[Cody Dawg]

Read here.

Seems Iran wants to be nuclear ready at any cost. Why? They have no reason to need nukes.

[DBursey]

Do you suppose anyone does? And if so, why?

[Troll]

You canna do it cap'n. Ye huvn gut the power!

[Cody Dawg]

I love Star Trek!

Especially Scottie.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by Troll:
You canna do it cap'n. Ye huvn gut the power!

Sure we do.. we've got tubes FULL of power, buried in the desert.

[Axo1ot1]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
Read here.

Seems Iran wants to be nuclear ready at any cost. Why? They have no reason to need nukes.

Maybe because George Bush and company sent the world a message saying if you don't have WMD we will invade you and depose your government (Iraq), but if you have nukes and the ability to use them against the US and are actively pursuing more we will engage in diplomacy and politely ask you to stop (N. Korea). Maybe Iran is trying to protect itself? Woah. Thinkin'. It does a foreign policy good.

[chris v]

Let's Roll�. Bring 'em On�. Mission Accomplished�.

[paully dub]

I'm just happy I won't be drafted.

[djohnson]

Originally posted by paully dub:
I'm just happy I won't be drafted.

I am happy no one will be drafted.

[mikellanes]

Originally posted by djohnson:
I am happy no one will be drafted.

Where are the troops? oh, oh the reserves, woooo glad we got them.. oh wait...

Not saying there will be a new draft, what does it take like 2 years to recruit/train?
But I don't see how people won't be "called back" to duty.

[mikellanes]

Originally posted by chris v:
Let's Roll�. Bring 'em On�. Mission Accomplished�.

It's Hard Work�.

[James L]

Originally posted by chris v:
Let's Roll�. Bring 'em On�. Mission Accomplished�.

What a shame:

A) "Let's Roll" was stated by a brave person, in a brave group of people, who were fighting for their freedom. Too use that phrase to justify another invasion and occupation of another country, to feed the warmongers, only tarnishes the bravery of those people. I have been to ground zero, I have been to the Pentagon, I have been to the plane crash site, I have spoken with people in my industry who were at these sites three years ago. The actions of the people on flight 93 should be honored, not used to further warmonger.

B) The Mission Accomplished phrase was stated 1.5 years ago, and as is obvious the mission is FAR from accomplished in Iraq.


On another note, you will see me stand up and state that NO country should have nukes, as long as no one does. If America wants a nuke free world, lead by example. If they don't think other countries should have 'em, get rid of their own first. Otherwise it is just pure hipocrisy.

A nuclear free world...I am all for it. But, for everyone, not just the non American countries!

Sigh, I suppose people will now say being for a complete ban against WMD, and being against hypocrisy, makes me anti-American. It doesn't, but I am tired of defending that so I will just let the loonies take their shots. I stand by my comments.

[chris v]

Originally posted by James L:
What a shame:

A) "Let's Roll" was stated by a brave person, in a brave group of people, who were fighting for their freedom. Too use that phrase to justify another invasion and occupation of another country, to feed the warmongers, only tarnishes the bravery of those people. I have been to ground zero, I have been to the Pentagon, I have been to the plane crash site, I have spoken with people in my industry who were at these sites three years ago. The actions of the people on flight 93 should be honored, not used to further warmonger.

B) The Mission Accomplished phrase was stated 1.5 years ago, and as is obvious the mission is FAR from accomplished in Iraq.


On another note, you will see me stand up and state that NO country should have nukes, as long as no one does. If America wants a nuke free world, lead by example. If they don't think other countries should have 'em, get rid of their own first. Otherwise it is just pure hipocrisy.

A nuclear free world...I am all for it. But, for everyone, not just the non American countries!

Sigh, I suppose people will now say being for a complete ban against WMD, and being against hypocrisy, makes me anti-American. It doesn't, but I am tired of defending that so I will just let the loonies take their shots. I stand by my comments.

I was being utterly sarcastic, as in we'd better prepare for a regurgitation of the catchphrases that seem to take the place of sane, rational policymaking in this administration. Here we go again!

[lil'babykitten]

I think it's just sick that some of you are already displaying your support for another war despite the absolute tragedy that is Iraq right now.

[Spliffdaddy]

It would be stupid to ignore the threat Iran poses to the US - especially when we're already in the neighborhood.

Get comfortable, folks. The US is gonna be in the Middle East for the rest of our life.

