to some Shia Muslims, is a great spiritual savior. This savior has a name; Muhammad al Mahdi.
> Mahdi was born around 868 A.D. at a time of large persecutions of Shiite Muslims. In order to protect him, his father, the 11th Imam, sent him into hiding. Mahdi appeared briefly in public as a child, but when his father died, he went back into the shadows. Even today, Shiites believe he continues to guide Muslims. Mahdis followers are often called Twelvers. Some devout Shiite Muslims believe him to be a direct descendant of the prophet Mohammed.
> 
> The president of Iran, Ahmadinejad, is a deeply committed Shiite Muslim and has spoken often and openly about praying for the return al Mahdi, his savior. But not in a way Christians speak about their savior Jesus Christ returning to earth, as you will soon discover. *Ahmadinejad believes that the 12th Imam is coming soon and that he is the chosen one. Chosen by Allah himself to hasten Mahdis return; which wherein is where the problem lies.*
> 
> Lets pause and recap for a moment. At the very least, we clearly have an unbalanced man, most likely a psychopathic killer, who is the leader of an oil rich nation where money is essentially endless.  His scientists are working around the clock to develop nuclear weapons. If unable to produce, he has the resources to purchase them along with biological weapons or E.M.P. devices from a friendly rogue nation. As a fanatical Muslim, he hates all non-Muslims especially Christians and Jews, which he openly states. Ahmadinejad is also someone who believes he has been told by the prophet Mohammed that he is the chosen one to hasten the return of the Muslims messiah by creating chaos throughout the world. Combine all of this with a world full of countries, except for Israel, who is unable or unwilling to stop this madman and we have all the ingredients of a very serious situation.
> 
> Iran, Ahmadinejad, & the 12th Imam


LOL, this is a very silly article.

And the author doesn't have a clue.

He is just mixing all kinds of nonsense about Iran; Ahmadinejad; and Shia Islam.

Into a huge loony lie that has No basis on reality.


----------



## JakeStarkey

theliq said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree that neither you nor Sunni Man understand the real import of this struggle, one that Iran cannot win, one that can only end in devastation.  Most of the world has no trouble seeing similarities between the the Third Reich and the Imam islamofascism of Iran.
> 
> 
> 
> Really you spew such rubbish....the dynamics will change completely when China and Russia come down on Irans side.Israel will of course will use nuclear before anyone else.  Yet they still deny they have them......they Iran etc., should be stripped of all Nuclear facilities and weapons NOWbecause t5hey are all MAD
Click to expand...


theliq is gibbering like one in a cage.  China and Russia will not support Iran on this.  Israel will, of course, defend the integrity of its borders, with nukes, if invaded or in retaliation for being overrun.  Iran should be stripped of its abilities to continue, and, yes, one way or another it will be.


----------



## georgephillip

toomuchtime_ said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> Crippling sanctions are intended to prevent Iran from putting nuclear warheads on its Shahab 6 and Shahab 7 missiles and  becoming a nuclear threat to the US and western Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel and the US are currently nuclear threats to Iran which is the only one of the three countries supporting a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East. It seems more likely crippling sanctions are designed to have the same effect of Iran's central bank as US interventions had on the central banks of Iraq and Libya; the New World Order has its sights set on Iran next.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It may well be that the Iranian regime is crazy enough to believe either Israel or the US is a nuclear threat to the country, but whatever their reasons for for doing it, it is clear that Iran is developing long range missiles in order to threaten western Europe and the US with nuclear attack, and it would be irresponsible of western governments to allow them to realize this desire.
Click to expand...

It is "clear" that Iran is developing long range missiles to terrorize Western Europe in the same way it was "clear" Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction. Two things are truly clear; the US and Israel possess thousands of nuclear weapons and both states are violating the UN Charter and SCR 1887 which specifically calls on all states to resolve disputes over nuclear issues peacefully and bans the use or threat of force.

The Iranian regime would be crazy if they didn't consider the US and Israel a threat to their country.


----------



## Jroc

Sunni Man said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> Throughout time, there have been many evil madmen who cite their cause as reason to perform horrific acts upon his fellow man. In the recent past, Hitler comes to mind. Among other things, under the guise of ethnic cleansing (or the elimination of an &#8220;inferior race&#8221 for the greater good. One example is Hitler, who killed many Jewish people in an attempt to eliminate through horrific gas chambers what he saw as an "inferior race."
> 
> Jump forward to present day. The madman&#8217;s name is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran. He refers to Israelis and Americans are "Little Satan" and "Great Satan," since to radical Muslims, the term "Satan" refers to groups rather than a specific individual as Christians know. Christians know that a fallen angel, Lucifer, is Satan. To a lot of radical Muslims, Satan is groups of people, or countries, not an individual, hence the &#8220;Satan&#8221; labels he&#8217;s given to Israel and the United States. Ahmadinejad's potential weapons are even more horrific than Hilter's gas chambers in that they are capable of killing millions in minutes. His goal in doing this is to hail the Shiite Muslim's messiah, the 12th Imam.
> 
> According to Islamic belief, an Imam is an anointed leader or ruler. Moreover, among the Islamic Shia, an Imam is believed to be a prayer leader or cleric who is anointed by the Islamic prophet Allah and a perfect example being able to lead mankind in every way. The 12th Imam, according to some Shia Muslims, is a great spiritual savior. This savior has a name; Muhammad al Mahdi.
> Mahdi was born around 868 A.D. at a time of large persecutions of Shiite Muslims. In order to protect him, his father, the 11th Imam, sent him into hiding. Mahdi appeared briefly in public as a child, but when his father died, he went back into the shadows. Even today, Shiites believe he continues to guide Muslims. Mahdi&#8217;s followers are often called &#8216;Twelvers&#8217;. Some devout Shiite Muslims believe him to be a direct descendant of the prophet Mohammed.
> 
> The president of Iran, Ahmadinejad, is a deeply committed Shiite Muslim and has spoken often and openly about praying for the return al Mahdi, his savior. But not in a way Christians speak about their savior Jesus Christ returning to earth, as you will soon discover. *Ahmadinejad believes that the 12th Imam is coming soon and that he is the chosen one. Chosen by Allah himself to hasten Mahdi&#8217;s return; which wherein is where the problem lies.*
> 
> Let&#8217;s pause and recap for a moment. At the very least, we clearly have an unbalanced man, most likely a psychopathic killer, who is the leader of an oil rich nation where money is essentially endless.  His scientists are working around the clock to develop nuclear weapons. If unable to produce, he has the resources to purchase them along with biological weapons or E.M.P. devices from a friendly rogue nation. As a fanatical Muslim, he hates all non-Muslims especially Christians and Jews, which he openly states. Ahmadinejad is also someone who believes he has been told by the prophet Mohammed that he is the chosen one to hasten the return of the Muslim&#8217;s messiah by creating chaos throughout the world. Combine all of this with a world full of countries, except for Israel, who is unable or unwilling to stop this madman and we have all the ingredients of a very serious situation.
> 
> Iran, Ahmadinejad, & the 12th Imam
> 
> 
> 
> LOL, this is a very silly article.
> 
> And the author doesn't have a clue.
> 
> He is just mixing all kinds of nonsense about Iran; Ahmadinejad; and Shia Islam.
> 
> Into a huge loony lie that has No basis on reality.
Click to expand...


Really? Shiah and Sunni are killing each other Sunni boy. Muslims with never be at peace, It's not in their nature.


----------



## Sunni Man

Jroc said:


> Really? Shiah and Sunni are killing each other Sunni boy. Muslims with never be at peace, It's not in their nature.


What does the internecine warfare between Sunni and Shia have to do with Israel, Iran, and the nonsense article you posted?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Sunni Man clearly can't defend his position logically.  Iran simply has to state that Israel has the same right to exist as Iran does, and Iran must allow public inspections of its nuclear operations.  There is no other way except severely punishing Iran.  That will happen if Iran continues in its warmongering way.


----------



## paulitician

JakeStarkey said:


> Sunni Man clearly can't defend his position logically.  Iran simply has to state that Israel has the same right to exist as Iran does, and Iran must allow public inspections of its nuclear operations.  There is no other way except severely punishing Iran.  That will happen if Iran continues in its warmongering way.



 Yes because the U.S. and the West would never Warmonger. Wow,some Americans really are incredibly ignorant. They just swallow down anything their Government feeds them. The U.S.,Israel,and the West are doing all the Warmongering at this point. How many Nations has Iran invaded lately? How many innocent Civilians have they slaughtered in recent years? Certainly not as many as the U.S. has. 

More Americans need to start putting themselves in Iran's shoes for a bit. They're being threatened everyday by numerous foreign nations. How would we like it if that was happening to us? How would we like spy drones flying over our nation,being bombed,and suffering from crippling sanctions? My guess is,we wouldn't like all that so much. Just a hunch anyway.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Defenders of Iran and opponents of Israel have the right to believe as they do.

They also have a moral obligation to understand that the USA, a good portion of the West, and Israel do not give a rat's fart for those beliefs.

If Iran continues in her nuclear construction and uranium enrichment, she will be severely punished and her people liberated from political islamofascism.


----------



## georgephillip

How many Iranians will be maimed, murdered and displaced?
Fewer than the millions of Iraqis who were "liberated?"


----------



## JakeStarkey

Let's hope the people of Iran grow a set and overthrow their tyrants.


----------



## Jroc

Sunni Man said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Shiah and Sunni are killing each other Sunni boy. Muslims with never be at peace, It's not in their nature.
> 
> 
> 
> What does the internecine warfare between Sunni and Shia have to do with Israel, Iran, and the nonsense article you posted?
Click to expand...


Nonsense?....Coming from you it doesn't mean much. A white, American, convert  who has these views...



Sunni Man said:


> My solution to the Jewish problem.
> 
> Would be to round them up world wide and find and island to quarantine them on.
> 
> There are several islands in the world that could easily contain the 13 million Jews that currently reside in various nations and Israel.
> 
> This way the Jews could build the ultimate Hebrew society they have always dreamed of.
> 
> Several gun boats would patrol the waters around the island to prevent any Jews from trying to escape.
> 
> This way the Jews could be protected from harm; and the world could finally have peace and security.
> 
> Thus a  Win = Win for both Jews and Gentiles




Whats does that say? In the end it doesn't matter what you say or these other defenders of the whack job in Iran.


----------



## Sunni Man

JakeStarkey said:


> Defenders of Iran and opponents of Israel have the right to believe as they do.
> 
> They also have a *moral obligation* to understand that the USA, a good portion of the West, and Israel do not give a rat's fart for those beliefs.
> 
> If Iran continues in her nuclear construction and uranium enrichment, she will be severely punished and her people liberated from political islamofascism.


What makes it a "moral obligation"?


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel and the US are currently nuclear threats to Iran which is the only one of the three countries supporting a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East. It seems more likely crippling sanctions are designed to have the same effect of Iran's central bank as US interventions had on the central banks of Iraq and Libya; the New World Order has its sights set on Iran next.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It may well be that the Iranian regime is crazy enough to believe either Israel or the US is a nuclear threat to the country, but whatever their reasons for for doing it, it is clear that Iran is developing long range missiles in order to threaten western Europe and the US with nuclear attack, and it would be irresponsible of western governments to allow them to realize this desire.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is "clear" that Iran is developing long range missiles to terrorize Western Europe in the same way it was "clear" Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction. Two things are truly clear; the US and Israel possess thousands of nuclear weapons and both states are violating the UN Charter and SCR 1887 which specifically calls on all states to resolve disputes over nuclear issues peacefully and bans the use or threat of force.
> 
> The Iranian regime would be crazy if they didn't consider the US and Israel a threat to their country.
Click to expand...


Israel and the US are threatening Iran because the regime is crazy.  Neither country had any hostile intentions towards Iran, despite Iran's decades of supporting international terrorism and trying to destabilize its neighboring states, until the regime decided to make Iran a nuclear threat to Israel, the US and western Europe.  The US may have been mistaken about Saddam's nukes, but, as events have proved, Saddam was crazy not to try to prove to us that he had none, and the Iranian regime is just as crazy as Saddam was to follow the same script he followed.


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> How many Iranians will be maimed, murdered and displaced?
> Fewer than the millions of Iraqis who were "liberated?"



How many Iranians have been maimed, murdered and displaced by the Iranian regime and how many Lebanese, Israelis, Palestinian Arabs and now Syrians are being maimed, murdered and displaced by the Iranian regime?  How many millions  of people in the ME, western Europe and the US is the Iranian regime planning to threaten  with its nuclear armed missiles?


----------



## theliq

JakeStarkey said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree that neither you nor Sunni Man understand the real import of this struggle, one that Iran cannot win, one that can only end in devastation.  Most of the world has no trouble seeing similarities between the the Third Reich and the Imam islamofascism of Iran.
> 
> 
> 
> Really you spew such rubbish....the dynamics will change completely when China and Russia come down on Irans side.Israel will of course will use nuclear before anyone else.  Yet they still deny they have them......they Iran etc., should be stripped of all Nuclear facilities and weapons NOWbecause t5hey are all MAD
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> theliq is gibbering like one in a cage.  China and Russia will not support Iran on this.  Israel will, of course, defend the integrity of its borders, with nukes, if invaded or in retaliation for being overrun.  Iran should be stripped of its abilities to continue, and, yes, one way or another it will be.
Click to expand...

Integrity of its borders.....is a very strange expression......and which borders are those may I ask,the borders from 1967,or did you mean the continuance of land illegally aquired by stealth from the Palestinians.....Israel as you should know but your total ignorance prevents you from comprehending,have little or NO INTEGRITY,their assasination of three and near miss of one Iranian scientist over the past 4 years is testiment to that.....something you tend to ignore,I don't happen to like the fuckers running Iran but I do balk at murder through ASSASINATION...IT GIVES OTHERS CARTE BLANCHE to do the same.

