Iran is threatening Greece, Turkey, and the EU

[BoweryBaker 0]

I guess thats why there is a devil in my religion.... lol and I will consider that Martin Luther thingy.

[shinRaiden 0]

I disagree 180 degrees with BoweryBaker, but you don't see me trying to arrange his personal permanent visit with Mr. Satan. Bin Laden on the other hand is, and it seems to me that the Iranians wouldn't mind either.

Look at the case of Hitler. He whined and howled and said "gimmie-gimmie or I'll pout", and history has shown the rest of the world the price of being a sucker for that kind of stuff. Of course Iran is interested in it's own interests, but I still say that their allegation of Israeli aggression is unwarranted and a false premise for nuclear escalation.

Furthermore, if that is all they are worried about, then why did they run the range so much further past the boundires of Israel? Why range it out to Greece? When have the Greeks been seen as Zionist conspiritors, except with the Cyprus mess - and how on earth is that in any way relevant to Iran?

Now to the economics aspect. It's understandable to be in the military arms business, stuff wears out and better things are developed. But this is not a police sidearm, it's a totally different psychological football. Back to my point about the Saudi Prince. I don't think that we're the only ones naively ignorant in the world on these matters, nor do I suppose that the Iranians are totally on the level either.

What is heartening is that those traditionally ground under foot in the ME as expendable serfs are beginning to look around and say "hey, wait a second, sure I'll be a martyer, but it's going to be for me and on my terms."

Quote[/b] ]but fairness is a cause my people too have had to fight in this country of America.

I presume that this is a comment about racial civil rights. Well the key to fixing that problem is when both sides admit that 'people' == 'people'. So long as Americans who happened to be black were regarded as property and not people, and as long as they accepted that, the vicious cycle continued.

When they said "hey, wait a sec., I am me, and I am a human being, and I resent not being recognized as such", that broke their psychological chains. The white population has had to have the same awakening, and then both sides have had to work it out legally.

But every time that there was somebody who rose up and said "Hey, let's kill all the white folk - because they're white", that was unfairly misconstrued to represent the entire population. As long as you allow the psychobabblers to dictate to you, instead you you telling them where to get off, you're still stuck in the rut.

Now to Iran. Friedman had another experience while in Lebanon. A leader of some influence was introducing him to a bunch of local imams, and commented on the favorable press he'd given. Then he mentioned "Oh, btw, he's Jewish", and the imam just about flipped. Is this representative of the Muslim community at large? I don't think so, but I believe it is of the Iranian Mullah councils.

[Donnervogel 0]

I'm not saying Iran is your peaceful neighbour. But I'm saying demoniszing Iran and thinking they're all evil-doers because of their genes or something is stupid. You have to deal with Iran (not necesserally with war). But in a smart way. And to be able to asses them right you have to see that they are human beings too and that they have the same interests as any other nation. I'm saying don't do the same mistake as with Iraq. I was against the Iraq war. Not because I thought Iraq was a good nation after all and Saddam was a good person. But because I still saw room for other actions that maybe could have prevented the mess we have now. Actually I don't have to care - I still do. But the Iraqi people have to. They are the ones that pay the biggest price for wrong assessment.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ] and if you single one out, they don't even care if they die anymore, I think God is on their side in this one, I really do. It's like he's blessed them with some kind of ferver, so high that they don't even fear death, ive never seen anyone so passionate about a cause like that, but fairness is a cause my people too have had to fight in this country of America.

hold on.... how does not having the fear of death proves that "god is on your side"? or I'm reading it wrong...

[SpecOp9 0]

Quote[/b] ] and if you single one out, they don't even care if they die anymore, I think God is on their side in this one, I really do.  It's like he's blessed them with some kind of ferver, so high that they don't even fear death, ive never seen anyone so passionate about a cause like that, but fairness is a cause my people too have had to fight in this country of America.

hold on.... how does not having the fear of death proves that "god is on your side"?  or I'm reading it wrong...

I think he's saying that they have such a strong religious beliefe that it's not normal.  Not normal at all.  It's beyond this world.

But back in the day, people always used to do stupid stuff, like sacrafice themselves ontop of pyramids for the gods.