Thankfully, maybe our grandchildren won't have to deal with the same crap we've dealt with for generations before.

[aberdeenwriter]

From a blog called, "The Belmont Club," comes this entry from 11/8/04 which discusses the Iranian nuclear negotiations with members of the European Union (EU). This could, the writer posits, lead to an arangement where Iran is protected from US or Israeli attack by the EU influence (military?).

http://belmontclub.blogspot.com/2004...ey-bennet.html

The second, of greater import, was a tentative agreement reached between the EU and Iran, Iran Says Provisional Nuke Pact Reached. Where: "They were very difficult and complicated negotiations, but we reached a preliminary agreement at the expert level," Mousavian said. "It contains the basic viewpoints of the two sides. The four countries are to take this to their capitals (for final approval)."

In looking at these developments I believe we may be seeing that final steps envisioned in the 1841 work of Frederick List's "The National System of Political Economy":

"Thus in not a very distant future the natural necessity which now imposes the French and Germans the necessity of establishing a Continental alliance against the British supremacy, will impose on the British the necessity of establishing a European coalition against the supremacy of America. Then will Great Britain be compelled to seek and to find in the leadership of the united powers of Europe protection, security, and compensation against the predominance of American, and an equivalent for her lost supremacy.�

Europe, far from being concerned about human rights or freedoms, has delivered a new Vichy government into existence and the hands of Islam - the EU. One which opposes the type of change necessary to unburden the world from fears of Islamic terrorism and one which actively, if tacitly or worse covertly, supports a rising tide of imperialist fundamentalism while ensuring Europe�s safe regional investments in the misbegotten belief appeasement will deliver them free from Islamic intervention - terrorism and domination.

If correct, the EU-Iranian agreement which comes into existence will satisfy the Euro's(and a complacent U.N.) but will fall far short of the type necessary to guard against, and guarantee, nuclear proliferation. An agreement under which the EU will extend its umbrella of mutual defense, first to Iran, then in a similar agreement, one to the Arab League, as assurance against U.S. or Israeli intervention.

Howere Iran cannot and will not sit idly by and become threatened by forces within and democracy outside her borders. In the 40�s we fought the �Master Race.�_ I think tomorrow we fight the �Master Religion� and, needless to say, her allies.

I hope this all proves dreadfully wrong. God Bless our troops, may they be swiftly successful, victorious and safe, as I do fear a much larger battle looming.

[Spliffdaddy]

I'd rather trust my safety to a Crosman .177 pellet gun than to the "EU influence".

[Axo1ot1]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
It would be stupid to ignore the threat Iran poses to the US - especially when we're already in the neighborhood.

Get comfortable, folks. The US is gonna be in the Middle East for the rest of our life.

Thankfully, maybe our grandchildren won't have to deal with the same crap we've dealt with for generations before.

I'd say the only reason they pose a threat is because we're in the neighborhood.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by Axo1ot1:
I'd say the only reason they pose a threat is because we're in the neighborhood.

We only stirred up some of the sh*t, it was already there long before we arrived.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
I'd rather trust my safety to a Crosman .177 pellet gun than to the "EU influence".

The writer agrees with you, Spliffdaddy. Here he says that forces from without AND within Iran may make them rely on more than the EU's protection.

"Howere Iran cannot and will not sit idly by and become threatened by forces within and democracy outside her borders. In the 40�s we fought the �Master Race.�_ I think tomorrow we fight the �Master Religion� and, needless to say, her allies. "

EDIT: Just found this on al Jazeera.
http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/new...ervice_id=5388

Germany rules out war against Iran
11/10/2004 8:30:00 AM GMT

German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said that war is not an option against Iran.

German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said on Wednesday that war is not an option against Iran and no one expects the standoff over Iran's nuclear program to lead to an "Iraq-like confrontation."

However, Fischer was quoted by Germany's Stern magazine as saying that there were "deep concerns" about Iran's nuclear and missile programs, adding that the possession of nuclear weapons would pose a real threat to the region and Europe.

"I don't see that we're immediately heading for an Iraq-like confrontation," Fischer said. "I believe that it's clear to all parties involved that war is not an option."

Fischer also refused backing Iranian opposition groups to topple Iran�s current leadership. �We are placing emphasis on the political process,� said Fischer.

Earlier this week, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw has also excluded that the United States was preparing to resolve the standoff with military force.