In NO WAY COULD YOU USE INTEGRITY AND ISRAEL IN THE SAME SENTENCE,when you see how theY have behaved in the past............as it happens I do believe in the state of Israel but to suggest that they are cleanskins is in view of their past ridiculous.TLby the way a lot of these countries should be stripped of NC capability<so in that we agree>Pakistan,India,Iran and Israel.


----------



## JakeStarkey

theliq is melting down!  

This is fun!!  Where is the pet, tor or ter or derp, or whatever the name is?


----------



## theliq

JakeStarkey said:


> theliq is melting down!
> 
> This is fun!!  Where is the pet, tor or ter or derp, or whatever the name is?


Yep I'm quite enjoying it toobut Crikey Jake,there is little FUN for the Palestinian and Israelis in all this,if only they could,should,would come to a agreement........Iran and all the other Fuckers would not be able to use this conflict to pressure Israel.These Arab nations and Iran,don't give a shit about Palestine or Israel...they are just making capital out of this situation,of which both these nations are well aware. As for melting down,well when I read that..I did have a wry smile....as like you I do still have a solid backbone.tl my spelling and grammar is pretty poor today,but who really gives a toss.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Good sport!  My point is that morality plays no role in this.  America and Israel and the West will destroy Iran if necessary, and China and Russia will not interfere.


----------



## Sunni Man

JakeStarkey said:


> Good sport!  My point is that morality plays no role in this.  America and Israel and the West will destroy Iran if necessary, and China and Russia will not interfere.


Russia shares a border with Iran and China is a close neighbor.

And they each are most favored trading partners with the peaceful nation of Iran.

So yes, Russia and China will get involved; especially if the rouge state of Israel is the agresser.

That's why the Israeli lobby in the U.S. keeps agitating for America to attack Iran.

That way all blame will fall on the U.S. and not Israel.


----------



## Shogun

It's pretty obvious how certain opinions in this thread would differ were it isreali scientists being murdered by unknown motorcyclists.


----------



## Sunni Man

Shogun said:


> It's pretty obvious how certain opinions in this thread would differ were it isreali scientists being murdered by unknown motorcyclists.


Don't you know that to even ponder such a thing is anti-semitic!!


----------



## Shogun

well, you know...  after the millionth utterance that the sky is falling...


----------



## manifold

Good clean kill


----------



## manifold

Shogun said:


> It's pretty obvious how certain opinions in this thread would differ were it isreali scientists being murdered by unknown motorcyclists.




You make it sound like if you don't cheer when the other team scores you're a hypocrite.


----------



## Shogun

manifold said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's pretty obvious how certain opinions in this thread would differ were it isreali scientists being murdered by unknown motorcyclists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You make it sound like if you don't cheer when the other team scores you're a hypocrite.
Click to expand...


rather, there is an inconsistency of standards that is laughably obvious in threads such as this.  Cheering of a team implies a common set of equally applied rules anyway.


----------



## manifold

Shogun said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's pretty obvious how certain opinions in this thread would differ were it isreali scientists being murdered by unknown motorcyclists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You make it sound like if you don't cheer when the other team scores you're a hypocrite.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> rather, there is an inconsistency of standards that is laughably obvious in threads such as this.  Cheering of a team implies a common set of equally applied rules anyway.
Click to expand...


I didn't read the thread, but inconsistency of standards is the standard for most here so I'll take your word for it.

As for the dead scientist, I won't be losing any sleep over his passing.


----------



## Shogun

manifold said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manifold said:
> 
> 
> 
> You make it sound like if you don't cheer when the other team scores you're a hypocrite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rather, there is an inconsistency of standards that is laughably obvious in threads such as this.  Cheering of a team implies a common set of equally applied rules anyway.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I didn't read the thread, but inconsistency of standards is the standard for most here so I'll take your word for it.
> 
> As for the dead scientist, I won't be losing any sleep over his passing.
Click to expand...


indeed.  however, as I said, it's pretty obvious how different the posts of this thread would be were it an israeli scientist being bombed by mysterious motorcycle riders.  The only real question is how many palestineans would have to eat cast lead shit in the aftermath.

I guess I hold a higher standard for killing people than you do.  ho hum.


----------



## manifold

Shogun said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> rather, there is an inconsistency of standards that is laughably obvious in threads such as this.  Cheering of a team implies a common set of equally applied rules anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't read the thread, but inconsistency of standards is the standard for most here so I'll take your word for it.
> 
> As for the dead scientist, I won't be losing any sleep over his passing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> indeed.  however, as I said, it's pretty obvious how different the posts of this thread would be were it an israeli scientist being bombed by mysterious motorcycle riders.  The only real question is how many palestineans would have to eat cast lead shit in the aftermath.
> 
> I guess I hold a higher standard for killing people than you do.  ho hum.
Click to expand...


You prefer snipers?


----------



## Shogun

I prefer a pretense for killing that amounts to more than sand in a zionist vagina.


----------



## manifold

Shogun said:


> I prefer a pretense for killing that amounts to more than sand in a zionist vagina.



Such as?


----------



## Shogun

actual evidence of a violent intent against isreal, for one.  

Is it too much to ask for more than mobile chem lab accusations when rationalizing the murder of foreign civilians?


----------



## manifold

Shogun said:


> actual evidence of a *violent intent* against isreal, for one.
> 
> Is it too much to ask for more than mobile chem lab accusations when rationalizing the murder of foreign civilians?



So you're going with the argument that there is no reason to believe Iran poses a violent threat toward Israel?

I thought you quit smoking the reefer.


----------



## Shogun

manifold said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> actual evidence of a *violent intent* against isreal, for one.
> 
> Is it too much to ask for more than mobile chem lab accusations when rationalizing the murder of foreign civilians?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you're going with the argument that there is no reason to believe Iran poses a violent thread toward Israel?
> 
> I thought you quit smoking the reefer.
Click to expand...


zionism /= israel

but, I guess you can assimilate whatever translation you want to already believe.  Suffice it to say, the assumption of preemptive violence is a thread about the mysterious murders of scientists is, as they say, asinine.  

it must be real boring around here these days for you to be so rusty at this.


----------



## Shogun

well mani... there were not enough worthwhile threads on this forum to keep me interested in waiting for your reply.  

it's just a different place now.

Have a good evening anyway.


----------



## Unkotare

Tehran's Genocidal Incitement against Israel :: Middle East Quarterly


----------



## georgephillip

toomuchtime_ said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> It may well be that the Iranian regime is crazy enough to believe either Israel or the US is a nuclear threat to the country, but whatever their reasons for for doing it, it is clear that Iran is developing long range missiles in order to threaten western Europe and the US with nuclear attack, and it would be irresponsible of western governments to allow them to realize this desire.
> 
> 
> 
> It is "clear" that Iran is developing long range missiles to terrorize Western Europe in the same way it was "clear" Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction. Two things are truly clear; the US and Israel possess thousands of nuclear weapons and both states are violating the UN Charter and SCR 1887 which specifically calls on all states to resolve disputes over nuclear issues peacefully and bans the use or threat of force.
> 
> The Iranian regime would be crazy if they didn't consider the US and Israel a threat to their country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel and the US are threatening Iran because the regime is crazy.  Neither country had any hostile intentions towards Iran, despite Iran's decades of supporting international terrorism and trying to destabilize its neighboring states, until the regime decided to make Iran a nuclear threat to Israel, the US and western Europe.  The US may have been mistaken about Saddam's nukes, but, as events have proved, Saddam was crazy not to try to prove to us that he had none, and the Iranian regime is just as crazy as Saddam was to follow the same script he followed.
Click to expand...

Do you consider the overthrow of a democratically elected prime minister evidence of hostile intentions?

"Mohammad Mosaddegh or Mosaddeq (Persian: &#1605;&#1615;&#1581;&#1614;&#1605;&#1614;&#1583; &#1605;&#1615;&#1589;&#1614;&#1583;&#1616;&#1602;, IPA: [mohæm&#712;mæd(-e) mosæd&#712;de&#611;] ( listen)*), also spelled Mossadegh, Mossadeq, Mosadeck, or Musaddiq (16 June 1882  5 March 1967), was the Prime Minister of Iran from 1951 to 1953 until being overthrown in a coup d'état.

"His administration introduced a wide range of social reforms but is most notable for its nationalization of the Iranian oil industry, which had been under British control since 1913 through the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (APOC/AIOC) (later British Petroleum or BP).

"Mosaddegh was removed from power in a coup on 19 August 1953, *organised and carried out by the United States CIA at the request of the British MI6* which chose Iranian General Fazlollah Zahedi to succeed Mosaddegh."

US foreign policy in the Middle East has been remarkably consistent since the end of WWII.
We have every intention of controlling Arab and Persian oil production and distribution, and we've proven that most recently with our occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mohammad Mosaddegh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## georgephillip

toomuchtime_ said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> How many Iranians will be maimed, murdered and displaced?
> Fewer than the millions of Iraqis who were "liberated?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many Iranians have been maimed, murdered and displaced by the Iranian regime and how many Lebanese, Israelis, Palestinian Arabs and now Syrians are being maimed, murdered and displaced by the Iranian regime?  How many millions  of people in the ME, western Europe and the US is the Iranian regime planning to threaten  with its nuclear armed missiles?
Click to expand...

*How many millions of people around this planet has the US military killed since 1945?*
How does that number compare to Iran's recent carnage?

There's little evidence Iran has any intention or capability to threaten the Middle East, Europe or the US with nuclear weapons. There are volumes of evidence attesting to US aggression from Korea, to Kosovo to Kandahar to???


----------



## Unkotare

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> How many Iranians will be maimed, murdered and displaced?
> Fewer than the millions of Iraqis who were "liberated?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many Iranians have been maimed, murdered and displaced by the Iranian regime and how many Lebanese, Israelis, Palestinian Arabs and now Syrians are being maimed, murdered and displaced by the Iranian regime?  How many millions  of people in the ME, western Europe and the US is the Iranian regime planning to threaten  with its nuclear armed missiles?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *How many millions of people around this planet has the US military killed since 1945?*
Click to expand...




How many millions has the US saved, enabled an escape from poverty and oppression, and provided freedom and opportunity to?


----------



## georgephillip

Which country did you have in mind?


----------



## Sunni Man

Unkotare said:


> How many millions has the US saved, enabled an escape from poverty and oppression, and provided freedom and opportunity to?


Does your list include our indigenous Native Americans?


----------



## georgephillip

Sunni Man said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> How many millions has the US saved, enabled an escape from poverty and oppression, and provided freedom and opportunity to?
> 
> 
> 
> Does your list include our indigenous Native Americans?
Click to expand...

I think we are limiting the discussion to post World War II.

Truman's counterinsurgency campaign in Greece during the late '40s killed of about 160,000 people, produced sixty thousand refugees with another 60,000 torture victims. The Greek political system was dismantled with, in some cases, Nazi collaborators being returned to power.

Chomsky labels it a war crime under the Nuremberg-Tokyo tribunals.

If the Nuremberg Laws were Applied..., by Noam Chomsky (Talk delivered around 1990)


----------



## theliq

jillian said:


> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes.
> 
> right?
> 
> pathetic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why isn't one of those Arab countries being accused of this murder?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> because israel gets accused of everything... including 9/11... it's a facile way for anti-semites to enjoy themselves.
Click to expand...

BORING GARBAGE AS USUAL


----------



## hjmick

theliq said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then why isn't one of those Arab countries being accused of this murder?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because israel gets accused of everything... including 9/11... it's a facile way for anti-semites to enjoy themselves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> BORING GARBAGE AS USUAL
Click to expand...


Yes, but the powers that be allow you to continue to post in spite of that...


----------



## theliq

JBG said:


> High_Gravity said:
> 
> 
> 
> TheAssLiq and his sock puppet TheTor are a bunch of ass clowns.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah. Lickass can't even get his Australian history straight.
Click to expand...

 O but YES I did,it is YOU ya MUG that knows nothing of Ausland,you got the names wrong but you insist you were right....as we say here......YOUR A BLOODY IDIOT......I'm just too smart for a dumbass like YOU.


theliq


----------



## theliq

hjmick said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> because israel gets accused of everything... including 9/11... it's a facile way for anti-semites to enjoy themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> BORING GARBAGE AS USUAL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, but the powers that be allow you to continue to post inspite of that...
Click to expand...

is that right thin skinned.....well they would because I speak fact......non of this pro Israel distortion that many of you speak because your BRAIN WASHED.....if you got out of you chair and came to Ausland you would meet rational folk....that are not seeped in BULL SHIT IDIOLOGY.just saying,anyway where in my statement to Jillian was I incorrect.....Israel DID COMMIT THE MURDER......answers please theliq


----------



## High_Gravity

theliq said:


> hjmick said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> BORING GARBAGE AS USUAL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the powers that be allow you to continue to post inspite of that...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> is that right thin skinned.....well they would because I speak fact......non of this pro Israel distortion that many of you speak because your BRAIN WASHED.....if you got out of you chair and came to Ausland you would meet rational folk....that are not seeped in BULL SHIT IDIOLOGY.just saying,anyway where in my statement to Jillian was I incorrect.....Israel DID COMMIT THE MURDER......answers please theliq
Click to expand...


How much acid do you take before you post on here?


----------



## theliq

High_Gravity said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hjmick said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the powers that be allow you to continue to post inspite of that...
> 
> 
> 
> is that right thin skinned.....well they would because I speak fact......non of this pro Israel distortion that many of you speak because your BRAIN WASHED.....if you got out of you chair and came to Ausland you would meet rational folk....that are not seeped in BULL SHIT IDIOLOGY.just saying,anyway where in my statement to Jillian was I incorrect.....Israel DID COMMIT THE MURDER......answers please theliq
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How much acid do you take before you post on here?
Click to expand...

Fair bit Grav but its the only way I can function on here, with some who find English comprehension so alien.
Saying that,whatever you throw at me is no problem because I reckon you're a good bloke,but cut the Foul Mouthing to folk,you don't need it,cause your better than that.

