NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, we all know the Iranians are working in Iraq. Now, as I was watching Scarborough Country, I found out that our forces are now going on missions to hunt down and kill Iranian militants in Iraq. Labeling them as KOS is one thing, but now we're actually hunting them? Has Bush ever heard of something called "diplomacy"? I mean, I myself haven't heard of any reports of the White House talking to Iran about these incidents.

Well, I guess everybody better get digging their fallout shelters.

Well, we all know the Iranians are working in Iraq. Now, as I was watching Scarborough Country, I found out that our forces are now going on missions to hunt down and kill Iranian militants in Iraq. Labeling them as KOS is one thing, but now we're actually hunting them? Has Bush ever heard of something called "diplomacy"? I mean, I myself haven't heard of any reports of the White House talking to Iran about these incidents.

Well, I guess everybody better get digging their fallout shelters.

The United States has MORE than tried diplomacy.. Iranian goons continue to cross over the border into Iraq (as do Syrians) and are responsible for the escalation of the internal struggle in Iraq, as well as costing the lives of American men and women. Are you suggesting that the Americans do not have a right to defend themselves? The Iraqi government should have sealed the borders along time ago, and made it abundantly clear that anyone crossing the border would be subject to search & interrogation. Sounds like one more reason for the "I hate America" group to raise their voice again. Note there is no comment nor even imply from the original poster that the Iranians may be responsible for violence and/or terrorist attacks in Iraq and that the Iraqi people may not want them there either..

IT all makes sense now! Bush supports Arabs, as shown in Fahrenheit 9/11 and is therefore strongly against Persians.

Well, we all know the Iranians are working in Iraq. Now, as I was watching Scarborough Country, I found out that our forces are now going on missions to hunt down and kill Iranian militants in Iraq. Labeling them as KOS is one thing, but now we're actually hunting them? Has Bush ever heard of something called "diplomacy"? I mean, I myself haven't heard of any reports of the White House talking to Iran about these incidents.

Well, I guess everybody better get digging their fallout shelters.

Hate to break this news to you, but the Iranians have been causing a lot of trouble in Iraq and will continue to cause it. The Iranians refuse any attempts at diplomacy to end it but hey I am sure you heard that on Scaborough county right? Or did the bias of that show forget to mention that because then it may cause the comment to be facitious?

Hate to break this news to you, but the Iranians have been causing a lot of trouble in Iraq and will continue to cause it. The Iranians refuse any attempts at diplomacy to end it but hey I am sure you heard that on Scaborough county right? Or did the bias of that show forget to mention that because then it may cause the comment to be facitious?

Oh, I'm sorry you've seem to have forgotten THAT EVERY SHOW IS BIASED. It is impossible to be unbiased. And we have tried diplomacy BEFORE, not with this new issue. Now we have evidence to back us up, unlike before.

Hate to break this news to you, but the Iranians have been causing a lot of trouble in Iraq and will continue to cause it. The Iranians refuse any attempts at diplomacy to end it but hey I am sure you heard that on Scaborough county right? Or did the bias of that show forget to mention that because then it may cause the comment to be facitious?

I think reporting accurate news is against the labor contract of the folks on Scarborough Country and similar shows... After all, why would they want anyone to know that the Happy, Smiling people of Iran could be up to no good..

Hate to break this news to you, but the Iranians have been causing a lot of trouble in Iraq and will continue to cause it. The Iranians refuse any attempts at diplomacy to end it but hey I am sure you heard that on Scaborough county right? Or did the bias of that show forget to mention that because then it may cause the comment to be facitious?

And from Danmarc
The United States has MORE than tried diplomacy.. Iranian goons continue to cross over the border into Iraq (as do Syrians) and are responsible for the escalation of the internal struggle in Iraq, as well as costing the lives of American men and women. Are you suggesting that the Americans do not have a right to defend themselves? The Iraqi government should have sealed the borders along time ago, and made it abundantly clear that anyone crossing the border would be subject to search & interrogation. Sounds like one more reason for the "I hate America" group to raise their voice again. Note there is no comment nor even imply from the original poster that the Iranians may be responsible for violence and/or terrorist attacks in Iraq and that the Iraqi people may not want them there either..