But that does'nt mean that has changed any.  People in the middle east still do stupid stuff because of their religion.  Like flying into stuff and blowing stuff up.

I don't think "god" is on their side.  And if he is, he's one evil bastard. and if its not god who is leading them, its the opposite.

And you know, maybey the year 2000 was'nt the end of the world. Maybey it was the start of the end.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]I don't think "god" is on their side. And if he is, he's one evil bastard.

.... .... WoW!!!

[Nemesis6 0]

Well, a chaotic country such as Iran shouldn't have any missile with that kind of range. Moreover, it shouldn't have any missiles at all.

[Balschoiw 0]

nice contribution billybob...could you at least try to post more than "...." and some expressions of your feelings oneday. Saves me and others from checking a thread. Or let´s better say : If you have nothing to contribute than "..." then pls don´t post at all. Or are you really so keen on pumping up your postcount by non-content posts ? I guess mod´s will happily accept your invitation for a post-reduce oneday.

Don´t waste our time. PLEEEAAASSSEE !  

Edit: Is the library closed already ? Too bad...

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]nice contribution billybob...could you at least try to post more than "...." and some expressions of your feelings oneday. Saves me and others from checking a thread. Or let´s better say : If you have nothing to contribute than "..." then pls don´t post at all. Or are you really so keen on pumping up your postcount by non-content posts ? I guess mod´s will happily accept your invitation for a post-reduce oneday.

Don´t waste our time. PLEEEAAASSSEE !

Erm... I just thought spec's comment was strong...

Quote[/b] ]

Edit: Is the library closed already ? Too bad...

No, the university library closes at midnight!!!!!! What are you trying to imply... I do have a connection at home....

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Well, a chaotic country such as Iran shouldn't have any missile with that kind of range.

Same for Pakistan, India, North Korea and Lybia , right ?

Israel is not on my list of unchaotic countries also...

Speaking of Russia...well...it´s not known for it´s stable condition also...

Hell noone should have such missiles, but as some do have them and those have problems with some other countries who don´t have them, the ones who don´t have them will put any effort in getting such just to have something to offer when the other nation decides to go for something freaky. Not that such has happened...no no , never...

Edit:

Quote[/b] ]What are you trying to imply...

That some more time in the library couldn´t really hurt...

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]That some more time in the library couldn´t really hurt...

I'm doing all right in school!!! This school has too many books and it is very hard to start somewhere.....just started to read "Brothers In Arms : The Epic Story of the 761St Tank Battalion, WWII's Forgotten Heroes". However, I do question some of the info in it (i.e. germany did not call their tanks "panthers", care to correct me?) .

[Bordoy 0]

Quote[/b] ]I don't think "god" is on their side.  And if he is, he's one evil bastard.

.... .... WoW!!!

Whats so surprising?

I doubt God condone's the actions of the minority of Muslims but if he did then he's evil.

all it is is Muslims interpreting the Kuran wrongly.

when the Kuran says "Take a non-believer with you to heaven", it doesn't actually mean kill them. It means convert them to Islam (which won't work on me ), but those "muslims" can't see that.

Note: The kuran doesn't actually say them words.

[bmgarcangel 0]

you guys are all a little...weird about this. Do you really think they'd launch missiles...yes they would...only if they got in a war with them which is highly unlikely!

[python3 0]

Well, a chaotic country such as Iran shouldn't have any missile with that kind of range. Moreover, it shouldn't have any missiles at all.

it seems rather stable to me. hell, iraq was also pretty stable until the US walked right in. Same will happen to iran. Just because they are not your allies, dont make them chaotic or irrational. They have 70 million people to defend, that is their priority. Frankly if i were the leader of iran and i had a nuclear power a couple hundred miles away, and another one toppling countries around mine and labelling my nation as a member of the "axis of evil" i would go for nukes and BM's to defend my people. Nukes are afterall the best deterent....

Not to mention that israel has its own extremists and right wing members who are very irrational as well. We wouldnt want a nuclear arsenal and bm's in their hands either.