Gravity,I come from a distant land and see things in a different way,as you would and do.But I must admit......I like to throw incenduries from time to time,to get a reaction,can't have everyone agreeing all the time moreover the American way isn't always the best at times..............I  if you see it that way because you and others have been brought up to believe and think differently.......Although only a guest on here and not American,I have learn't much during my stay(which I never take for granted and deem a privilege )The thing I really like is how you protect and support each other....you inparticular.......which is also an Australian trait.Keep Well Steven aka theliq,ASSWIPE and all the other profanities I have been accused of.   Ps Janette still is waiting to give you a proper thrashing with No 2 leather flay of hers so watch out

I note that you and others did not explian where I was in anyway incorrect in my statement to Jillian,you realize that if you find such piquant situations difficult to respond to,you do end up eventually becoming a bit of a bore.Grav,Please....do not think I'm singleing you out,but it's  a trait,not responding to a question accurately/properly many seem to have gotten into on here.The standards have started to drop but theliq stands predominate,theliq stands firm,with his rod of correction.


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> How many Iranians will be maimed, murdered and displaced?
> Fewer than the millions of Iraqis who were "liberated?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many Iranians have been maimed, murdered and displaced by the Iranian regime and how many Lebanese, Israelis, Palestinian Arabs and now Syrians are being maimed, murdered and displaced by the Iranian regime?  How many millions  of people in the ME, western Europe and the US is the Iranian regime planning to threaten  with its nuclear armed missiles?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *How many millions of people around this planet has the US military killed since 1945?*
> How does that number compare to Iran's recent carnage?
> 
> There's little evidence Iran has any intention or capability to threaten the Middle East, Europe or the US with nuclear weapons. There are volumes of evidence attesting to US aggression from Korea, to Kosovo to Kandahar to???
Click to expand...


There were some US blunders, but no aggressions, and most of the blunders involved using military force too late.  Had the US moved to prevent Hitler from rebuilding the German military, tens of millions of lives could have been saved.  Had we moved to support the South Vietnamese earlier and with fewer restrictions on our military, South Vietnam and much of Southeast Asia could now be as free and prosperous as South Korea.

The current Iranian regime has made Iran into the principal aggressor nation in the world today, responsible for attacks against the people and governments of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Lebanon, the Palestinian Arabs as well as the Israeli people, and and for fatwas ordering the murders of people all over the world who are critics of the regime or who question their religious views and for terror attacks against Jews as far away as Argentina and for the murders of huge numbers of secularists who have disappeared since the regime took power.   

There is abundant evidence in both their nuclear and long range missile programs that Iranian regime intends to become a nuclear threat to both western Europe and the US and given the religious fanaticism, fatalism and reverence for martyrdom the regime and its supporters express, these threats have to be taken seriously.


----------



## georgephillip

Had the US not intervened in World War I it's unlikely Hitler would ever have come to power. That intervention, arguably, had more to do with saving Morgan's billions than it did with saving democracy.

It's also arguable that North and South Korea would have united democratically after the Second World War if the US had not garrisoned to South. The numbers are highly debated;however, it is entirely possible US bombs killed one out of every three citizens of North Korea, based on a total population of nine million before the war and three million dead by the time the armistice was signed.

Our bombers turned cities and villages into rubble, then came back and turned the rubble into pebbles, and then returned to turn pebbles into dust. Virtually every city and village north of the 38th parallel was pulverized repeatedly by US air power, and our generals made public jokes about the destruction.

Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia add significantly to the Korean numbers, whatever you believe them to be. One of the "restrictions" you mention in Vietnam revolved around the number of dead Vietnamese that would be required to "win" that conflict.

Left and right in this country agreed the number was somewhere between 80% to 90% of the total civilian population. The right was perfectly willing to accept that level of genocide. Do you think they were right or wrong?

Since Iran, along with North and South Korea and Vietnam, not to mention Iraq and Afghanistan, have never posed the slightest existential threat to the US homeland, the abundance of evidence seems to point to the US being the principal threat to world peace since WWII.


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> Had the US not intervened in World War I it's unlikely Hitler would ever have come to power. That intervention, arguably, had more to do with saving Morgan's billions than it did with saving democracy.
> 
> It's also arguable that North and South Korea would have united democratically after the Second World War if the US had not garrisoned to South. The numbers are highly debated;however, it is entirely possible US bombs killed one out of every three citizens of North Korea, based on a total population of nine million before the war and three million dead by the time the armistice was signed.
> 
> Our bombers turned cities and villages into rubble, then came back and turned the rubble into pebbles, and then returned to turn pebbles into dust. Virtually every city and village north of the 38th parallel was pulverized repeatedly by US air power, and our generals made public jokes about the destruction.
> 
> Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia add significantly to the Korean numbers, whatever you believe them to be. One of the "restrictions" you mention in Vietnam revolved around the number of dead Vietnamese that would be required to "win" that conflict.
> 
> Left and right in this country agreed the number was somewhere between 80% to 90% of the total civilian population. The right was perfectly willing to accept that level of genocide. Do you think they were right or wrong?
> 
> Since Iran, along with North and South Korea and Vietnam, not to mention Iraq and Afghanistan, have never posed the slightest existential threat to the US homeland, the abundance of evidence seems to point to the US being the principal threat to world peace since WWII.



Your numbers are exaggerated and your presumption that either NK or NV would have allowed and abided by democratic elections is bizarre.  The wars we have fought have been a continuation of the West's battle against totalitarianism that began in WWII and is not over yet.  Europe is free and democratic today only because the US was willing to fight for its freedom and SK is free and democratic today only because the US and many of its allies were willing to fight for its freedom, and if democracy finds a home in the Arab countries of the ME and North Africa and Iran it will be only because the US and its allies have again stood firm in defense of it.  

All this said, Iran is an altogether different matter.  The regime's efforts to acquire nuclear weapons and long range missiles make it clear that the Iranian regime intends to become a nuclear threat to western Europe and the US, and given the regime's commitment to international terrorism and its reverence for martyrdom, no responsible western government can allow the Iranian regime to have a nuclear capability.


----------



## georgephillip

You're misreading or misrepresenting what I said.
There would have been no North Korea or South Korea or North Vietnam or South Vietnam if the US hadn't sent troops half-way around the world and intervened for corporate interests, murdering thousands or millions of innocent (non-white) human beings in the process.

And making $billions for Wall Street and Pentagon elites.

I would suggest the wars we've fought since 1945 were in defense of corporate tyranny which has far more in common with fascism and Bolshevism that with any democratic ideals. Iran is the latest sovereign state to get on the wrong side of the world's central bankers for threatening to sell their oil in a currency other than the US dollar. As a consequence the US is violating their airspace with drones, consorting with other terrorists like MEK to conduct sabotage within Iran, and imposing economic sanctions that qualify as acts of war.

Do you believe the US or Israel would tolerate Iranian assassins killing Israeli scientists in Tel Aviv or murdering Americans in Los Alamos while wounding several of their wives and, in one case, shooting them in front of their child's kindergarten?

As a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Iran is within its rights to pursue the peaceful pursuit of nuclear energy unlike Israel which has never signed the treaty and refuses all IAEA inspections. The only nuclear threats in the Middle East are Israel and the US, and the overwhelming majority of Arab and Persians and Europeans know it.


----------



## Iggy

georgephillip said:


> You're misreading or misrepresenting what I said.
> There would have been no North Korea or South Korea or North Vietnam or South Vietnam if the US hadn't sent troops half-way around the world and intervened for corporate interests, murdering thousands or millions of innocent (non-white) human beings in the process.
> 
> And making $billions for Wall Street and Pentagon elites.
> 
> I would suggest the wars we've fought since 1945 were in defense of corporate tyranny which has far more in common with fascism and Bolshevism that with any democratic ideals. Iran is the latest sovereign state to get on the wrong side of the world's central bankers for threatening to sell their oil in a currency other than the US dollar. As a consequence the US is violating their airspace with drones, consorting with other terrorists like MEK to conduct sabotage within Iran, and imposing economic sanctions that qualify as acts of war.
> 
> Do you believe the US or Israel would tolerate Iranian assassins killing Israeli scientists in Tel Aviv or murdering Americans in Los Alamos while wounding several of their wives and, in one case, shooting them in front of their child's kindergarten?
> 
> As a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation *Treaty Iran is within its rights to pursue the peaceful pursuit of nuclear energ*y unlike Israel which has never signed the treaty and refuses all IAEA inspections. The only nuclear threats in the Middle East are Israel and the US, and the overwhelming majority of Arab and Persians and Europeans know it.



You just dumped all over yourself for being blind enough to see peaceful nuclear ambitions where war ambitions are clearly being prepared.

I note you do this quite a bit.  You start your premises falsely.  Peaceful?  

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hLDjGdJC0Q]Ahmadinejad: Israel Will Disappear From Map - YouTube[/ame]

Disappear from the map of history.

^ Means never even being.  Wiped even its history. Yet peaceful you say.


----------



## Jos

*Iran won't build nuclear weapon in 2012, says draft Isis report*


> Iran is unlikely to move towards building a nuclear weapon in 2012 because it cannot yet produce enough weapon-grade uranium and is being deterred by sanctions and the prospect of an Israeli attack, according to a draft report by the Institute for Science and International Security (Isis).
> 
> The report by the institute founded by nuclear expert David Albright offers a more temperate view of Iran's nuclear program than some of the heated rhetoric that has surfaced since the United States and its allies stepped up sanctions on Tehran.
> 
> The Isis analysis is revealed after a prediction that Israel will attack Iran in 2012 to try and stop any nuclear bomb programme.
> 
> "Iran is unlikely to decide to dash toward making nuclear weapons as long as its uranium enrichment capability remains as limited as it is today," the report said.


Iran won't build nuclear weapon in 2012, says draft Isis report | World news | guardian.co.uk


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> You're misreading or misrepresenting what I said.
> There would have been no North Korea or South Korea or North Vietnam or South Vietnam if the US hadn't sent troops half-way around the world and intervened for corporate interests, murdering thousands or millions of innocent (non-white) human beings in the process.
> 
> And making $billions for Wall Street and Pentagon elites.
> 
> I would suggest the wars we've fought since 1945 were in defense of corporate tyranny which has far more in common with fascism and Bolshevism that with any democratic ideals. Iran is the latest sovereign state to get on the wrong side of the world's central bankers for threatening to sell their oil in a currency other than the US dollar. As a consequence the US is violating their airspace with drones, consorting with other terrorists like MEK to conduct sabotage within Iran, and imposing economic sanctions that qualify as acts of war.
> 
> Do you believe the US or Israel would tolerate Iranian assassins killing Israeli scientists in Tel Aviv or murdering Americans in Los Alamos while wounding several of their wives and, in one case, shooting them in front of their child's kindergarten?
> 
> As a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Iran is within its rights to pursue the peaceful pursuit of nuclear energy unlike Israel which has never signed the treaty and refuses all IAEA inspections. The only nuclear threats in the Middle East are Israel and the US, and the overwhelming majority of Arab and Persians and Europeans know it.



I understand perfectly what you are saying, but it's not clear that you do.  You are flailing about seeking any excuse for your irrational hatreds of the US and Israel.  

The US sent troops half way around the world to Korea to fight the Japanese. When Japan surrendered, US troops occupied the south and Soviet troops occupied the north.  The UN formalized this arrangement by setting up two administrative districts.  The Soviets set up a communist dictatorship in the North and the US and western allies helped the South Koreans set up a western style republic.  

In 1950, a Soviet armed, trained and financed North Korean army invaded the South, and in the ensuing war the combined forces of North Korea, China and the USSR fought against the combined forces of South Korea, the US, UK, Turkey, Australia, Canada. France, Greece, Columbia, Thailand, Ethiopia, Netherlands, Philippines, Belgium, South Africa, New Zealand, Norway and Luxembourg.  The US and other South Korean allies provided about 1/3 of the troops fighting alongside the South Koreans while the USSR and China provided about 80% of of the troops fighting against the South Koreans.  

Had the US and other countries not aided South Korea in fighting against Chinese, Soviet and North Korean aggression, the South Koreans would now be living under an impoverished, oppressive dictatorship along with the North Koreans instead of enjoying freedom, democracy and prosperity as they do today.

Vietnam is a more complex issue, and I am tempted to say that if the US had immediately committed to defend South Vietnam against communist aggression in 1956, as it had committed to defending South Korea, that the outcome would have been different, but the North Vietnamese had been fighting a guerrilla war against one country or another for thirty years by then, and the US was not then prepared to fight an asymmetrical war.  

In any case, your nonsense about corporate tyranny, central banks, fascism and bolshevism are just further evidence that you do not understand why you have such strong feelings of hatred towards the US and Israel.    

Again, interesting as these subjects may be, they have nothing to do with Iran.  You ask if Israel or the US would tolerate Iran killing their scientists, but both countries have tolerated far more from Iran.  Iran supplied Iraqi terrorists with weapons to kill US troops in Iraq and Israel has long tolerated Iranian terrorism by its proxies, Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad that has rained thousands of rockets and mortars on Israeli civilians for years, and it is precisely because Iran is ruled by a terrorist regime that the rest of the world cannot allow it to develop its long range missiles and arm them with nuclear warheads aimed at western Europe and the US.