QFT

Oh, I'm sorry you've seem to have forgotten THAT EVERY SHOW IS BIASED. It is impossible to be unbiased. And we have tried diplomacy BEFORE, not with this new issue. Now we have evidence to back us up, unlike before.

I in no way shape or form tried to deny any show was not biased, that would be against my beileifs. Because I agree with you on that subject. I was just pointing out the one show because that is who the OP mentioned.

ooops for got to finish, and actually we have had evidence that they have been in volved since not long after the begining of the war and diplomacy on it has been tried, and ignored.

Well, we all know the Iranians are working in Iraq. Now, as I was watching Scarborough Country, I found out that our forces are now going on missions to hunt down and kill Iranian militants in Iraq. Labeling them as KOS is one thing, but now we're actually hunting them? Has Bush ever heard of something called "diplomacy"? I mean, I myself haven't heard of any reports of the White House talking to Iran about these incidents.

Well, I guess everybody better get digging their fallout shelters.

Have you ever heared of denial? Iran is not going too take responsibility of training shiite millitias in Iraq, just like it doesnt officially declare Hezbollah an organization under its authority. We all know they fund and train the millitants, but do so quietly. Perhaps you're familiar with US advisors in South Vietnam, circa 1950's? Why not hunt them? They fight under express orders too bring unrest too Iraq, through violence and terror, and we beg Ahmynameistoolong too even admit he knows of this? These millitants, mind you, do not fight under formal support of Tehran remmeber, they can easily be interperted as ambiguous "foreign fighters". Alot of these, do in fact, come from Iran.

Oh, I'm sorry you've seem to have forgotten THAT EVERY SHOW IS BIASED. It is impossible to be unbiased. And we have tried diplomacy BEFORE, not with this new issue. Now we have evidence to back us up, unlike before.


Just thought I would throw this one out there..... What kind of diplomacy are you suggesting?? Iran has already expelled UN nuclear inspectors... I guess we should schedule a meeting a few months from now, then let them cancel or push the date back by another 6 months or a year.. Then let the Iranian "dignitaries" fail to show up for said diplomatic meeting, all the while completing their goal of working nuclear weapons they can waive at Israel, who they have already threatened to wipe off the map. Surely you can't continue to hide behind the curtain of diplomacy...

I think reporting accurate news is against the labor contract of the folks on Scarborough Country and similar shows... After all, why would they want anyone to know that the Happy, Smiling people of Iran could be up to no good..

You mean they are not smiling and happy?:headbang:

QFT

not trying to be an idiot here, but what does QFT mean?? just curious.

Ok, look.

Iran HAS been training and providing weapons to insurgents for a LONG time.

What they have NOT been doing is actually sending in their OWN troops to fight us.

There is a BIG difference between those two facts.

If we confront them with the latter, I'd think they'd be a lot more willing for negotiations.

not trying to be an idiot here, but what does QFT mean?? just curious.

Quoted For Truth

not trying to be an idiot here, but what does QFT mean?? just curious.

Quoted for truth.

I didn't know before I had posted on here for a while, too, so don't worry. ;)

Ok, look.

Iran HAS been training and providing weapons to insurgents for a LONG time.

What they have NOT been doing is actually sending in their OWN troops to fight us.

There is a BIG difference between those two facts.

If we confront them with the latter, I'd think they'd be a lot more willing for negotiations.


There is absolutely no difference, and they have been confronted with those facts more then once. And I also disagree with your statement about them sending in their own troops, many of those "foreign fighters" from Iran are Iranian army just without wearing their uniform, if you want to train people to fight you send soldiers. It does not mean they have to wear a uniform. I started my tour in Iraq on the Iranian border about 6 miles from it in fact one of the thing being watched for was infiltrators from Iran.
And hate to break this news to you if you point a gun at me your the bad guy and you will be shot. Iranian in uniform or not they try to kill us they should be killed right along with the others. You do not try to talk to a rabid dog you put them down for the good of the community. The radical leaders of Iran do not care to negotiate their track record with the UN and the world is proof of that if you can not admit this or even understand it maybe you need to do some more studying of the background of Iran and the world.