[BoweryBaker 0]

@ shinraiden: My mind isn't in chains at all, my mind is free. I don't need preaching on how to overcome I already know. I'm saying that maybe its more than Iran just being "evil", maybe its deeper than just that. Because lately both sides of these wars have just been calling each other evil. Just think of this, what would happen if we invaded Iran with a full scale military, pre announced on television, then had to stay and rebuild it, while we're in Iraq, South Korea, and Afghanistan? What's your answer to that mess all in the name of security? You can be a tough guy waving a tough flag but in the end you won't be fighting over there. So now, try thinking of it from a leader perspective who has to put his men through the trouble. Every situation is difusable with words, up until that person is in danger, then he won't negotiate. I wouldn't go to war with them mofos up until they start making crazy demands and using nukes as a threat. Look at North Korea, they aren't hitting us because they know that if they do they'll all die. They only use it as a last resort. The only reason North Korea is poor is because all we want for them is democracy (more power for the united states) and they don't want it so they're punished. We're forcing our views on them which we believe to be true. I say let them run themselves into the dirt, nukes and all, then wait for them to ask us for help, then we change them. If they're too stubborn, they die of their own pride. Who's to say that our system will even work for us in the long run anyways, we're outstretched and we're outsourcing jobs to foreigners. We may see a new type of government system...right now the nation is so split. Even if you do vote, its some guy with glasses that decides who your vote goes towards. I want a government where the people who vote, their vote goes into the ballot that counts, otherwise what are we even voting for? I don't mean to speak out against my country but sh*t, do you honestly think thats fair? lol. It's all about that state vote these days, but its the individuals who should be making the decisions for themselves. As it stands its not right and that is what needs correction in my honest opinion. I don't challenge traditional thinking, but an honest voting system should really be in place.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]you guys are all a little...weird about this. Do you really think they'd launch missiles...yes they would...only if they got in a war with them which is highly unlikely!

That´s exactly what I say, try to explain and make clear for uhh some pages now

[shinRaiden 0]

@BowreryBaker - That is because America has such a strong and broad peasantry that healthfully views themselves as kings and not chattel. Nobody has made any serious moves towards resolving the ME myopias, because nobody wants to acknowledge or deal with all the baggage they've attached to it.

Israel DMZ'd the Sinai for a buffer zone, Jordan went away, and now they are cordoning off the Palestinians. That's not a 'fix', it is just a workaround. With Iran, they claim a justification of a retalitory position, but their claim that Israel is 'out to get them' is rediculous, and why is it ok for Iran to pursue a pre-emptory policy when it is not ok for the US to do it? Is it Iranian citizens locked down in Ramallah and Gaza or no? Do the Palestinians have their own envoy to the UN or no? If Israel had announced that their intent were to exterminate all non-jews starting with their cousins, Iran might have a point, but then Iran would only become a coalition partner equivelent to what Bulgaria or such is doing in Iraq, according Kerryesque accounting.

In light of the fact that Israel does not have the military capacity to conduct exhaustive occupationary adventures into multiple of it's <s>neighboring</s> adjoining countries, and that that any such operations would likely involve flyovers of US interests who would object (ie Iraq, Turkey, Saudi Arabia), I say that the notion of an Israeli strike is preposterous. This isn't the mid 80's, there is a different policy in place. With the state dept actively pursuing a policy of mimicing Khomeini's revolution by inciting public unrest, unifying military action could be disadvantageous.

Now as concerning Asia, N. Korea will not come to the table until China pulls the rug out from under them, and China will not do that because N. Korea is the prop they use to put the screws to S. Korea and Japan and proxied through to the US. Japan is starting to shed its emotional baggage from the Manchrian Occupation and re-enter the Asian diplomatic arena, but is stalemated over N. Korean abductions vs. Japanese occupation. In any case, China is N. Korea's 'nuke', and unless China says "hey, you can't do that, we won't back up you", N. Korea can do as it pleases, to the consternation of the whole rest of the world, and China skates free. Then you have 'insolent' little Taiwan who just won't 'go along for the ride'.

[Balschoiw 0]

As long as the US vetoes any UN statement towards the unjustifyable behaviour of Israel on entering refugee camps with tanks and randomly killing people, children and bystanders, flattening residential homes for a safeguard zone there will be opposition to both, US and Israel. They just cant go on with bullshit like this.