----------



## georgephillip

toomuchtime_ said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're misreading or misrepresenting what I said.
> There would have been no North Korea or South Korea or North Vietnam or South Vietnam if the US hadn't sent troops half-way around the world and intervened for corporate interests, murdering thousands or millions of innocent (non-white) human beings in the process.
> 
> And making $billions for Wall Street and Pentagon elites.
> 
> I would suggest the wars we've fought since 1945 were in defense of corporate tyranny which has far more in common with fascism and Bolshevism that with any democratic ideals. Iran is the latest sovereign state to get on the wrong side of the world's central bankers for threatening to sell their oil in a currency other than the US dollar. As a consequence the US is violating their airspace with drones, consorting with other terrorists like MEK to conduct sabotage within Iran, and imposing economic sanctions that qualify as acts of war.
> 
> Do you believe the US or Israel would tolerate Iranian assassins killing Israeli scientists in Tel Aviv or murdering Americans in Los Alamos while wounding several of their wives and, in one case, shooting them in front of their child's kindergarten?
> 
> As a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Iran is within its rights to pursue the peaceful pursuit of nuclear energy unlike Israel which has never signed the treaty and refuses all IAEA inspections. The only nuclear threats in the Middle East are Israel and the US, and the overwhelming majority of Arab and Persians and Europeans know it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I understand perfectly what you are saying, but it's not clear that you do.  You are flailing about seeking any excuse for your irrational hatreds of the US and Israel.
> 
> The US sent troops half way around the world to Korea to fight the Japanese. When Japan surrendered, US troops occupied the south and Soviet troops occupied the north.  The UN formalized this arrangement by setting up two administrative districts.  The Soviets set up a communist dictatorship in the North and the US and western allies helped the South Koreans set up a western style republic.
> 
> In 1950, a Soviet armed, trained and financed North Korean army invaded the South, and in the ensuing war the combined forces of North Korea, China and the USSR fought against the combined forces of South Korea, the US, UK, Turkey, Australia, Canada. France, Greece, Columbia, Thailand, Ethiopia, Netherlands, Philippines, Belgium, South Africa, New Zealand, Norway and Luxembourg.  The US and other South Korean allies provided about 1/3 of the troops fighting alongside the South Koreans while the USSR and China provided about 80% of of the troops fighting against the South Koreans.
> 
> Had the US and other countries not aided South Korea in fighting against Chinese, Soviet and North Korean aggression, the South Koreans would now be living under an impoverished, oppressive dictatorship along with the North Koreans instead of enjoying freedom, democracy and prosperity as they do today.
> 
> Vietnam is a more complex issue, and I am tempted to say that if the US had immediately committed to defend South Vietnam against communist aggression in 1956, as it had committed to defending South Korea, that the outcome would have been different, but the North Vietnamese had been fighting a guerrilla war against one country or another for thirty years by then, and the US was not then prepared to fight an asymmetrical war.
> 
> In any case, your nonsense about corporate tyranny, central banks, fascism and bolshevism are just further evidence that you do not understand why you have such strong feelings of hatred towards the US and Israel.
> 
> Again, interesting as these subjects may be, they have nothing to do with Iran.  You ask if Israel or the US would tolerate Iran killing their scientists, but both countries have tolerated far more from Iran.  Iran supplied Iraqi terrorists with weapons to kill US troops in Iraq and Israel has long tolerated Iranian terrorism by its proxies, Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad that has rained thousands of rockets and mortars on Israeli civilians for years, and it is precisely because Iran is ruled by a terrorist regime that the rest of the world cannot allow it to develop its long range missiles and arm them with nuclear warheads aimed at western Europe and the US.
Click to expand...

If US troops had not chosen to take part in an illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq they would not risk being killed, would they? I condemn those who kill innocent human beings for money, apparently you don't if the hired killers happen to be born in the same country as you.

Your basic facts about US aggression in Korea are equally slanted.

The Korean peninsula which is populated by one of the world's most homogeneous ethnic groups  was united from the seventh century through 1945 and is now divided because of actions taken by the Truman administration and the US military.

Korea was a Japanese colony from 1910 to 1945 and when the Japanese prepared to surrender to the allies they turned over power in Korea to local people as they did elsewhere in Asia in the hope western powers would not continue to colonize.

On September 6, 1945 the "Korean People's Republic" formed in Seoul with a broad-based leadership ranging from right to left across the political spectrum. Shortly thereafter US General John R. Hodge, leader of US occupation arrived in Inchon and ordered Japanese authorities to remain at their posts. At the same time Koreans who collaborated with the Japanese were being hunted down and killed in the north, the collaborators in the south were being absorbed into the police and military establishments of South Korea.

Hodge refused to acknowledge Korean self rule, and eventually banned all references to the Korean People's Republic. The US would be in charge of what was seen as a defeated enemy nation. Koreans responded much like Iraqis would three generations hence.

In the North the Red Army handed over power to the Korean Workers" Party, headed by Kim Il-sung, a guerrilla leader who fought the Japanese in Manchuria during WWII. Syngman Rhee, who spent WWII in the US, was installed as "president" in South Korea by the US military  and soon enacted laws that severely curtailed political dissent. His "presidency" ended in resignation following popular protests against a disputed election in 1960.

Had the US withdrawn its troops in 1948 like the Soviets did the US wouldn't have propped up a succession of South Korean dictators like Park Chung-hee and Chun Doo-hwan and a united Korea would have made its own political choices independently of US corporate influence.


----------



## Unkotare

theliq said:


> ....as we say here......YOUR A BLOODY IDIOT......I'm just too smart for a dumbass like YOU.





Have you heard of 'irony' down under?


----------



## Unkotare

theliq said:


> non of this pro Israel distortion that many of you speak because your BRAIN WASHED.....if you got out of you chair and came to Ausland you would meet rational folk....that are not seeped in BULL SHIT IDIOLOGY.




http://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/israel/pictorial_history.pdf


Australia and Israel: a unique friendship - The Drum Opinion (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)


----------



## theliq

Unkotare said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> non of this pro Israel distortion that many of you speak because your BRAIN WASHED.....if you got out of you chair and came to Ausland you would meet rational folk....that are not seeped in BULL SHIT IDIOLOGY.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/israel/pictorial_history.pdf
> 
> 
> Australia and Israel: a unique friendship - The Drum Opinion (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Click to expand...

SO one of Australia's greatest Military Leaders,with Thomas Blamey,was Jewish.....so what,he actually was Australian and had a very low opinion of the British Military Leadership and told them so,the result was autonomy in the War(WW1) and John was in command of Australian troops.

This has been the way in wars ever since,you will note in the recent war in Iraq as in Afghanistan the Australians serve alone and nowhere near US or British Troops,our SAS a very highly regarded as it should be.

Monash was the son of Jewish migrants from Germany,and it shows how everyone is encompassed into society in Australia......it is a mute point Tare,but he was not know as a Jewish Australian,as everyone here is referred to as JUST AN AUSTRALIAN...............unlike the US,who precurser all ethnicity ie..African American,Mexican American,Chinese American,Native American and so on.Its a bad practice and something you as a society should cease in my opinion.

He wished for a state of Israel,a land for Jewish people......and that was acheived in 1948 and there was nothing wrong in that asperation.....had his family not come to Australia....who knows where they would have ended up.(you know what I mean Tare).

John Monash....a Great Australian,So what if he had Jewish Blood....He Was A Great Bloke...........Tare Some on here think I am anti-Jew.....That's Fucking Bollocks as many of my friends are Jewish.   Shalom steve


----------



## theliq

Unkotare said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....as we say here......YOUR A BLOODY IDIOT......I'm just too smart for a dumbass like YOU.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you heard of 'irony' down under?
Click to expand...

NO THEY HAVEN'T and you really are a BLOODY troublemaker, SOMETIMES


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're misreading or misrepresenting what I said.
> There would have been no North Korea or South Korea or North Vietnam or South Vietnam if the US hadn't sent troops half-way around the world and intervened for corporate interests, murdering thousands or millions of innocent (non-white) human beings in the process.
> 
> And making $billions for Wall Street and Pentagon elites.
> 
> I would suggest the wars we've fought since 1945 were in defense of corporate tyranny which has far more in common with fascism and Bolshevism that with any democratic ideals. Iran is the latest sovereign state to get on the wrong side of the world's central bankers for threatening to sell their oil in a currency other than the US dollar. As a consequence the US is violating their airspace with drones, consorting with other terrorists like MEK to conduct sabotage within Iran, and imposing economic sanctions that qualify as acts of war.
> 
> Do you believe the US or Israel would tolerate Iranian assassins killing Israeli scientists in Tel Aviv or murdering Americans in Los Alamos while wounding several of their wives and, in one case, shooting them in front of their child's kindergarten?
> 
> As a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Iran is within its rights to pursue the peaceful pursuit of nuclear energy unlike Israel which has never signed the treaty and refuses all IAEA inspections. The only nuclear threats in the Middle East are Israel and the US, and the overwhelming majority of Arab and Persians and Europeans know it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I understand perfectly what you are saying, but it's not clear that you do.  You are flailing about seeking any excuse for your irrational hatreds of the US and Israel.
> 
> The US sent troops half way around the world to Korea to fight the Japanese. When Japan surrendered, US troops occupied the south and Soviet troops occupied the north.  The UN formalized this arrangement by setting up two administrative districts.  The Soviets set up a communist dictatorship in the North and the US and western allies helped the South Koreans set up a western style republic.
> 
> In 1950, a Soviet armed, trained and financed North Korean army invaded the South, and in the ensuing war the combined forces of North Korea, China and the USSR fought against the combined forces of South Korea, the US, UK, Turkey, Australia, Canada. France, Greece, Columbia, Thailand, Ethiopia, Netherlands, Philippines, Belgium, South Africa, New Zealand, Norway and Luxembourg.  The US and other South Korean allies provided about 1/3 of the troops fighting alongside the South Koreans while the USSR and China provided about 80% of of the troops fighting against the South Koreans.
> 
> Had the US and other countries not aided South Korea in fighting against Chinese, Soviet and North Korean aggression, the South Koreans would now be living under an impoverished, oppressive dictatorship along with the North Koreans instead of enjoying freedom, democracy and prosperity as they do today.
> 
> Vietnam is a more complex issue, and I am tempted to say that if the US had immediately committed to defend South Vietnam against communist aggression in 1956, as it had committed to defending South Korea, that the outcome would have been different, but the North Vietnamese had been fighting a guerrilla war against one country or another for thirty years by then, and the US was not then prepared to fight an asymmetrical war.
> 
> In any case, your nonsense about corporate tyranny, central banks, fascism and bolshevism are just further evidence that you do not understand why you have such strong feelings of hatred towards the US and Israel.
> 
> Again, interesting as these subjects may be, they have nothing to do with Iran.  You ask if Israel or the US would tolerate Iran killing their scientists, but both countries have tolerated far more from Iran.  Iran supplied Iraqi terrorists with weapons to kill US troops in Iraq and Israel has long tolerated Iranian terrorism by its proxies, Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad that has rained thousands of rockets and mortars on Israeli civilians for years, and it is precisely because Iran is ruled by a terrorist regime that the rest of the world cannot allow it to develop its long range missiles and arm them with nuclear warheads aimed at western Europe and the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If US troops had not chosen to take part in an illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq they would not risk being killed, would they? I condemn those who kill innocent human beings for money, apparently you don't if the hired killers happen to be born in the same country as you.
> 
> Your basic facts about US aggression in Korea are equally slanted.
> 
> The Korean peninsula which is populated by one of the world's most homogeneous ethnic groups  was united from the seventh century through 1945 and is now divided because of actions taken by the Truman administration and the US military.
> 
> Korea was a Japanese colony from 1910 to 1945 and when the Japanese prepared to surrender to the allies they turned over power in Korea to local people as they did elsewhere in Asia in the hope western powers would not continue to colonize.
> 
> On September 6, 1945 the "Korean People's Republic" formed in Seoul with a broad-based leadership ranging from right to left across the political spectrum. Shortly thereafter US General John R. Hodge, leader of US occupation arrived in Inchon and ordered Japanese authorities to remain at their posts. At the same time Koreans who collaborated with the Japanese were being hunted down and killed in the north, the collaborators in the south were being absorbed into the police and military establishments of South Korea.
> 
> Hodge refused to acknowledge Korean self rule, and eventually banned all references to the Korean People's Republic. The US would be in charge of what was seen as a defeated enemy nation. Koreans responded much like Iraqis would three generations hence.
> 
> In the North the Red Army handed over power to the Korean Workers" Party, headed by Kim Il-sung, a guerrilla leader who fought the Japanese in Manchuria during WWII. Syngman Rhee, who spent WWII in the US, was installed as "president" in South Korea by the US military  and soon enacted laws that severely curtailed political dissent. His "presidency" ended in resignation following popular protests against a disputed election in 1960.
> 
> Had the US withdrawn its troops in 1948 like the Soviets did the US wouldn't have propped up a succession of South Korean dictators like Park Chung-hee and Chun Doo-hwan and a united Korea would have made its own political choices independently of US corporate influence.
Click to expand...


The Japanese surrendered to the US in the south and to the Soviets in the north.  The Korean People's Republic, more commonly referred to as the People's Republic of Korea, was proclaimed as the provisional government of Korea by a group of Korean nationalists immediately after the war.  In the South, the US military government abolished it, and in the north it became the communist party which built the Stalinist slave state that still exists.  

Clearly, you are upset that US actions prevented the South Koreans from enjoying the blessings of poverty and oppression that characterize life in the North and instead are forced to cope daily with what you appear to see as the horrors of freedom, democracy and prosperity. 

It is undisputed that the war began with a North Korean invasion that was intended to crush the nascent democracy in the South.  In a previous post you claimed to be horrified by the destruction of that war, but in this post you seek to justify the war despite the huge destruction wrought by both sides because it was, in your mind, directed against the US.  In fact, the only values that appear to be consistent in your posts are irrational hatreds of the US and Israel.  Everything else, war, terrorism, tyranny, nuclear proliferation appear to be justified in your view as long as they are directed against the US or Israel.


----------



## georgephillip

It is undisputed the North Korean forces crossed the 38th parallel on June 25, 1950 (two years after the Soviet withdrawl) and within three days took control of Seoul, meeting little resistance and finding much support from their southern brothers and sisters.

The US military industrial complex was not prepared to see a reunification of Korea on any terms except their own. Using the typical fig leaf of UN authorization (the Soviet ambassador was absent when the Security Council voted and an American puppet held China's seat) the US counterattacked, driving nearly as far as the Yalu River.

The war ended in stalemate, after the death of about 4 million people, three years later.

"The huge destruction wrought by both sides" would likely have never occurred if the US had withdrawn its troops at the same time the Soviets did, and a united Korea today would be at least as prosperous and free as you imagine South Korea to be. 