Oh and if the US government has not kept you up to date on their Diplomatic moves I would think about sending them your current e-mail address I am sure it is just a clerical error on their part and they would not want to miss out on keeping you informed and getting your view on all they are doing wrong so far. I am sure Our diplomatic corp could use any help and/or advice you may have to offer in helping them clear up their shortcomings in the world today.

There is absolutely no difference, and they have been confronted with those facts more then once. And I also disagree with your statement about them sending in their own troops, many of those "foreign fighters" from Iran are Iranian army just without wearing their uniform, if you want to train people to fight you send soldiers. It does not mean they have to wear a uniform. I started my tour in Iraq on the Iranian border about 6 miles from it in fact one of the thing being watched for was infiltrators from Iran.
And hate to break this news to you if you point a gun at me your the bad guy and you will be shot. Iranian in uniform or not they try to kill us they should be killed right along with the others. You do not try to talk to a rabid dog you put them down for the good of the community. The radical leaders of Iran do not care to negotiate their track record with the UN and the world is proof of that if you can not admit this or even understand it maybe you need to do some more studying of the background of Iran and the world.

Oh and if the US government has not kept you up to date on their Diplomatic moves I would think about sending them your current e-mail address I am sure it is just a clerical error on their part and they would not want to miss out on keeping you informed and getting your view on all they are doing wrong so far. I am sure Our diplomatic corp could use any help and/or advice you may have to offer in helping them clear up their shortcomings in the world today.

Puncutation. 'Tis your friend, my good man.

Also: I understand that if an Iranian is shooting at you, you have the right to fight back. However, before now no large number of Iranians have actually gotten into Iraq. Most have been back in Iran, either sending supplies or training non-Iranian government sponsored fighters. Never before have there been actual, whole military units in Iraq. Hell, chances are (concerning the fact that most Middle Eastern governments don't have that much control over their countries), it isn't ACTUALLY the Iranian government doing these activities, but simply extremists living within Iran. Either way, these new things will certainly be a good barganing chip.

Also: I have a friend who grew up in Iran, so don't say I don't know anything about Iran.

Also: Oh, threatening to tell the government about my activities, hmm? Big Brother going to come arrest me for speaking bad about the motherland?

Also: Not saying I have any ideas on how to be diplomatic with these guys, but I know there has to be someway we haven't tried, concerning that the most diplomacy we've gotten out of the White House is "Comply or we bomb the shit out of you".

Also: Don't say something along the lines of "Why do you hate the troops?". I respect the troops. What I don't respect is the oil war which will very soon escalate unless we try some more diplomatic means.

The USA needs to do only one thing right now to completely fix the Iraq quagmire. U-Turn on U.S.-Iranian relations.

Reopen diplomatic channels, lift all trade embargos, agree to assist them in regional security, apologise for installing the Shah, give them whatever scraps they want. In return, any decent negotiator would get Israeli recognition in exchange, an apology for the hostage crisis, guarantees on certain human rights, as well as for strong promises not to compromise American interests anywhere within their sphere.

Then, by the time we leave Iraq, we leave it firmly in Iran's sphere. If we follow Bush's plan, we leave Iraq in the sphere of a hotile nation, an absolute failure. If we follow my plan, we leave Iraq in the sphere of a friendly nation, that will protect Iraq from militantism.

The USA needs to do only one thing right now to completely fix the Iraq quagmire. U-Turn on U.S.-Iranian relations.

Reopen diplomatic channels, lift all trade embargos, agree to assist them in regional security, apologise for installing the Shah, give them whatever scraps they want. In return, any decent negotiator would get Israeli recognition in exchange, an apology for the hostage crisis, guarantees on certain human rights, as well as for strong promises not to compromise American interests anywhere within their sphere.

Then, by the time we leave Iraq, we leave it firmly in Iran's sphere. If we follow Bush's plan, we leave Iraq in the sphere of a hotile nation, an absolute failure. If we follow my plan, we leave Iraq in the sphere of a friendly nation, that will protect Iraq from militantism.

That's all good... Except for the Israel part.