It´s just not ok. And the UN has to be changed towards such behaviour as a lot of countries already demand. Israel has proven to be the major agressor more than once lately and they still face no international consequences as the US gladly support them in any bull they´re doing. This has to be changed. The veto of a single nation has to be removed to make the UN an instrument of policy power again.

[shinRaiden 0]

Ok, this 'wacko' theory is widely dismissed, but look at it mathmatically. Everyone claims that it is the US and Israel with their heads in the sand, but conversely isn't it equally possible that it is only the US and Israel who have their heads on straight? Or how about maybe nobody is on the level?

The whole reason Israel has to go in to the refugee camps in the first place is that the Palestinian terrorists and their allies in Tehran have no qualms about using 'innocent' civilians as pawns on the chessboard. How about Israel just send an invoice to Arafat asking him to cover the costs for caskets of people killed just by the rockets fired from the refugee camps instead? Any idea when that invoice would get covered?

It's like on the Simpsons where Apu says "Please do not be touching my merchandise or I will have to be asking you nicely again". Now with a mobile system they can excuse that by claiming that Israel would supposedly first-strike a fixed location, then launch it from a hospital, and charge the Israelis for the deaths of innocent civilians then the hospital gets leveled.

Back to Beirut. A guy there allowed IDF spotters to use his roof to call in artillery strikes on an enemy clan. Each time the enemy site got hit, he showered his guests with the blessings of Allah. Finally the guys wised up and figured out where the spotter was, and dropped a morter on his front steps. Those spotters were escorted off the property so fast they didn't know what happened.

So it is in Iran. As long as the mullahs continue scamming the world and the rest of the world continues to be duped by it, and thinks it's "ok" for Iran to have nukes because the 'impetuous' Israel may or may not, rather than lifting a finger to disarm both sides, things will continue to be nuts until the locals say "Hey, NIMBY ain't such a bad idea, I might live a bit longer."

[Bernadotte 0]

...isn't it equally possible that it is only the US and Israel who have their heads on straight?

No

How about Israel just send an invoice to Arafat asking him to cover the costs for caskets of people killed just by the rockets fired from the refugee camps instead?

How many caskets?  Two for an attack in June?  

The IDF raid has killed 77 in less than a week.

[kerosene 0]

Why is it so hard for some people to understand that democratic governments should be held to a higher standard of morality than terrorists or dictators.

What would the U.S say if britain sent the S.A.S into the republic of Ireland to conduct assassinations, or had responded to a bombing in London by attacking catholic coucil estates with helicopters and tanks?

A hellfire missile is not a tool for crowd control, does it concern you at all, the number of palestenian children shot by Israeli snipers, in their living rooms, etc? Why is necessary to tear there infrastructure apart? How are people in the middle east supposed to feel when the worlds collective response is furrowed brows and mild concern?

If Israel cant stop the attacks how are the Palestenian authorites supposed to do it?

Sein Fein generated plenty of money from U.S donors pre 9-11 and i dont believe some of that money didnt go to the IRA. If americans clinging onto tenous links a "homeland" they've probably never visted can support the IRA, why is it a suprise that muslims collectivley are concerned about Palestenians.

Most of the concern about Zimbabwe's government has cracked down on democracy and instituted questionable land reform, even tabloids in britain have picked up on it - why? not because they care about the majority African population, but because a tiny, white minority from britain are losing thier land. In a democracy with a free press, this is the only thing most people understand about that problem, because of thier own bias and that of thier media.

The Iranians or muslims in general dont have a god-injected rage propelling them, they live in a part of the world where they have little access to free information. Didnt Iran fund the Northern Alliance against the Taliban?

Saudi Arabia, a nation the U.S wont hear any criticism of, exports a far more xenophobic, hateful version of Islam than Iran and there attitudes to foreigners, even non-arab muslims are often horrific, is the U.S pressuring them not to distrubute school books advising children not to befriend foreigners? No. Britain was even willing to look the other way when they falseley arrested and tortured its citizens.

Anyone can see the Palestenians are getting shafted and there is no real end in sight.