Clearly you take great pride in apologizing for the crimes of the greatest purveyor of violence on the face of the earth.


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> It is undisputed the North Korean forces crossed the 38th parallel on June 25, 1950 (two years after the Soviet withdrawl) and within three days took control of Seoul, meeting little resistance and finding much support from their southern brothers and sisters.
> 
> The US military industrial complex was not prepared to see a reunification of Korea on any terms except their own. Using the typical fig leaf of UN authorization (the Soviet ambassador was absent when the Security Council voted and an American puppet held China's seat) the US counterattacked, driving nearly as far as the Yalu River.
> 
> The war ended in stalemate, after the death of about 4 million people, three years later.
> 
> "The huge destruction wrought by both sides" would likely have never occurred if the US had withdrawn its troops at the same time the Soviets did, and a united Korea today would be at least as prosperous and free as you imagine South Korea to be.
> 
> Clearly you take great pride in apologizing for the crimes of the greatest purveyor of violence on the face of the earth.



Your irrational hatred of the US and Israel leads you to make one absurd statement after another.  It is bizarre to claim that the Stalinist slave state the Soviets installed in in North Korea that cannot feed its own people would have been able to create a free and prosperous society in South Korea if it had conquered it.  

It was Stalin who, in 1947, rejected the UN call for a united Korea to hold free and fair elections monitored by the UN by boycotting the vote on the proposal and then declaring he would not abide by it.  The UN passed the proposal and proceeded with the elections but Stalin refused to allow the Koreans under his control to vote.  In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North, just as he had in all the countries he had conquered in eastern Europe and central Asia.  

Had Stalin allowed the North Korean to vote in UN monitored elections then there would have been a united Korea with a government chosen by the Korean people and there would have been no war.


----------



## Unkotare

toomuchtime_ said:


> In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North.




Painfully and permanently dividing thousands and thousands of family members who would suffer (and still do) for decades thereafter.


----------



## georgephillip

toomuchtime_ said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is undisputed the North Korean forces crossed the 38th parallel on June 25, 1950 (two years after the Soviet withdrawl) and within three days took control of Seoul, meeting little resistance and finding much support from their southern brothers and sisters.
> 
> The US military industrial complex was not prepared to see a reunification of Korea on any terms except their own. Using the typical fig leaf of UN authorization (the Soviet ambassador was absent when the Security Council voted and an American puppet held China's seat) the US counterattacked, driving nearly as far as the Yalu River.
> 
> The war ended in stalemate, after the death of about 4 million people, three years later.
> 
> "The huge destruction wrought by both sides" would likely have never occurred if the US had withdrawn its troops at the same time the Soviets did, and a united Korea today would be at least as prosperous and free as you imagine South Korea to be.
> 
> Clearly you take great pride in apologizing for the crimes of the greatest purveyor of violence on the face of the earth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your irrational hatred of the US and Israel leads you to make one absurd statement after another.  It is bizarre to claim that the Stalinist slave state the Soviets installed in in North Korea that cannot feed its own people would have been able to create a free and prosperous society in South Korea if it had conquered it.
> 
> It was Stalin who, in 1947, rejected the UN call for a united Korea to hold free and fair elections monitored by the UN by boycotting the vote on the proposal and then declaring he would not abide by it.  The UN passed the proposal and proceeded with the elections but Stalin refused to allow the Koreans under his control to vote.  In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North, just as he had in all the countries he had conquered in eastern Europe and central Asia.
> 
> Had Stalin allowed the North Korean to vote in UN monitored elections then there would have been a united Korea with a government chosen by the Korean people and there would have been no war.
Click to expand...

At the Yalta Conference in February of 1945 Stalin advocated independence for the Koreans as soon as possible. FDR countered with a suggestion of a US/Korean "trusteeship" of 20-30 years, modeled on our successful occupation of the Philippines, where we perfected the water torture known today as waterboarding. 

The US commitment to Korean independence began with the Taft-Katusra  agreement with Japan in 1904-05 at the conclusion of the Russo-Japanese War. In exchange for Japanese recognition of US colonial rule over the Philippines, the US recognized Japan's "right" to annex Korea in 1910.

Shit clumps, as they say.


----------



## georgephillip

Unkotare said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Painfully and permanently dividing thousands and thousands of family members who would suffer (and still do) for decades thereafter.
Click to expand...

At the conclusion of the war in Europe, Soviet forces invaded Korea, advancing to the 38th parallel by August 10, 1945. They could easily have conquered the entire peninsula. What did the do? They consulted with the US who requested they halt their advance so the US could occupy the rest of Korea in the coming month.

In that same month, defeated Japanese troops formally turned over authority in Korea to the broad-based Committee for the Preparation of Korean Independence, led by Lyuh Woon-hyung, which in September proclaimed the Korean People's Republic.

When US General Hodge arrived in Inchon to accept the Japanese surrender he ordered all Japanese occupiers to remain at their posts, refused to recognize Lyuh as national leader, and soon banned all public reference to the KPR.

Soviet troops left Korea in 1948.
Ours are still there.
That should tell you everything you need to know about the US commitment to Korean independence.


----------



## Unkotare

georgephillip said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Painfully and permanently dividing thousands and thousands of family members who would suffer (and still do) for decades thereafter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> At the conclusion of the war in Europe, Soviet forces invaded Korea, advancing to the 38th parallel by August 10, 1945. They could easily have conquered the entire peninsula. What did the do? They consulted with the US who requested they halt their advance so the US could occupy the rest of Korea in the coming month.
> 
> In that same month, defeated Japanese troops formally turned over authority in Korea to the broad-based Committee for the Preparation of Korean Independence, led by Lyuh Woon-hyung, which in September proclaimed the Korean People's Republic.
> 
> When US General Hodge arrived in Inchon to accept the Japanese surrender he ordered all Japanese occupiers to remain at their posts, refused to recognize Lyuh as national leader, and soon banned all public reference to the KPR.
> 
> Soviet troops left Korea in 1948.
> Ours are still there.
> That should tell you everything you need to know about the US commitment to Korean independence.
Click to expand...



Does it ever even occur to you that you read all history as if you were a mortal enemy of the US yourself personally?

The Soviets were so thoughtful out of a deep respect for us? Or, might it have been something else? Hmmm...what had happened oh, say four days or so before they exhibited such thoughtful restraint? Hmmm...something...something...what was it...?

While you are working on that great mystery, consider this: Look at North and South Korea today. Which condition would you like to have seen for the entire penninsula (and don't pretend it wasn't one or the other unless you are hopelessly naive or hopelessly ignorant of the history).

South Korea is a free, democratic, prosperous nation as opposed to the nightmarish, starving, oppressive, dangerous basketcase just to its north. "That should tell you everything you need to know about the US commitment to Korean independence."


----------



## Unkotare

georgephillip said:


> The US commitment to Korean independence began with the Taft-Katusra  agreement with Japan in 1904-05 at the conclusion of the Russo-Japanese War. In exchange for Japanese recognition of US colonial rule over the Philippines, the US recognized Japan's "right" to annex Korea in 1910.
> 
> Shit clumps, as they say.





It's really all Admiral Perry's fault, right?


----------



## georgephillip

Unkotare said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> The US commitment to Korean independence began with the Taft-Katusra  agreement with Japan in 1904-05 at the conclusion of the Russo-Japanese War. In exchange for Japanese recognition of US colonial rule over the Philippines, the US recognized Japan's "right" to annex Korea in 1910.
> 
> Shit clumps, as they say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's really all Admiral Perry's fault, right?
Click to expand...

I think it's more likely the fault of whoever authorized the US merchant ship _General Sherman_ to defy the laws of Korea in 1866 by sailing up the Taedong River to demand trade. (sort of like Perry's arrogance in Japan.

Things didn't work out as well for the imperialists in Korea as the _General Sherman_ was burned and sunk with the loss of her entire crew.


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is undisputed the North Korean forces crossed the 38th parallel on June 25, 1950 (two years after the Soviet withdrawl) and within three days took control of Seoul, meeting little resistance and finding much support from their southern brothers and sisters.
> 
> The US military industrial complex was not prepared to see a reunification of Korea on any terms except their own. Using the typical fig leaf of UN authorization (the Soviet ambassador was absent when the Security Council voted and an American puppet held China's seat) the US counterattacked, driving nearly as far as the Yalu River.
> 
> The war ended in stalemate, after the death of about 4 million people, three years later.
> 
> "The huge destruction wrought by both sides" would likely have never occurred if the US had withdrawn its troops at the same time the Soviets did, and a united Korea today would be at least as prosperous and free as you imagine South Korea to be.
> 
> Clearly you take great pride in apologizing for the crimes of the greatest purveyor of violence on the face of the earth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your irrational hatred of the US and Israel leads you to make one absurd statement after another.  It is bizarre to claim that the Stalinist slave state the Soviets installed in in North Korea that cannot feed its own people would have been able to create a free and prosperous society in South Korea if it had conquered it.
> 
> It was Stalin who, in 1947, rejected the UN call for a united Korea to hold free and fair elections monitored by the UN by boycotting the vote on the proposal and then declaring he would not abide by it.  The UN passed the proposal and proceeded with the elections but Stalin refused to allow the Koreans under his control to vote.  In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North, just as he had in all the countries he had conquered in eastern Europe and central Asia.
> 
> Had Stalin allowed the North Korean to vote in UN monitored elections then there would have been a united Korea with a government chosen by the Korean people and there would have been no war.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> At the Yalta Conference in February of 1945 Stalin advocated independence for the Koreans as soon as possible. FDR countered with a suggestion of a US/Korean "trusteeship" of 20-30 years, modeled on our successful occupation of the Philippines, where we perfected the water torture known today as waterboarding.
> 
> The US commitment to Korean independence began with the Taft-Katusra  agreement with Japan in 1904-05 at the conclusion of the Russo-Japanese War. In exchange for Japanese recognition of US colonial rule over the Philippines, the US recognized Japan's "right" to annex Korea in 1910.
> 
> Shit clumps, as they say.
Click to expand...


Whatever you may imagine FDR said at Yalta, in 1947 the US clearly had no designs on Korea.  The US proposed free and fair elections monitored by the UN in all of Korea to choose a government, but the Soviets refused to allow the Koreans to decide their own destiny, boycotted the vote and refused to abide by it.  When the South Koreans elected their own government in the summer of 1948, the US military government immediately turned all power and authority over to them and began withdrawing US troops.  By the time North Korea invaded the South in the summer of 1950, only 500 US troops assigned as advisers to the South Korean army remained.  

Before the North Korean invasion, the US had not considered Korea part of its defensive perimeter against Soviet expansion in Asia.  Both Syngman Rhee, the president of South Korea, and Kim Il Sung, the North Korean dictator, were ardent nationalists who wanted to unite Korea, each under his own government, and this led to threats and border incidents caused by both sides.  The US did not want to encourage Rhee to invade the North, so it refused to provide the South with tanks, aircraft or heavy artillery which it would need for an invasion.  Stalin, on the other hand, provided North Korea with its most advanced weaponry, fighters, bombers, tanks and heavy artillery.  It was for these reasons, the lack of US troops and the fact that the South Korean army lacked heavy weapons, that the invasion had some initial success.

US troops were returned to Korea to counter the invasion because the Truman administration reasoned the not responding forcefully to Soviet aggression in Korea would encourage the Soviet expansion elsewhere, even in Europe.


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Painfully and permanently dividing thousands and thousands of family members who would suffer (and still do) for decades thereafter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> At the conclusion of the war in Europe, Soviet forces invaded Korea, advancing to the 38th parallel by August 10, 1945. They could easily have conquered the entire peninsula. What did the do? They consulted with the US who requested they halt their advance so the US could occupy the rest of Korea in the coming month.
> 
> In that same month, defeated Japanese troops formally turned over authority in Korea to the broad-based Committee for the Preparation of Korean Independence, led by Lyuh Woon-hyung, which in September proclaimed the Korean People's Republic.
> 
> When US General Hodge arrived in Inchon to accept the Japanese surrender he ordered all Japanese occupiers to remain at their posts, refused to recognize Lyuh as national leader, and soon banned all public reference to the KPR.
> 
> Soviet troops left Korea in 1948.
> Ours are still there.
> That should tell you everything you need to know about the US commitment to Korean independence.
Click to expand...


Japanese troops surrendered to the Soviets in the North and to the US in the South.  The Japanese colonial authority hoping to gain protection for themselves and to hold on to their property supported the Soviet dominated Preparation of Korean Independence.

US troops began withdrawing from South Korea after the Korean government was elected in the summer of 1948.  By the time of the North Korean invasion in the summer of 1950, only 500 US troops assigned as advisers remained.