Wait... I'm not hijacking this thread. Nevermind.

Puncutation. 'Tis your friend, my good man.

Also: I understand that if an Iranian is shooting at you, you have the right to fight back. However, before now no large number of Iranians have actually gotten into Iraq. Most have been back in Iran, either sending supplies or training non-Iranian government sponsored fighters. Never before have there been actual, whole military units in Iraq. Hell, chances are (concerning the fact that most Middle Eastern governments don't have that much control over their countries), it isn't ACTUALLY the Iranian government doing these activities, but simply extremists living within Iran. Either way, these new things will certainly be a good barganing chip.

Also: I have a friend who grew up in Iran, so don't say I don't know anything about Iran.

Also: Oh, threatening to tell the government about my activities, hmm? Big Brother going to come arrest me for speaking bad about the motherland?

Also: Not saying I have any ideas on how to be diplomatic with these guys, but I know there has to be someway we haven't tried, concerning that the most diplomacy we've gotten out of the White House is "Comply or we bomb the shit out of you".

Also: Don't say something along the lines of "Why do you hate the troops?". I respect the troops. What I don't respect is the oil war which will very soon escalate unless we try some more diplomatic means.


hmmmmm never said you hate the troops nor implied it. Do not care if the gov't knows of your activities, said you need to give them your addie so they can get your input since they do not know what their doing. Also in the same sarcasm said it is not your responsibility to know all the details of what goes on between the US and Iranian diplomats...... if you want it to be go to school and become a diplomat and make it your job.
And bad news one friend in Iran does not mean you know all about Iran. And if you think that the Iranian gov't is not behind or does not know of and or support these activities then you are a complete moron, which I highly doubt. I think your just naive. Which is something you point out if you really think this is an oil war.....since we do not get nor have gotten oil from Iraq in more then 20 years. But hey you watch Scarborough country so you would beleive just about anything that anyone says against Bush. WHom may not be the best choice for president, but there have not been good choices in a long time.

And if you do not think the Iranians have been in Iraq in large numbers for quite awhile then you probably think the Report on NPR back in Feb 2005 about the capture of Syrian intelligence agents in Iraq training Insurgents was justa case of rogue agents without knowledge of their gov't. But hey the syrians and Iranians are in bed on most things from Hezbollah to the Iraqi Insurgents.

Great, now we're HUNTING the Iranians
Anyone else immediately think of this when they read the thread title:
http://wbzcrew.fanspace.com/images/elmer-fudd.jpg
"Be vewwy vewwy qwiet! I'm hunting Iwanians!"

Anyone else immediately think of this when they read the thread title:
http://wbzcrew.fanspace.com/images/elmer-fudd.jpg
"Be vewwy vewwy qwiet! I'm hunting Iwanians!"

Perhaps Bugs Bunny was a Sunni?

Well, we all know the Iranians are working in Iraq. Now, as I was watching Scarborough Country, I found out that our forces are now going on missions to hunt down and kill Iranian militants in Iraq.

and your point? ? ?

Reopen diplomatic channels

Tehran hostage crisis. 444 days.Ring any bells?

lift all trade embargos

You're joking, I take it.

agree to assist them in regional security

....you want to help them consolidate their grip and create a pan Islamic nation that includes Iraq...then Syria...Lebanon...Saudi Arabia....riiighttt..

apologise for installing the Shah

Soon as they apologise for the Tehran hostage crisis, revoke the death sentence on Salman Rushdie, cease funding and arming and sending terrorists into Iraq and other nations, as soon as they cease arming and funding Hezbollah, soon as they tell us they do NOT want to see Israel "wiped off the map..."...once they do that, get back to me., I'll take the apology under advisement in the meantime...

give them whatever scraps they want.

Why Mr Chamberlain, I didn't recognise you.,...

In eturn, any decent negotiator would get Israeli recognition in exchange, an apology for the hostage crisis, guarantees on certain human rights, as well as for strong promises not to compromise American interests anywhere within their sphere.

Iran. Guarantees on human rights. :headbang: :headbang:

Then, by the time we leave Iraq, we leave it firmly in Iran's sphere.

Anyone care to tell this guy just what he has just said?