The U.S. accuses Iran of covertly developing nuclear weapons and wants Tehran�s nuclear file to be referred to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions.

The Islamic republic denies the U.S. allegations and maintains that its program is mainly aimed at the peaceful generation of electricity and insists on its right to enrich uranium under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

"A military nuclearization of Iran would have unforeseen consequences in one of the most dangerous regions of the world. That would not only threaten Israel but also Europe," Fischer said.

The EU �Big Trio� warned Iran that it might face UN Security Council sanctions if it fails to suspend all activities related to the enrichment of uranium by a November 25 deadline set by the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency.

The Europeans are offering Iran a deal under which the Islamic republic would freeze its uranium enrichment program for an indefinite period, while negotiating a larger package of economic and political incentives.

But the U.S. remains deeply skeptical over the EU-Iranian nuclear deal. American officials claim that Tehran is only using the negotiations with the Europeans to buy time in order to develop atomic weapons._

Jeffrey Gedmin, head of the U.S. Aspen Institute in Berlin, which has close links to the American government, describes the EU Big Three�s initiative as an �axis of weakness.�

�In truth, Germany�s Iran policy has been bankrupt from nearly day one,� said Gedmin.

�In 1999 the EU changed the name of the policy to �Constructive Dialogue� ... Europe is nice to the mullahs, and when this fails, well, Europe tries to be a little nicer,� he said, adding: �Germany has been allergic even to the idea of stepped up political pressure.�

Related stories...

* Iran can mass produce Shahab-3 missiles
* Iran will respond to attacks on nuclear reactors
* Diplomats: U.S. should approve EU-Iranian nukes deal
* Iran reached preliminary nuclear agreement with EU
* Iran asks Bush to �change behavior� after re-election
* Straw: U.S. attack on Iran inconceivable

[James L]

Originally posted by chris v:
I was being utterly sarcastic, as in we'd better prepare for a regurgitation of the catchphrases that seem to take the place of sane, rational policymaking in this administration. Here we go again!

My apologies. I completely missed the sarcasm.

Cheers,

James

[Agasthya]

Originally posted by James L:
My apologies. I completely missed the sarcasm.

Cheers,

James

That didn't tip you off?

[James L]

Originally posted by Agasthya:


That didn't tip you off?

Nope.... sad, isn't it?

[Cody Dawg]

Iran is an unstable government.

65% of their population is under the age of 29.

Letting Iran get or keep nukes is like letting a teenager drink and drive. Like teenagers, not only do they not have experience with these types of things, but they are also likely to have emotional immaturity and lack of good decision-making skills.

No, Iran should not have nukes.

[Cody Dawg]

Incidentally, no, I do not support a war in Iran.

Iran should just play nice.

As far as trying to prevent nuclear arms from going into countries that shouldn't have them and disarming them if they are a threat to neighboring countries or the world, I think it's a good idea. The UN is supposed to help accomplish that objective. But the UN is nothing but a worthless weak useless organization. Annan deserves no confidence.

We should have been firm about the same with North Korea long ago.

With that much said, I think this country has a serious economic problem. The deficit is freaking scary.

[aberdeenwriter]

http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/new...ervice_id=5586

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iranian economists sound alarm to leadership
11/9/2004 11:17:00 AM GMT .

A group of 11 leading Iranian economists released a tough warning to Tehran�s leadership on Monday, complaining that political conflicts had left weaknesses in the economy ignored.

The group of senior university academics criticized what they said was a "society infected by politics" and policies driven by "emotions and idealism regardless of their economic consequences." They also cautioned over continued "isolation in the international arena and blanket state administration in the manufacturing, industrial and service sectors."

They said that the Islamic republic is over-dependent on oil proceeds and suffers from budget deficits, financial and administrative corruption, high unemployment, technological underdevelopment, smuggling and uncompetitive manufactured products._

"For a country like ours, whose administration has always been in the hand of a certain domain of limited figures, there can be no room for the justification of absurd trials and errors" or "spontaneous initiatives without scientific basis," the letter said.

The warning is seen as a direct challenge to Iran's conservative-held Parliament. Conservatives have promised to concentrate on bread-and-butter issues. But Parliament has yet to focus on issues such as the burden of energy subsidies, high inflation - 15 percent officially, around 30 percent unofficially - or downsizing or privatizing state bodies.

The warning comes after months of confusing messages from Iranian authorities on privatization plans. Article 44 of Iran's constitution states that core infrastructure must remain in the hands of the state.
_
Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said in early October that a capitalist approach to privatization was out of the question.