----------



## georgephillip

toomuchtime_ said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your irrational hatred of the US and Israel leads you to make one absurd statement after another.  It is bizarre to claim that the Stalinist slave state the Soviets installed in in North Korea that cannot feed its own people would have been able to create a free and prosperous society in South Korea if it had conquered it.
> 
> It was Stalin who, in 1947, rejected the UN call for a united Korea to hold free and fair elections monitored by the UN by boycotting the vote on the proposal and then declaring he would not abide by it.  The UN passed the proposal and proceeded with the elections but Stalin refused to allow the Koreans under his control to vote.  In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North, just as he had in all the countries he had conquered in eastern Europe and central Asia.
> 
> Had Stalin allowed the North Korean to vote in UN monitored elections then there would have been a united Korea with a government chosen by the Korean people and there would have been no war.
> 
> 
> 
> At the Yalta Conference in February of 1945 Stalin advocated independence for the Koreans as soon as possible. FDR countered with a suggestion of a US/Korean "trusteeship" of 20-30 years, modeled on our successful occupation of the Philippines, where we perfected the water torture known today as waterboarding.
> 
> The US commitment to Korean independence began with the Taft-Katusra  agreement with Japan in 1904-05 at the conclusion of the Russo-Japanese War. In exchange for Japanese recognition of US colonial rule over the Philippines, the US recognized Japan's "right" to annex Korea in 1910.
> 
> Shit clumps, as they say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatever you may imagine FDR said at Yalta, in 1947 the US clearly had no designs on Korea.  The US proposed free and fair elections monitored by the UN in all of Korea to choose a government, but the Soviets refused to allow the Koreans to decide their own destiny, boycotted the vote and refused to abide by it.  When the South Koreans elected their own government in the summer of 1948, the US military government immediately turned all power and authority over to them and began withdrawing US troops.  By the time North Korea invaded the South in the summer of 1950, only 500 US troops assigned as advisers to the South Korean army remained.
> 
> Before the North Korean invasion, the US had not considered Korea part of its defensive perimeter against Soviet expansion in Asia.  Both Syngman Rhee, the president of South Korea, and Kim Il Sung, the North Korean dictator, were ardent nationalists who wanted to unite Korea, each under his own government, and this led to threats and border incidents caused by both sides.  The US did not want to encourage Rhee to invade the North, so it refused to provide the South with tanks, aircraft or heavy artillery which it would need for an invasion.  Stalin, on the other hand, provided North Korea with its most advanced weaponry, fighters, bombers, tanks and heavy artillery.  It was for these reasons, the lack of US troops and the fact that the South Korean army lacked heavy weapons, that the invasion had some initial success.
> 
> US troops were returned to Korea to counter the invasion because the Truman administration reasoned the not responding forcefully to Soviet aggression in Korea would encourage the Soviet expansion elsewhere, even in Europe.
Click to expand...

If the US had no designs on Korea and didn't consider Korea part of its "defensive perimeter", why did US General Hodge order all Japanese officials to remain at their posts? Why did Hodge refuse to meet with Lyuh Woon-hyung, leader of the Korean People's Republic? Why were Koreans who collaborated with the Japanese occupation murdered in the north and welcomed into the security services in the south?

That "free" election in 1948 was about as free as recent elections in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Syngman Rhee was a corrupt American puppet in the mold of Hamid Karzi.
Rhee presided over the murder of thousands of South Korean patriots with the biggest revolts against Rhee's US-backed rule taking place on Cheju Island, where North Korean influence was minimal.
Rhee was not an acceptable candidate for president in the minds of the majority of all Koreans; therefore, many boycotted the sham elections in 1948.

For all his faults, Rhee was preferable to another US puppet to rule in South Korea, Park Chung-hee, who served in the Japanese army during WWII. Park's reign was marked by economic growth, martial law, censorship, political repression, and the torture of political prisoners. His rule ended by assassination in 1979 at the hands of the KCIA.

Once free of their Japanese oppressors the Koreans needed no outside help to form a government.
That independence was unacceptable to Harry Truman.
Just as real independence in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan (and Honduras) is unacceptable to US elites today.


----------



## Truthseeker420

jillian said:


> you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes.
> 
> right?
> 
> pathetic.



Who is speaking for Arab countries? Even if you could show some Arab saying he doesn't  want Iran to have "nukes" it is not his decision. It is Iran's decision to decide what is best for their security and I don't blame them with warmongering Israel threating to attack Iran.

Western Hypocrisy knows no bounds.


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> At the Yalta Conference in February of 1945 Stalin advocated independence for the Koreans as soon as possible. FDR countered with a suggestion of a US/Korean "trusteeship" of 20-30 years, modeled on our successful occupation of the Philippines, where we perfected the water torture known today as waterboarding.
> 
> The US commitment to Korean independence began with the Taft-Katusra  agreement with Japan in 1904-05 at the conclusion of the Russo-Japanese War. In exchange for Japanese recognition of US colonial rule over the Philippines, the US recognized Japan's "right" to annex Korea in 1910.
> 
> Shit clumps, as they say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whatever you may imagine FDR said at Yalta, in 1947 the US clearly had no designs on Korea.  The US proposed free and fair elections monitored by the UN in all of Korea to choose a government, but the Soviets refused to allow the Koreans to decide their own destiny, boycotted the vote and refused to abide by it.  When the South Koreans elected their own government in the summer of 1948, the US military government immediately turned all power and authority over to them and began withdrawing US troops.  By the time North Korea invaded the South in the summer of 1950, only 500 US troops assigned as advisers to the South Korean army remained.
> 
> Before the North Korean invasion, the US had not considered Korea part of its defensive perimeter against Soviet expansion in Asia.  Both Syngman Rhee, the president of South Korea, and Kim Il Sung, the North Korean dictator, were ardent nationalists who wanted to unite Korea, each under his own government, and this led to threats and border incidents caused by both sides.  The US did not want to encourage Rhee to invade the North, so it refused to provide the South with tanks, aircraft or heavy artillery which it would need for an invasion.  Stalin, on the other hand, provided North Korea with its most advanced weaponry, fighters, bombers, tanks and heavy artillery.  It was for these reasons, the lack of US troops and the fact that the South Korean army lacked heavy weapons, that the invasion had some initial success.
> 
> US troops were returned to Korea to counter the invasion because the Truman administration reasoned the not responding forcefully to Soviet aggression in Korea would encourage the Soviet expansion elsewhere, even in Europe.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If the US had no designs on Korea and didn't consider Korea part of its "defensive perimeter", why did US General Hodge order all Japanese officials to remain at their posts? Why did Hodge refuse to meet with Lyuh Woon-hyung, leader of the Korean People's Republic? Why were Koreans who collaborated with the Japanese occupation murdered in the north and welcomed into the security services in the south?
> 
> That "free" election in 1948 was about as free as recent elections in Afghanistan and Iraq.
> Syngman Rhee was a corrupt American puppet in the mold of Hamid Karzi.
> Rhee presided over the murder of thousands of South Korean patriots with the biggest revolts against Rhee's US-backed rule taking place on Cheju Island, where North Korean influence was minimal.
> Rhee was not an acceptable candidate for president in the minds of the majority of all Koreans; therefore, many boycotted the sham elections in 1948.
> 
> For all his faults, Rhee was preferable to another US puppet to rule in South Korea, Park Chung-hee, who served in the Japanese army during WWII. Park's reign was marked by economic growth, martial law, censorship, political repression, and the torture of political prisoners. His rule ended by assassination in 1979 at the hands of the KCIA.
> 
> Once free of their Japanese oppressors the Koreans needed no outside help to form a government.
> That independence was unacceptable to Harry Truman.
> Just as real independence in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan (and Honduras) is unacceptable to US elites today.
Click to expand...


Clearly, the US had no designs on Korea.  In 1947, the US turned the matter of elections over to the UN and in 1948 abided by the choice the Koreans had made by turning over all power and authority to the new government and beginning to withdraw its troops.  It is also clear that the US did not consider South Korea to be part of its strategic Asian defensive perimeter since it withdrew its troops from South Korea and refused to supply the South Korean army with anything but light weapons.  The Soviet and Chinese backed North Korean invasion was seen by the Truman administration as a threat to Japan and a test of US resolve to oppose Soviet expansion elsewhere and this caused them to revise their strategic thinking and to redraw the perimeter at the 38th parallel.  

The US and UN provided a venue in which all the groups, both those that favored communism and those who opposed it, that wanted to form a government could compete, and the South Korean people elected Syngman Rhee.  In the North, the Soviets installed what government they wanted without consulting the Korean people and installed a leader, Kim Il-Sung, who barely spoke the Korean language, having been educated in Chinese and having spent nearly his entire life to that point among the Chinese or Russians.  

Although South Korea faced a steep learning curve to becoming a sustainable democracy, as you have pointed out, since 1987 it has been a free, prosperous democracy, while the Soviet installed Stalinist slave state in North Korea remains as it was, a relic from another age, frozen in time, espousing policies and values no other nation, not even its former Chinese and Russian mentors, believe in, its people starving, suffering outrageous oppressions, prisoners within its borders.  

The division of Korea into two states and the suffering the Korean War caused these people is entirely the fault of the Soviet Union.  Had Stalin allowed the North Korean people to vote in the UN monitored elections, there would have been one Korea, probably non aligned in the Cold War, and the people of the North might have had the opportunity to enjoy the freedoms and prosperity that the South Koreans now have.  Failing that, had the Soviets not supported Kim IL-Sung's ill advised invasion of the South, none of the horrors of the Korean War would have occurred.


----------



## georgephillip

US imperial designs on Korea were apparent in September of 1945 when a US general refused to meet with a delegation from the "Korean Peoples"s Republic which had broad-based political and geographic support from one end of the peninsula to the other. The US colonial designs immediately inflamed the passions of Korean patriots in the north and south.

Thousands, some say hundreds of thousands, south Korean patriots died attempting to dislodge Syngman Rhee during his two years of US-backed rule before the 1948 elections.

Clearly, if all Koreans had been allowed to vote in 1945 the long line of US sponsored dictators in the south would've never begun, and a united Korea could well be prosperous and free today.

But it would also be an independent Korea, and that is something US elites have never tolerated.


----------



## jillian

Truthseeker420 said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes.
> 
> right?
> 
> pathetic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is speaking for Arab countries? Even if you could show some Arab saying he doesn't  want Iran to have "nukes" it is not his decision. It is Iran's decision to decide what is best for their security and I don't blame them with warmongering Israel threating to attack Iran.
> 
> Western Hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Click to expand...


i'm not "speaking" for anyone. i'm relating fact. iran is shi'a. the rest of the arab countries are sunni. they hate each other. why do you think the saudis gave israel the right to use its air space.

but then again, you'd actually have to know something about the middle east other than your own anti-semitism to understand that.


----------



## High_Gravity

Truthseeker420 said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes.
> 
> right?
> 
> pathetic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is speaking for Arab countries? Even if you could show some Arab saying he doesn't  want Iran to have "nukes" it is not his decision. It is Iran's decision to decide what is best for their security and I don't blame them with warmongering Israel threating to attack Iran.
> 
> Western Hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Click to expand...


Why don't you move to Tehran ass wipe?


----------



## Hugidwyn

*America is preparing a provocation, "the scale of Pearl Harbor"*

In the expert community is increasingly gaining momentum conclusions about possible provocations by the U.S. against Iran, which resulted in Iran will make the aggressor and his support for Russia and China, even in the UN Security Council can be significantly reduced under the pressure of public opinion.

In the Persian Gulf sent an American aircraft carrier battle group led by the nuclear aircraft carrier "Enterprise". This aircraft carrier U.S. plans to completely write off the fleet in 2013. Given the growth of the economic crisis as many content becomes unsupportable burden AUG for the United States. But at the same time, to write off this carrier, dropping it into the recycling is also very expensive, because unlike other carriers, it has on board eight nuclear reactors (the other is not more than two).

At the same time, the United States sent in the same area mother ship U.S. Navy - the ship Ponce, which is the amazing coincidence, is also going to write off any time soon, after 40 years of operation.

Recall that part of the historians called the method of provocation attack ships of old, classic version of the war the United States. For example, some claim that Japan before the attack on "Pearl Harbor" Americans are specially brought out all the newest ships in the same time, contrary to the harbor having got old. But if the story of the "Pearl Harbor" actively questioned the official story, but the events related to the battleship "Maine" no one disputes do not cause.

"In 1898, to the shores of Cuba, then the colony of Spain, approached an American battleship" Maine. " All this occurred against the backdrop of worsening of Spain and the United States. The Spaniards, wanting not to aggravate the crisis allowed the ship in its territorial waters. February 15, 1898 the battleship exploded and sank. Exploding, "Maine" left behind a lot of mysteries and oddities, "taking with them life 266 U.S. sailors, among which by strange coincidence, 260 were black and the skin was not a single officer."

In Havana, the U.S. investigators arrived to determine the circumstances. The nature of damage pointed to an internal explosion, but the commission has ignored this fact and left for home, where in full swing started to prepare for war with Spain. The Americans have done everything for that would make people antiispansky attitude. April 19 Congress passed a resolution requiring that Spain left Cuba, leaving her in the care of the United States. After that call began deploying volunteers and Navy. From April 21 U.S. Navy ships began to seize the Spanish transports to Cuba. "


----------



## georgephillip

Stranger things have happened in US History:

*"The USS Liberty incident* was an attack on a United States Navy technical research ship, USS Liberty, by Israeli Air Force jet fighter aircraft and Israeli Navy torpedo boats, on June 8, 1967, during the Six-Day War.[2] 

"The combined air and sea attack *killed 34 crew members* (naval officers, seamen, two Marines, and one civilian), wounded 170 crew members, and severely damaged the ship.[3] 

"At the time, the ship was in international waters north of the Sinai Peninsula, about 25.5 nmi (29.3 mi; 47.2 km) northwest from the Egyptian city of Arish.[1][4]"

USS Liberty incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> US imperial designs on Korea were apparent in September of 1945 when a US general refused to meet with a delegation from the "Korean Peoples"s Republic which had broad-based political and geographic support from one end of the peninsula to the other. The US colonial designs immediately inflamed the passions of Korean patriots in the north and south.
> 
> Thousands, some say hundreds of thousands, south Korean patriots died attempting to dislodge Syngman Rhee during his two years of US-backed rule before the 1948 elections.
> 
> Clearly, if all Koreans had been allowed to vote in 1945 the long line of US sponsored dictators in the south would've never begun, and a united Korea could well be prosperous and free today.
> 
> But it would also be an independent Korea, and that is something US elites have never tolerated.



Again, your irrational hatred of the US and Israel leads you to make one absurd statement after another.  The "Korean People's Republic" was he precursor of the North Korean communist party which has never allowed the Korean people any say in their government.  

It was Stalin who divided Korea at exactly the same place that the Tsar had proposed to the Japanese before the Russo Japanese War,  both seeing North Korea as no more than a buffer between Russia and a potential enemy, first Japan and later the US.  It was the US that consistently lobbied for a united democratic Korea and the Soviets that consistently opposed it.

One need only compare the conditions in the two Koreas today to see which occupation and alliance was most beneficial to the Korean people.