If we follow Bush's plan, we leave Iraq in the sphere of a hotile nation, an absolute failure.

No, the failure is in a complete withdrawal leaving Iran free to walk into Iraq and take over. Are you in the mood for a Pan Islamic state headed by a lunatic that thinks he is the next incarnation of the Mahdi?

If we follow my plan, we leave Iraq in the sphere of a friendly nation, that will protect Iraq from militantism.

"friendly nation"

Iran. :eek: :eek:

'Scuse me...I think I am about to go throw up.....

Reopen diplomatic channels

Tehran hostage crisis. 444 days.Ring any bells?

lift all trade embargos

You're joking, I take it.

agree to assist them in regional security

....you want to help them consolidate their grip and create a pan Islamic nation that includes Iraq...then Syria...Lebanon...Saudi Arabia....riiighttt..

apologise for installing the Shah

Soon as they apologise for the Tehran hostage crisis, revoke the death sentence on Salman Rushdie, cease funding and arming and sending terrorists into Iraq and other nations, as soon as they cease arming and funding Hezbollah, soon as they tell us they do NOT want to see Israel "wiped off the map..."...once they do that, get back to me., I'll take the apology under advisement in the meantime...

give them whatever scraps they want.

Why Mr Chamberlain, I didn't recognise you.,...

In eturn, any decent negotiator would get Israeli recognition in exchange, an apology for the hostage crisis, guarantees on certain human rights, as well as for strong promises not to compromise American interests anywhere within their sphere.

Iran. Guarantees on human rights. :headbang: :headbang:

Then, by the time we leave Iraq, we leave it firmly in Iran's sphere.

Anyone care to tell this guy just what he has just said?

If we follow Bush's plan, we leave Iraq in the sphere of a hotile nation, an absolute failure.

No, the failure is in a complete withdrawal leaving Iran free to walk into Iraq and take over. Are you in the mood for a Pan Islamic state headed by a lunatic that thinks he is the next incarnation of the Mahdi?

If we follow my plan, we leave Iraq in the sphere of a friendly nation, that will protect Iraq from militantism.

"friendly nation"

Iran. :eek: :eek:

'Scuse me...I think I am about to go throw up.....

The United States has MORE than tried diplomacy...

Really?

"Iran offered the US a package of concessions in 2003, but it was rejected, a senior former US official has told the BBC's Newsnight programme.
Tehran proposed ending support for Lebanese and Palestinian militant groups and helping to stabilise Iraq following the US-led invasion.

Offers, including making its nuclear programme more transparent, were conditional on the US ending hostility.

But Vice-President Dick Cheney's office rejected the plan, the official said."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6274147.stm

My comments are in bold.....

Tehran hostage crisis. 444 days.Ring any bells?


You're joking, I take it.

Get over it.....that was many years ago

....you want to help them consolidate their grip and create a pan Islamic nation that includes Iraq...then Syria...Lebanon...Saudi Arabia....riiighttt..

Why do you think you should stop them forming it - we have similar things such as NATO and the EU. Why should it be different just because it is 'Islamic'

Soon as they apologise for the Tehran hostage crisis, revoke the death sentence on Salman Rushdie, cease funding and arming and sending terrorists into Iraq and other nations, as soon as they cease arming and funding Hezbollah, soon as they tell us they do NOT want to see Israel "wiped off the map..."...once they do that, get back to me., I'll take the apology under advisement in the meantime...

Has America never funded and armed 'terrorists' in their own interest? Contras etc

Why Mr Chamberlain, I didn't recognise you.,...

????

Iran. Guarantees on human rights. :headbang: :headbang:

Gitmo Gitmo Gitmo :headbang: :headbang:

Anyone care to tell this guy just what he has just said?


No, the failure is in a complete withdrawal leaving Iran free to walk into Iraq and take over. Are you in the mood for a Pan Islamic state headed by a lunatic that thinks he is the next incarnation of the Mahdi?


"friendly nation"

Iran. :eek: :eek:

'Scuse me...I think I am about to go throw up.....