P.S ShinRaiden, do you think Israel kept a man in soliatary for the best part of life because he revealed a nuclear secret that didnt exist. ( I never really understood the point of a nuclear arsenal that no one knows about, not much of a deterant, but whatever)

[-ZG-BUZZARD 0]

Just to add my 2 cents...

1. I agree with Donnervogel on his opinions.

2. In historical terms, it's all the brits fault. They should never have betrayed the arabs in breaking their promise towards them- if everybody knew the true story of Lawrence of Arabia and the birth of the state of Israel and had cared about it then (after WW1), then the whole of the ME would be peaceful- either the promise should never have been made, or the promise should have been kept.

3. I'm in Europe but I seriously don't feel threatened by Iran (ok so I don't live in England ).

4. The "commando"-type spec-op warfare is being implemented by 3rd world countries, their "black op" teams we call terrorist cells. Always reminds me of those lines of mission impossible: "If you're captured or killed (blabla), the state will discredit any knowledge of your actions" (or something like that). Heck, it's the only way the people of Palestine (why can't I say it's a state? oh, yeah, right, the majority of the international community is in favour, and only Israel isn't, and we all know who Israel's biggest friend is... ) sees to manage to exert any degree of backpressure against the way they've been handled for the last... 60 years? I've read some interesting textes on Israel's policy on grabbing the best land and all the water wells and underground pockets, leaving the palestinians in the shithole, economy-wise- I'd be pretty pissed about it too...

4. If anybody read the story of why Iran turned to radicalism in terms of their theistic leadership, one will discover that in fact it was the US who were responsible for ousting prime-minister Mussadegh and were involved in the killing of prime minister Hassan Ali Mansur- no wonder they'd end up praying for Allah and going hard-line radical against western nations, and successfully attempted to get rid of the Shah Reza Pahlavi, which acted as a perfect puppet for the US (heck, without that man the F-14 wouldn't have been more than a prototype, lol). And you call Iran and other arab countries irresponsible? Guess hardship does provoke that, and the Israeli people seem to know it best- strange they never sound surprised but always go on the offense...

Edit:

5. If it weren't for the oil in the ME, I'm sure nobody would give a damn if muslims and jews would have a go at each other, or give a crap about the whole area...

[kerosene 0]

BUZZARD @ Oct. 07 2004,14:52)]3. I'm in Europe but I seriously don't feel threatened by Iran (ok so I don't live in England ).

4. The "commando"-type spec-op warfare is being implemented by 3rd world countries, their "spec op" teams we call terrorist cells.

3) Why would people in England feel threatened, unless you live in Iceland or Ireland you cant get any further from Iran and still be in Europe?

4) I dont really understand this, third world countries have standing armies with their own special ops units and air assault divisons. Terrorist cells are just that, not commando outfits. The rebels in Sudan would be a good example of paramilitaries, as would some of the groups that work with the columbian army, these arent those nations spec ops though.

Good call on Iran and how they became as militant as they are. Did Britain have sole control over the protectorate of Palestine? I thought the U.N/leauge of nations were involved too - i might be wrong there.

[-ZG-BUZZARD 0]

I was being a little sarcastic, I just thought that the radicals might remember to target Great Britain first for what they did all those years back. And as I read it in a documentary on the true life of Lawrence of Arabia, he succeeded to get the issue of the promise that the arabs would have the Middle East as their region to split it up as sovereign nations for themselves thus no longer being british & french colonies, at the peace conference of Versailles which ended WW1, since he hoped that the implementation of US President Woodrow Wilson's 14 Points would somehow guarantee that... well, his case was reviewed but the claims were not granted... thus the british word so highly esteemed by the arabs back then was broken...

Edit, ok, substitute the terrorist cell definition of spec ops for black ops, it's more accurate, mistake acknowledged & corrected.

[shinRaiden 0]

Quote[/b] ]

Why is it so hard for some people to understand that democratic governments should be held to a higher standard of morality than terrorists or dictators.

Why should we be giving them - the dictators - a pass in the first place? Why should we feel bad for promoting peace and liberty? Is it because it is 'inhumane' to burst their little bubbles? Isn't this just classic "some are more equal than others"?