----------



## georgephillip

"The People's Republic of Korea (PRK) was a short-lived provisional government organized to take over control of Korea after the Surrender of Japan at the end of the Pacific War. It operated as the government in late August and early September 1945 until the United States Army Military Government in Korea was established by the United States. After that it operated unofficially, and in opposition to the United States Military Government, *until it was forcibly dissolved in January 1946*."

People's Republic of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your irrational obsequiousness toward the greatest purveyor of violence on the face of the planet today blinds you to historical reality.


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> "The People's Republic of Korea (PRK) was a short-lived provisional government organized to take over control of Korea after the Surrender of Japan at the end of the Pacific War. It operated as the government in late August and early September 1945 until the United States Army Military Government in Korea was established by the United States. After that it operated unofficially, and in opposition to the United States Military Government, *until it was forcibly dissolved in January 1946*."
> 
> People's Republic of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Your irrational obsequiousness toward the greatest purveyor of violence on the face of the planet today blinds you to historical reality.



It was organized by whom?  Not by the majority of the Korean people because that could only happen through free and fair elections and the Soviets refused to allow that to happen in the North.  In fact, these people had no legitimate claim to organize a government for Korea and when they did run for office in the 1948 UN monitored elections the Korean people rejected them.


----------



## georgephillip

toomuchtime_ said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The People's Republic of Korea (PRK) was a short-lived provisional government organized to take over control of Korea after the Surrender of Japan at the end of the Pacific War. It operated as the government in late August and early September 1945 until the United States Army Military Government in Korea was established by the United States. After that it operated unofficially, and in opposition to the United States Military Government, *until it was forcibly dissolved in January 1946*."
> 
> People's Republic of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Your irrational obsequiousness toward the greatest purveyor of violence on the face of the planet today blinds you to historical reality.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was organized by whom?  Not by the majority of the Korean people because that could only happen through free and fair elections and the Soviets refused to allow that to happen in the North.  In fact, these people had no legitimate claim to organize a government for Korea and when they did run for office in the 1948 UN monitored elections the Korean people rejected them.
Click to expand...

By August of 1945, after 35 years of Japanese rule, the majority of Korean people had their own plans for the future of Korea, and it isn't likely re-occupation by foreign forces ranked high on any Korean's list.

General Abe Nobuyuki was the last Japanese Governor-General of Korea, and he had been in contact with with numerous influential Koreans since the beginning of August to transfer power to the Koreans. 

On August 15, 1945, Lyuh Woon Hyung, "a moderate left wing politician, agreed to take over."

"He was in charge of preparing the creation of a new country and worked hard to build governmental structures. On September 6, 1945, a congress of representatives was convened in Seoul. 

"The foundation of a modern Korean state took place just three weeks after Japan's capitulation.

"The government was predominantly left wing; many of those who had resisted Japanese rule identified with *Communism's views on imperialism and colonialism*."

Division of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to his Wiki entry, Yuh "is rare among politicians in modern Korean history in that he is revered in both South and North Korea."


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The People's Republic of Korea (PRK) was a short-lived provisional government organized to take over control of Korea after the Surrender of Japan at the end of the Pacific War. It operated as the government in late August and early September 1945 until the United States Army Military Government in Korea was established by the United States. After that it operated unofficially, and in opposition to the United States Military Government, *until it was forcibly dissolved in January 1946*."
> 
> People's Republic of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Your irrational obsequiousness toward the greatest purveyor of violence on the face of the planet today blinds you to historical reality.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was organized by whom?  Not by the majority of the Korean people because that could only happen through free and fair elections and the Soviets refused to allow that to happen in the North.  In fact, these people had no legitimate claim to organize a government for Korea and when they did run for office in the 1948 UN monitored elections the Korean people rejected them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> By August of 1945, after 35 years of Japanese rule, the majority of Korean people had their own plans for the future of Korea, and it isn't likely re-occupation by foreign forces ranked high on any Korean's list.
> 
> General Abe Nobuyuki was the last Japanese Governor-General of Korea, and he had been in contact with with numerous influential Koreans since the beginning of August to transfer power to the Koreans.
> 
> On August 15, 1945, Lyuh Woon Hyung, "a moderate left wing politician, agreed to take over."
> 
> "He was in charge of preparing the creation of a new country and worked hard to build governmental structures. On September 6, 1945, a congress of representatives was convened in Seoul.
> 
> "The foundation of a modern Korean state took place just three weeks after Japan's capitulation.
> 
> "The government was predominantly left wing; many of those who had resisted Japanese rule identified with *Communism's views on imperialism and colonialism*."
> 
> Division of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> According to his Wiki entry, Yuh "is rare among politicians in modern Korean history in that he is revered in both South and North Korea."
Click to expand...


So your point is that a Japanese colonial official appointed the people who formed the Korean People's Party and that made it legitimate?  You believe Japanese colonial officials know what's best for the Korea people and a small group of political activists know what's best for the Korean people and Soviet colonial officials who installed the North Korean government and installed Kim Il-Sung, a virtual illiterate in the Korean language who spoke Korean with a heavy Chinese accent and had to have Soviet advisers write his speeches and teach him how to deliver them and invent a biography for him and help him turn the North Korean government into one of the most repressive in the world and a monarchy in all but name, know what's best for the Korean people, but the only people you don't trust to decide what's best for them is the Korean people when they go to the polls to elect their government.  

The difference between us is that you trust dictatorships and political elitists to decide what's best for people and I trust the people to decide for themselves through democratic processes what's best for themselves.  The US helped the South Korean people in their struggles through difficult times to establish the democratic institutions they enjoy today and the Soviets, apparently with your blessing prevented the North Korean people from ever having any control over their own government, over their own lives.


----------



## JBG

Truthseeker420 said:


> Who is speaking for Arab countries? Even if you could show some Arab saying he doesn't  want Iran to have "nukes" it is not his decision. It is Iran's decision to decide what is best for their security and I don't blame them with warmongering Israel threating to attack Iran.
> 
> Western Hypocrisy knows no bounds.


What if the "warmongering" Israel does is designed to protect itself against Iranians getting the first crack at them through terror? Israel would find itself unable to respond because of Iran's nukes. Since the surrounding peoples have been in unremitting war against Israel from the get-go Israel clearly has the right to preserve it's ability to respond.

Never again will the Jews render themselves helpless.


----------



## georgephillip

toomuchtime_ said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was organized by whom?  Not by the majority of the Korean people because that could only happen through free and fair elections and the Soviets refused to allow that to happen in the North.  In fact, these people had no legitimate claim to organize a government for Korea and when they did run for office in the 1948 UN monitored elections the Korean people rejected them.
> 
> 
> 
> By August of 1945, after 35 years of Japanese rule, the majority of Korean people had their own plans for the future of Korea, and it isn't likely re-occupation by foreign forces ranked high on any Korean's list.
> 
> General Abe Nobuyuki was the last Japanese Governor-General of Korea, and he had been in contact with with numerous influential Koreans since the beginning of August to transfer power to the Koreans.
> 
> On August 15, 1945, Lyuh Woon Hyung, "a moderate left wing politician, agreed to take over."
> 
> "He was in charge of preparing the creation of a new country and worked hard to build governmental structures. On September 6, 1945, a congress of representatives was convened in Seoul.
> 
> "The foundation of a modern Korean state took place just three weeks after Japan's capitulation.
> 
> "The government was predominantly left wing; many of those who had resisted Japanese rule identified with *Communism's views on imperialism and colonialism*."
> 
> Division of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> According to his Wiki entry, Yuh "is rare among politicians in modern Korean history in that he is revered in both South and North Korea."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So your point is that a Japanese colonial official appointed the people who formed the Korean People's Party and that made it legitimate?  You believe Japanese colonial officials know what's best for the Korea people and a small group of political activists know what's best for the Korean people and Soviet colonial officials who installed the North Korean government and installed Kim Il-Sung, a virtual illiterate in the Korean language who spoke Korean with a heavy Chinese accent and had to have Soviet advisers write his speeches and teach him how to deliver them and invent a biography for him and help him turn the North Korean government into one of the most repressive in the world and a monarchy in all but name, know what's best for the Korean people, but the only people you don't trust to decide what's best for them is the Korean people when they go to the polls to elect their government.
> 
> The difference between us is that you trust dictatorships and political elitists to decide what's best for people and I trust the people to decide for themselves through democratic processes what's best for themselves.  The US helped the South Korean people in their struggles through difficult times to establish the democratic institutions they enjoy today and the Soviets, apparently with your blessing prevented the North Korean people from ever having any control over their own government, over their own lives.
Click to expand...

Millions of Koreans from south to north made it perfectly clear in August of 1945 they wanted no part of any new foreign occupation. A single US General overruled their wishes. You may call that "freedom"; I don't.

For all the millions of human beings that Stalin and Mao killed, they didn't commit their crimes on the opposite side of the globe from their homeland.

That distinction belongs to the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet.


----------



## toomuchtime_

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> By August of 1945, after 35 years of Japanese rule, the majority of Korean people had their own plans for the future of Korea, and it isn't likely re-occupation by foreign forces ranked high on any Korean's list.
> 
> General Abe Nobuyuki was the last Japanese Governor-General of Korea, and he had been in contact with with numerous influential Koreans since the beginning of August to transfer power to the Koreans.
> 
> On August 15, 1945, Lyuh Woon Hyung, "a moderate left wing politician, agreed to take over."
> 
> "He was in charge of preparing the creation of a new country and worked hard to build governmental structures. On September 6, 1945, a congress of representatives was convened in Seoul.
> 
> "The foundation of a modern Korean state took place just three weeks after Japan's capitulation.
> 
> "The government was predominantly left wing; many of those who had resisted Japanese rule identified with *Communism's views on imperialism and colonialism*."
> 
> Division of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> According to his Wiki entry, Yuh "is rare among politicians in modern Korean history in that he is revered in both South and North Korea."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So your point is that a Japanese colonial official appointed the people who formed the Korean People's Party and that made it legitimate?  You believe Japanese colonial officials know what's best for the Korea people and a small group of political activists know what's best for the Korean people and Soviet colonial officials who installed the North Korean government and installed Kim Il-Sung, a virtual illiterate in the Korean language who spoke Korean with a heavy Chinese accent and had to have Soviet advisers write his speeches and teach him how to deliver them and invent a biography for him and help him turn the North Korean government into one of the most repressive in the world and a monarchy in all but name, know what's best for the Korean people, but the only people you don't trust to decide what's best for them is the Korean people when they go to the polls to elect their government.
> 
> The difference between us is that you trust dictatorships and political elitists to decide what's best for people and I trust the people to decide for themselves through democratic processes what's best for themselves.  The US helped the South Korean people in their struggles through difficult times to establish the democratic institutions they enjoy today and the Soviets, apparently with your blessing prevented the North Korean people from ever having any control over their own government, over their own lives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Millions of Koreans from south to north made it perfectly clear in August of 1945 they wanted no part of any new foreign occupation. A single US General overruled their wishes. You may call that "freedom"; I don't.
> 
> For all the millions of human beings that Stalin and Mao killed, they didn't commit their crimes on the opposite side of the globe from their homeland.
> 
> That distinction belongs to the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet.
Click to expand...


Not millions of people but just a few Koreans political activists who, as you pointed out, conspired with Japanese colonial officials to try to take over the government without allowing free elections.  Thanks to the US, millions of Koreans in the South had the opportunity to choose their own government, and thanks to the Soviets and Chinese the millions of Koreans in the North never did get that opportunity.  

The US traveled thousands of miles to liberate the Asian countries the Japanese had captured and the European countries the Germans had captured,  and after liberating Korea, the US kept the South free from Soviet domination.  All of the countries the US occupied after the war quickly became independent democracies and all the countries that fell to the Soviets or the Chinese became Stalinist slave states.


----------



## paulitician

'Perpetual War for perpetual Peace.' That's our wonderful vicious circle Foreign Policy. We need more War so we can have more Peace. Makes perfect sense no? It's kind of like Big Brother claiming he has to take your rights away so he can protect them. It's all just a sad scam. And the American People are the dupes. The Global Elite and Military Industrial Complex have us exactly where they want us...In a permanent state of War.


----------



## High_Gravity

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> By August of 1945, after 35 years of Japanese rule, the majority of Korean people had their own plans for the future of Korea, and it isn't likely re-occupation by foreign forces ranked high on any Korean's list.
> 
> General Abe Nobuyuki was the last Japanese Governor-General of Korea, and he had been in contact with with numerous influential Koreans since the beginning of August to transfer power to the Koreans.
> 
> On August 15, 1945, Lyuh Woon Hyung, "a moderate left wing politician, agreed to take over."
> 
> "He was in charge of preparing the creation of a new country and worked hard to build governmental structures. On September 6, 1945, a congress of representatives was convened in Seoul.
> 
> "The foundation of a modern Korean state took place just three weeks after Japan's capitulation.
> 
> "The government was predominantly left wing; many of those who had resisted Japanese rule identified with *Communism's views on imperialism and colonialism*."
> 
> Division of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> According to his Wiki entry, Yuh "is rare among politicians in modern Korean history in that he is revered in both South and North Korea."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So your point is that a Japanese colonial official appointed the people who formed the Korean People's Party and that made it legitimate?  You believe Japanese colonial officials know what's best for the Korea people and a small group of political activists know what's best for the Korean people and Soviet colonial officials who installed the North Korean government and installed Kim Il-Sung, a virtual illiterate in the Korean language who spoke Korean with a heavy Chinese accent and had to have Soviet advisers write his speeches and teach him how to deliver them and invent a biography for him and help him turn the North Korean government into one of the most repressive in the world and a monarchy in all but name, know what's best for the Korean people, but the only people you don't trust to decide what's best for them is the Korean people when they go to the polls to elect their government.
> 
> The difference between us is that you trust dictatorships and political elitists to decide what's best for people and I trust the people to decide for themselves through democratic processes what's best for themselves.  The US helped the South Korean people in their struggles through difficult times to establish the democratic institutions they enjoy today and the Soviets, apparently with your blessing prevented the North Korean people from ever having any control over their own government, over their own lives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Millions of Koreans from south to north made it perfectly clear in August of 1945 they wanted no part of any new foreign occupation. A single US General overruled their wishes. You may call that "freedom"; I don't.
> 
> For all the millions of human beings that Stalin and Mao killed, they didn't commit their crimes on the opposite side of the globe from their homeland.
> 
> That distinction belongs to the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet.
Click to expand...