*passes sick bag*

Why do you think you should stop them forming it - we have similar things such as NATO and the EU. Why should it be different just because it is 'Islamic'

I have a great argument regarding Islamic terrorism and Islamic violence.

It's called GROUND ZERO and it's located where the WTC once stood.

Gitmo Gitmo Gitmo

Slarti....lemme clue you in here. People captured by the US get three hots, a cot, lawyers, advocates,. sympathy and publicity.

BTW.,.Leon Klinghoffer, Nick Berg, Dora Bloch and the crew of the USS Cole send their regards.

Oh wait..yeah, lets look at Iran's sterling human rights record, shall we?

http://www.iran-e-azad.org/english/hr.html

# List of More Than 20,000 Members of the Opposition Executed by the Mullas Regime
# List of UN and Other Related Resolutions Condemning Human Rights Violation in Iran.

http://www.hambastegi.org/newsrelease/press136.htm

B. Freedom of Expression

An independent press is banned in Iran and journalists are not allowed to write or publish the journals, magazines or newspapers that reflect their dissent. An independent press is prohibited. Over the past year and a half, over fifty newspapers linked to a faction of the regime have been closed down and their editors and reporters have been imprisoned.

The conservative judiciary has even referred to government newspapers as 'satanic' and seeking to undermine the Islamic character of the state. There is no meaningful freedom of expression or freedom of the press where voices of dissent are summarily silenced and advocates of free speech are crushed and branded as enemies of the state.

Moreover, Iran is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which it ratified in 1975. Iran is obliged, therefore, by its treaty commitments to provide a full panoply of rights to all citizens without discrimination on such grounds as 'political or other opinion.' The state here is clearly in violation of its internationally recognised obligations and duties and those who challenge this have been subject to the most arbitrary and brutal forms of detention, torture, and long term imprisonment.

Gee whiz....looks like Iran isn't quite up to snuff....but yeah sure, lets compare Gitmo with beheading children, flogging then stoning homosexuals, lets compare Gitmo to a regime that stones women for daring to talk back to the mullahs (http://www.wfafi.org/wfafistatement12.htm)...yeah, you're right, Gitmo is FAR worse than a President of Iran who vows a second Holocaust.....

Cole send their regards.

Oh wait..yeah, lets look at Iran's sterling human rights record, shall we?

http://www.iran-e-azad.org/english/hr.html

# List of More Than 20,000 Members of the Opposition Executed by the Mullas Regime
# List of UN and Other Related Resolutions Condemning Human Rights Violation in Iran.

http://www.hambastegi.org/newsrelease/press136.htm

[QUOTE]B. Freedom of Expression

An independent press is banned in Iran and journalists are not allowed to write or publish the journals, magazines or newspapers that reflect their dissent. An independent press is prohibited. Over the past year and a half, over fifty newspapers linked to a faction of the regime have been closed down and their editors and reporters have been imprisoned.

Why do you think you should stop them forming it - we have similar things such as NATO and the EU. Why should it be different just because it is 'Islamic'

I have a great argument regarding Islamic terrorism and Islamic violence.

It's called GROUND ZERO and it's located where the WTC once stood. you think they wont take the chance to do it again? Only this time when they kill it will be in the millions??

Atomic weapon - Tel Aviv. Think about it.

Gitmo Gitmo Gitmo

Slarti....lemme clue you in here. People captured by the US get three hots, a cot, lawyers, advocates,. sympathy and publicity.

BTW.,.Leon Klinghoffer, Nick Berg, Dora Bloch and the crew of the USS Cole send their regards.You remember Leon? He was an old main in a wheelchair thrown off the stern of a ship...the Achille Lauro??.

Man that took courage...killing an old man in a wheelchair.....

Oh wait..yeah, lets look at Iran's sterling human rights record, shall we?

http://www.iran-e-azad.org/english/hr.html

# List of More Than 20,000 Members of the Opposition Executed by the Mullas Regime
# List of UN and Other Related Resolutions Condemning Human Rights Violation in Iran.

http://www.hambastegi.org/newsrelease/press136.htm

B. Freedom of Expression

An independent press is banned in Iran and journalists are not allowed to write or publish the journals, magazines or newspapers that reflect their dissent. An independent press is prohibited. Over the past year and a half, over fifty newspapers linked to a faction of the regime have been closed down and their editors and reporters have been imprisoned.