However, in early October the Expediency Council gave a ruling to allow the privatization of downstream oil and gas sectors, mines, banking, insurance, telecommunications, railway, roads, airlines and shopping.

Two weeks ago, the Management and Planning Organization (MPO) enforced the council's decision by setting up a 20-year economic, social and cultural development plan (2005-2025) which demands privatization of major state enterprises.

But the MPO and Expediency Council decisions came after deputies publicly rejected several major contracts that were signed with foreign companies in recent months, despite the government's privatization target of $5.95 billion in the year to March 2005.

[aberdeenwriter]

Bush Confronts New Challenge on Issue of Iran

By STEVEN R. WEISMAN

New York Times November 19, 2004

[Spheric Harlot]

I find it mildly terrifying that the rhetoric machine is already working so well - a second time - that some of the more gullible types are accepting a second war as given, long before the first one is in any way done.

This has been fairly obvious. However, it's also fairly obvious that, while Saddam was pretty unpopular among the Muslim world as he was too secular, an attack on Iran would be pure suicide, by any standard, and would dispel any doubts the Muslim world may still have had about Bush's Crusade.

It would also be a crying shame, since Iran is pretty much the only middle-eastern Muslim nation slowly but steadily moving towards democracy ON ITS OWN. Sabre-rattling will only push it towards extremism.

-s*

[Spliffdaddy]

OR

we'll kick Iran's ass into submission.

While the 'global community' whines about it.

Kinda like they do now with Iraq.

[SimpleLife]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
It would be stupid to ignore the threat Iran poses to the US - especially when we're already in the neighborhood.

Get comfortable, folks. The US is gonna be in the Middle East for the rest of our life.

Thankfully, maybe our grandchildren won't have to deal with the same crap we've dealt with for generations before.

Amazing how those elastic borders should not be seen as a threat.

And yes, we will be comfortable under terrorists Law.

[Cody Dawg]

I don't like the idea of hurting people.

But, I also don't like the idea of people having a nuclear bomb that resides in a country that is full of terrorists.

[SimpleLife]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
OR

we'll kick Iran's ass into submission.

While the 'global community' whines about it.

Kinda like they do now with Iraq.

That is a cause for a third World War.

I can see some people in other countries in Europe and South America fighting with this idea in mind.

"Tame the U.S."

[SimpleLife]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I don't like the idea of hurting people.

But, I also don't like the idea of people having a nuclear bomb that resides in a country that is full of terrorists.

What makes you believe Iran is full of terrorists?

[SubGeniux]

Isn't it just amazing how after the EU and Iran come to an agreement on this issue, that the US comes out and says it has new intelligence saying Iran is now going full-tilt in trying to produce uranium.

My oh my how gullible do we have to be now. Bush needs his other little war, the one on Iran, the one he promised to his backers. Let me guess, the US will go in unilaterally, producing zero believable evidence, and arguments as flimsy as a wet tissue.

What a joke, I had to laugh at Bush's little speech today warning Iran. How about Iran warns the US to **** off and stop actnig like it can do what it wants, at anytime, and others can't? What's the Bush apolgists going to come up with now? That Iran is secretly involved with Al-Qaeeda, that they are a rogue nation (lol)?

Iran, like any other nation, has the right to defend itself. If the US can ****ing break treaties, have apologists pouring out the woodwork explaining how it's ok for the US to do this, break that, not sign up to this, or behave this way, pull out of this agreement, nullify that one. Then so can Iran.

[SubGeniux]

Iran, a nation harbouring terrorists? What a laugh. How much of a simpleton must you be to just go 'Yes, Mr. President' when he just throws the label of terroriist state at countries he wants to invade. It's so obvious why he is wantnig to. but... if he is foolish to 'go into Iran' I sincerely hope, from the bottom of my heart, just pray to Adonai that who go into, and support this, get the kicking you badly deserve.

It's one thing invading a very weakm broken Afghanistn/Iraq, but let's see you do it to Iran, fight on all these fronts with little or no support from the EU.

I'm sorry if I sound so fatalistic, or using sensationalist language, but I'm sick of hearing from arseholes arguing how right it is for the US to undertake such things. I don't need to hear smarmy lawyer-speak anymore trying to persuade everyone this is a-ok.

[Spliffdaddy]

heh. You got it backwards.