You hate America so much, why don't you move to North Korea?


----------



## georgephillip

toomuchtime_ said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> So your point is that a Japanese colonial official appointed the people who formed the Korean People's Party and that made it legitimate?  You believe Japanese colonial officials know what's best for the Korea people and a small group of political activists know what's best for the Korean people and Soviet colonial officials who installed the North Korean government and installed Kim Il-Sung, a virtual illiterate in the Korean language who spoke Korean with a heavy Chinese accent and had to have Soviet advisers write his speeches and teach him how to deliver them and invent a biography for him and help him turn the North Korean government into one of the most repressive in the world and a monarchy in all but name, know what's best for the Korean people, but the only people you don't trust to decide what's best for them is the Korean people when they go to the polls to elect their government.
> 
> The difference between us is that you trust dictatorships and political elitists to decide what's best for people and I trust the people to decide for themselves through democratic processes what's best for themselves.  The US helped the South Korean people in their struggles through difficult times to establish the democratic institutions they enjoy today and the Soviets, apparently with your blessing prevented the North Korean people from ever having any control over their own government, over their own lives.
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of Koreans from south to north made it perfectly clear in August of 1945 they wanted no part of any new foreign occupation. A single US General overruled their wishes. You may call that "freedom"; I don't.
> 
> For all the millions of human beings that Stalin and Mao killed, they didn't commit their crimes on the opposite side of the globe from their homeland.
> 
> That distinction belongs to the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not millions of people but just a few Koreans political activists who, as you pointed out, conspired with Japanese colonial officials to try to take over the government without allowing free elections.  Thanks to the US, millions of Koreans in the South had the opportunity to choose their own government, and thanks to the Soviets and Chinese the millions of Koreans in the North never did get that opportunity.
> 
> The US traveled thousands of miles to liberate the Asian countries the Japanese had captured and the European countries the Germans had captured,  and after liberating Korea, the US kept the South free from Soviet domination.  All of the countries the US occupied after the war quickly became independent democracies and all the countries that fell to the Soviets or the Chinese became Stalinist slave states.
Click to expand...

"Soviet forces arrived in Korea first, but occupied only the northern half, stopping at the 38th parallel, per the agreement with the United States.

"*On August 10, 1945* two young officers  Dean Rusk and Charles Bonesteel  were assigned to define an American occupation zone. Working at extremely short notice and completely unprepared, they used a National Geographic map to decide on the 38th parallel. 

"They chose it because it divided the country approximately in half but would leave the capital Seoul under American control. *No experts on Korea were consulted*. 

"The two men were unaware that forty years previous, Japan and Russia had discussed sharing Korea along the same parallel. 

"Rusk later said that had he known, he '*almost surely*' would have chosen a different line.[6] Regardless, the decision was hastily written into General Order No. 1 for the administration of postwar Japan."

Millions of Koreans from the north and south who didn't have a subscription to National Geographic already knew there was only one Korea. They also knew how to implement free and fair elections without any help from racist Americans whose first concern was Empire.

Division of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## georgephillip

High_Gravity said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> So your point is that a Japanese colonial official appointed the people who formed the Korean People's Party and that made it legitimate?  You believe Japanese colonial officials know what's best for the Korea people and a small group of political activists know what's best for the Korean people and Soviet colonial officials who installed the North Korean government and installed Kim Il-Sung, a virtual illiterate in the Korean language who spoke Korean with a heavy Chinese accent and had to have Soviet advisers write his speeches and teach him how to deliver them and invent a biography for him and help him turn the North Korean government into one of the most repressive in the world and a monarchy in all but name, know what's best for the Korean people, but the only people you don't trust to decide what's best for them is the Korean people when they go to the polls to elect their government.
> 
> The difference between us is that you trust dictatorships and political elitists to decide what's best for people and I trust the people to decide for themselves through democratic processes what's best for themselves.  The US helped the South Korean people in their struggles through difficult times to establish the democratic institutions they enjoy today and the Soviets, apparently with your blessing prevented the North Korean people from ever having any control over their own government, over their own lives.
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of Koreans from south to north made it perfectly clear in August of 1945 they wanted no part of any new foreign occupation. A single US General overruled their wishes. You may call that "freedom"; I don't.
> 
> For all the millions of human beings that Stalin and Mao killed, they didn't commit their crimes on the opposite side of the globe from their homeland.
> 
> That distinction belongs to the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You hate America so much, why don't you move to North Korea?
Click to expand...

Which country is currently the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet?
Do you think my moving to North Korea will change the answer?
Empire or Republic?


----------



## High_Gravity

georgephillip said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of Koreans from south to north made it perfectly clear in August of 1945 they wanted no part of any new foreign occupation. A single US General overruled their wishes. You may call that "freedom"; I don't.
> 
> For all the millions of human beings that Stalin and Mao killed, they didn't commit their crimes on the opposite side of the globe from their homeland.
> 
> That distinction belongs to the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not millions of people but just a few Koreans political activists who, as you pointed out, conspired with Japanese colonial officials to try to take over the government without allowing free elections.  Thanks to the US, millions of Koreans in the South had the opportunity to choose their own government, and thanks to the Soviets and Chinese the millions of Koreans in the North never did get that opportunity.
> 
> The US traveled thousands of miles to liberate the Asian countries the Japanese had captured and the European countries the Germans had captured,  and after liberating Korea, the US kept the South free from Soviet domination.  All of the countries the US occupied after the war quickly became independent democracies and all the countries that fell to the Soviets or the Chinese became Stalinist slave states.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "Soviet forces arrived in Korea first, but occupied only the northern half, stopping at the 38th parallel, per the agreement with the United States.
> 
> "*On August 10, 1945* two young officers  Dean Rusk and Charles Bonesteel  were assigned to define an American occupation zone. Working at extremely short notice and completely unprepared, they used a National Geographic map to decide on the 38th parallel.
> 
> "They chose it because it divided the country approximately in half but would leave the capital Seoul under American control. *No experts on Korea were consulted*.
> 
> "The two men were unaware that forty years previous, Japan and Russia had discussed sharing Korea along the same parallel.
> 
> "Rusk later said that had he known, he '*almost surely*' would have chosen a different line.[6] Regardless, the decision was hastily written into General Order No. 1 for the administration of postwar Japan."
> 
> Millions of Koreans from the north and south who didn't have a subscription to National Geographic already knew there was only one Korea. They also knew how to implement free and fair elections without any help from racist Americans whose first concern was Empire.
> 
> Division of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


So you really believe that if we had not went to Korea, the Korean penninsula would be united, peaceful and democratic?


----------



## High_Gravity

georgephillip said:


> High_Gravity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of Koreans from south to north made it perfectly clear in August of 1945 they wanted no part of any new foreign occupation. A single US General overruled their wishes. You may call that "freedom"; I don't.
> 
> For all the millions of human beings that Stalin and Mao killed, they didn't commit their crimes on the opposite side of the globe from their homeland.
> 
> That distinction belongs to the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You hate America so much, why don't you move to North Korea?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which country is currently the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet?
> Do you think my moving to North Korea will change the answer?
> Empire or Republic?
Click to expand...


You should move to North Korea because according to you America is a terrible country, why would you force yourself to live here if you hate it so much?


----------



## georgephillip

paulitician said:


> 'Perpetual War for perpetual Peace.' That's our wonderful vicious circle Foreign Policy. We need more War so we can have more Peace. Makes perfect sense no? It's kind of like Big Brother claiming he has to take your rights away so he can protect them. It's all just a sad scam. And the American People are the dupes. The Global Elite and Military Industrial Complex have us exactly where they want us...In a permanent state of War.


And only Ron Paul among all the major candidates for commander-in-chief is admitting the truth. With only a few exceptions Republicans AND Democrats depend on the 1% to fund their election campaigns. The 1% depend on eternal war and ever-increasing levels of debt to fund their lifestyles.

Do the math. 

Republicans AND Democrats have controlled the US government since 1860.
They have both outlived their usefulness to our Republic.
They are faithful servants of Empire.
FLUSH 'em ALL starting in the White House next November.


----------



## georgephillip

High_Gravity said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not millions of people but just a few Koreans political activists who, as you pointed out, conspired with Japanese colonial officials to try to take over the government without allowing free elections.  Thanks to the US, millions of Koreans in the South had the opportunity to choose their own government, and thanks to the Soviets and Chinese the millions of Koreans in the North never did get that opportunity.
> 
> The US traveled thousands of miles to liberate the Asian countries the Japanese had captured and the European countries the Germans had captured,  and after liberating Korea, the US kept the South free from Soviet domination.  All of the countries the US occupied after the war quickly became independent democracies and all the countries that fell to the Soviets or the Chinese became Stalinist slave states.
> 
> 
> 
> "Soviet forces arrived in Korea first, but occupied only the northern half, stopping at the 38th parallel, per the agreement with the United States.
> 
> "*On August 10, 1945* two young officers  Dean Rusk and Charles Bonesteel  were assigned to define an American occupation zone. Working at extremely short notice and completely unprepared, they used a National Geographic map to decide on the 38th parallel.
> 
> "They chose it because it divided the country approximately in half but would leave the capital Seoul under American control. *No experts on Korea were consulted*.
> 
> "The two men were unaware that forty years previous, Japan and Russia had discussed sharing Korea along the same parallel.
> 
> "Rusk later said that had he known, he '*almost surely*' would have chosen a different line.[6] Regardless, the decision was hastily written into General Order No. 1 for the administration of postwar Japan."
> 
> Millions of Koreans from the north and south who didn't have a subscription to National Geographic already knew there was only one Korea. They also knew how to implement free and fair elections without any help from racist Americans whose first concern was Empire.
> 
> Division of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you really believe that if we had not went to Korea, the Korean penninsula would be united, peaceful and democratic?
Click to expand...

I think Yuh Woon-Hyung might well have united the peninsula in 1945 if he had been allowed to hold free elections at that time:

"His (Yuh) pen-name was Mongyang (&#47805;&#50577;; &#22818;&#38525, the Chinese characters for '*dream' and 'light*.' 

"He is rare among politicians in modern Korean history in that he is revered in both South and North Korea."

Yuh Woon-Hyung - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## High_Gravity

georgephillip said:


> High_Gravity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Soviet forces arrived in Korea first, but occupied only the northern half, stopping at the 38th parallel, per the agreement with the United States.
> 
> "*On August 10, 1945* two young officers  Dean Rusk and Charles Bonesteel  were assigned to define an American occupation zone. Working at extremely short notice and completely unprepared, they used a National Geographic map to decide on the 38th parallel.
> 
> "They chose it because it divided the country approximately in half but would leave the capital Seoul under American control. *No experts on Korea were consulted*.
> 
> "The two men were unaware that forty years previous, Japan and Russia had discussed sharing Korea along the same parallel.
> 
> "Rusk later said that had he known, he '*almost surely*' would have chosen a different line.[6] Regardless, the decision was hastily written into General Order No. 1 for the administration of postwar Japan."
> 
> Millions of Koreans from the north and south who didn't have a subscription to National Geographic already knew there was only one Korea. They also knew how to implement free and fair elections without any help from racist Americans whose first concern was Empire.
> 
> Division of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you really believe that if we had not went to Korea, the Korean penninsula would be united, peaceful and democratic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think Yuh Woon-Hyung might well have united the peninsula in 1945 if he had been allowed to hold free elections at that time:
> 
> "His (Yuh) pen-name was Mongyang (&#47805;&#50577;; &#22818;&#38525, the Chinese characters for '*dream' and 'light*.'
> 
> "He is rare among politicians in modern Korean history in that he is revered in both South and North Korea."
> 
> Yuh Woon-Hyung - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


Thats crap, you and me both know that Kim Il Sun would have took over the whole penninsula if US Troops never went there.


----------



## georgephillip

High_Gravity said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> High_Gravity said:
> 
> 
> 
> You hate America so much, why don't you move to North Korea?
> 
> 
> 
> Which country is currently the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet?
> Do you think my moving to North Korea will change the answer?
> Empire or Republic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You should move to North Korea because according to you America is a terrible country, why would you force yourself to live here if you hate it so much?
Click to expand...

Because I distinguish between America and the corporate elites who control its government.
Maybe I haven't done a very good job of explaining that.


----------



## georgephillip

High_Gravity said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> High_Gravity said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you really believe that if we had not went to Korea, the Korean penninsula would be united, peaceful and democratic?
> 
> 
> 
> I think Yuh Woon-Hyung might well have united the peninsula in 1945 if he had been allowed to hold free elections at that time:
> 
> "His (Yuh) pen-name was Mongyang (&#47805;&#50577;; &#22818;&#38525, the Chinese characters for '*dream' and 'light*.'
> 
> "He is rare among politicians in modern Korean history in that he is revered in both South and North Korea."
> 
> Yuh Woon-Hyung - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thats crap, you and me both know that Kim Il Sun would have took over the whole penninsula if US Troops never went there.
Click to expand...

I think it's at least as likely Kim and Yuh would have been allies:

"Like many in the Korean independence movement, Yuh sought aid from both right and left. 

"In 1920, he joined the Kory&#466; Communist Party (&#44256;&#47140; &#44277;&#49328;&#45817;, Goryeo Gongsandang) and, in 1921, attended the First Congress of the Toilers of the Far East in Moscow. In 1924 he joined Sun Yat-sen's Chinese Nationalist Party and worked for Sino-Korean cooperation. 

"In 1929, he was arrested by the British police for criticizing Britain&#8217;s colonial policy and handed over to the Japanese for imprisonment in Korea."

Yuh Woon-Hyung - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------