The conservative judiciary has even referred to government newspapers as 'satanic' and seeking to undermine the Islamic character of the state. There is no meaningful freedom of expression or freedom of the press where voices of dissent are summarily silenced and advocates of free speech are crushed and branded as enemies of the state.

Moreover, Iran is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which it ratified in 1975. Iran is obliged, therefore, by its treaty commitments to provide a full panoply of rights to all citizens without discrimination on such grounds as 'political or other opinion.' The state here is clearly in violation of its internationally recognised obligations and duties and those who challenge this have been subject to the most arbitrary and brutal forms of detention, torture, and long term imprisonment.

Gee whiz....looks like Iran isn't quite up to snuff....but yeah sure, lets compare Gitmo with beheading children, flogging then stoning homosexuals, lets compare Gitmo to a regime that stones women for daring to talk back to the mullahs (http://www.wfafi.org/wfafistatement12.htm)...yeah, you're right, Gitmo is FAR worse than a President of Iran who vows a second Holocaust....

I have a great argument regarding Islamic terrorism and Islamic violence.

It's called GROUND ZERO and it's located where the WTC once stood.

I mentioned an Islamic State - that does not always mean violence

Slarti....lemme clue you in here. People captured by the US get three hots, a cot, lawyers, advocates,. sympathy and publicity.

BTW.,.Leon Klinghoffer, Nick Berg, Dora Bloch and the crew of the USS Cole send their regards.

But no trials? Prove people are guilty. You cannot just round them up and keep them in cages cos it suits you

Oh wait..yeah, lets look at Iran's sterling human rights record, shall we?

Why not pick on countries with equally bad human rights records....like China. Oh no, they are not a dirt poor Arab country who you can walk all over are they. If you are going to use that old arguement, grow some balls and go after the real offenders



Gee whiz....looks like Iran isn't quite up to snuff....but yeah sure, lets compare Gitmo with beheading children, flogging then stoning homosexuals, lets compare Gitmo to a regime that stones women for daring to talk back to the mullahs (http://www.wfafi.org/wfafistatement12.htm)...yeah, you're right, Gitmo is FAR worse than a President of Iran who vows a second Holocaust....

Like that is gonna happen.

Don't get me wrong, I am totally against terrorism, but cannot stomach the gung-ho, we are always right attitude of some Americans

I have a great argument regarding Islamic terrorism and Islamic violence.

It's called GROUND ZERO and it's located where the WTC once stood. you think they wont take the chance to do it again? Only this time when they kill it will be in the millions??....

What has that to do with Iran?


Slarti....lemme clue you in here. People captured by the US get three hots, a cot, lawyers, advocates,. sympathy and publicity.??....

As well as tortured and locked up indefintely. And thats Guantanamo. What about the various "black" detention units?


BTW.,.Leon Klinghoffer, Nick Berg, Dora Bloch and the crew of the USS Cole send their regards.You remember Leon? He was an old main in a wheelchair thrown off the stern of a ship...the Achille Lauro??..??....

And what have any of those incidents to do with Iran?

[

Iran has every right as a sovereign state to arm and support insurgents directly or indirectly in Iraq to fight US troops. The US military presence in Iraq represents a clear threat to Iranian interests in the region, as Iraq borders them, while the US is miles away and there is no threat to them, no matter what the neocons spin.

Furthermore, the invasion and occupation of Iraq constitutes a violation of international law as a war of aggression as defined at Nuremberg. Defense is all the more justified because of this. The US President should realize this and pull out.

Well, we all know the Iranians are working in Iraq. Now, as I was watching Scarborough Country, I found out that our forces are now going on missions to hunt down and kill Iranian militants in Iraq. Labeling them as KOS is one thing, but now we're actually hunting them? Has Bush ever heard of something called "diplomacy"? I mean, I myself haven't heard of any reports of the White House talking to Iran about these incidents.

Well, I guess everybody better get digging their fallout shelters.

They shoot at us. We shoot at them. They run. We chase. It's war.