We are telling Dubya to invade Iran - not the other way around.

[Cody Dawg]

SubGeniux said
Iran, a nation harbouring terrorists? What a laugh.

Are you stupid? Or just plain uninformed or out of touch with reality?

Of COURSE there is the threat from terrorism with respect to Iran.

"If Iran goes nuclear, you worry that Hezbollah goes nuclear." So said Paul Leventhal, president of the Nuclear Control Institute in a New York Times article and an interview yesterday with The Washington Times. Mr. Leventhal points to an often-overlooked danger that Iranian possession of nuclear weapons would pose: that the regime could pass along nuclear weapons to Hezbollah or other terrorist organizations that it supports.

Read the entire article here.

Or, are you now going to dispute and argue against the rest of the world in the belief that Iran is an unsafe place for nukes to reside?

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
Are you stupid? Or just plain uninformed or out of touch with reality?

Of COURSE there is the threat from terrorism with respect to Iran.



Read the entire article here.

Or, are you now going to dispute and argue against the rest of the world in the belief that Iran is an unsafe place for nukes to reside?

Gee, I don't recall your ever smacking anyone down, Cody!

[shmerek]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
Are you stupid? Or just plain uninformed or out of touch with reality?

Of COURSE there is the threat from terrorism with respect to Iran.



Read the entire article here.

Or, are you now going to dispute and argue against the rest of the world in the belief that Iran is an unsafe place for nukes to reside?

Gee an editorial, I guess that proves it.

[shmerek]

Originally posted by aberdeenwriter:
Gee, I don't recall your ever smacking anyone down, Cody!

How is that a smackdown? A link to an editorial about a "what if" senario, what a bunch of ****.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally posted by shmerek:
How is that a smackdown? A link to an editorial about a "what if" senario, what a bunch of ****.

Are you stupid? Or just plain uninformed or out of touch with reality?

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally posted by shmerek:
Gee an editorial, I guess that proves it.

Are you stupid? Or just plain uninformed or out of touch with reality?

[shmerek]

Originally posted by aberdeenwriter:
Are you stupid? Or just plain uninformed or out of touch with reality?

Sorry none of the above but if you are so smart, informed and in touch with reality please enlighten me.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally posted by shmerek:
Sorry none of the above but if you are so smart, informed and in touch with reality please enlighten me.

shmerek, don't be a jerek.

[Cody Dawg]

shmerek, don't be a jerek.

ROFLMAO!



Howdy, aberdeenwriter? Howsa yowza today?

[icydanger]

sad, sad, sad, MacNN Forums full of war mongers

[shmerek]

Originally posted by aberdeenwriter:
shmerek, don't be a jerek.

I ask for enlightenment to release me from my apparent stupidity and this is the response I get? Seriously, how old are you anyway, 15-16?

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally posted by icydanger:
sad, sad, sad, MacNN Forums full of war mongers

sad, sad, sad, MacNN Forums full of weak-kneed terrorist appeasers.

"Just give 'em what they want and they'll leave us alone."

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally posted by shmerek:
I ask for enlightenment to release me from my apparent stupidity and this is the response I get? Seriously, how old are you anyway, 15-16?

The Quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SubGeniux said:
Iran, a nation harbouring terrorists? What a laugh.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Smackdown:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cody Dawg said:
Are you stupid? Or just plain uninformed or out of touch with reality?

Of COURSE there is the threat from terrorism with respect to Iran.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The Challenge:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
shmerek said:
How is that a smackdown? A link to an editorial about a "what if" senario, what a bunch of ****.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Reply:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Are you stupid? Or just plain uninformed or out of touch with reality?"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Challenge II:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
shmerek said:
Gee an editorial, I guess that proves it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply II:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Are you stupid? Or just plain uninformed or out of touch with reality?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Challenge III:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
shmerek said:
Sorry none of the above but if you are so smart, informed and in touch with reality please enlighten me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply III:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
shmerek, don't be a jerek.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Challenge IV:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
shmerek said:
I ask for enlightenment to release me from my apparent stupidity and this is the response I get? Seriously, how old are you anyway, 15-16?
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply IV:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Are you stupid? Or just plain uninformed or out of touch with reality?" I'm seven...in shmerek years.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
ROFLMAO!



Howdy, aberdeenwriter? Howsa yowza today?

Hey Cody! I'm good, thanks. Hope you and yours are all well.