If you want to protest against the war, fine. But this is ludicrous. What's wrong with "hunting" them? It's a search with aggresive, in this case lethal, intent. That's the definition. Nothing illegal about it, not in wartime.

Now, as to the Iranian scheme, I like the idea, but as you say "any decent negotiator" should get the deal. I doubt the "decent negotiators, by our meaning, get Iranian civil service positions.

They shoot at us. We shoot at them. They run. We chase. It's war.

If you want to protest against the war, fine. But this is ludicrous. What's wrong with "hunting" them? It's a search with aggresive, in this case lethal, intent. That's the definition. Nothing illegal about it, not in wartime.

Now, as to the Iranian scheme, I like the idea, but as you say "any decent negotiator" should get the deal. I doubt the "decent negotiators, by our meaning, get Iranian civil service positions.
So does this mean the US will be delivering a declaration of war to the desk of the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran?

So does this mean the US will be delivering a declaration of war to the desk of the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran?

I would imagine, unfortunately, that they already have one written and are just waiting for the right moment (probably the next time Bush loses contact with world opinion)

The United States has MORE than tried diplomacy...

And that is utter bollocks. Let me ask you...why is that the Swiss represent the US in Iran? The Iranians have no problem with having a US consular presence. Its the US that has withdrawn direct diplomatic representation.

Furthermore, the invasion and occupation of Iraq constitutes a violation of international law as a war of aggression as defined at Nuremberg.

Oops....sorry, wrong,

The UN has officially endorsed the US presence in Iraq. Nice try.

iran has every right as a sovereign state to arm and support insurgents directly or indirectly in Iraq to fight US troops.

Um..Iran has the right to cross the border into another nation to attack US troops? Since when? And they have been killing IRAQIS....in case you hadn't noticed, thats an act of war.

Like that is gonna happen.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/10/26/ahmadinejad/

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iran's new president has repeated a remark from a former ayatollah that Israel should be "wiped out from the map," insisting that a new series of attacks will destroy the Jewish state, and lashing out at Muslim countries and leaders that acknowledge Israel.

The remarks by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad -- reported by Islamic Republic News Agency -- coincide with a month-long protest against Israel called "World without Zionism" and with the approach of Jerusalem Day.

What makes you think that he isn't serious and that he would not hesitate to use a nuclear weapon in Israel? Your assurance is...astounding.

So does this mean the US will be delivering a declaration of war to the desk of the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran?

No, it means that any Iranian national in Iraq actively engaged in hostile actions towards US personnel is fair game. Makes perfect sense to me.

Nodinia: If Iran is allowed a major foothold as a pan islamic state, encompassing both Iran and Iraq, another Sept 11 wont be a matter of IF, it will be WHEN.

As well as tortured and locked up indefintely. And thats Guantanamo. What about the various "black" detention units?

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/06/17/181653.php

1. The detainees have direct access to the International Red Cross represenatativies contrary to the accusations that they have no outside contact. Also, all the detainees are allowed to write and receive mail from family.

Furthermore, the invasion and occupation of Iraq constitutes a violation of international law as a war of aggression as defined at Nuremberg.

Oops....sorry, wrong,

The UN has officially endorsed the US presence in Iraq. Nice try.

iran has every right as a sovereign state to arm and support insurgents directly or indirectly in Iraq to fight US troops.

Um..Iran has the right to cross the border into another nation to attack US troops? Since when? And they have been killing IRAQIS....in case you hadn't noticed, thats an act of war.

Like that is gonna happen.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/10/26/ahmadinejad/

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iran's new president has repeated a remark from a former ayatollah that Israel should be "wiped out from the map," insisting that a new series of attacks will destroy the Jewish state, and lashing out at Muslim countries and leaders that acknowledge Israel.

The remarks by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad -- reported by Islamic Republic News Agency -- coincide with a month-long protest against Israel called "World without Zionism" and with the approach of Jerusalem Day.

What makes you think that he isn't serious and that he would not hesitate to use a nuclear weapon in Israel? Your assurance is...astounding.

So does this mean the US will be delivering a declaration of war to the desk of the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran?

No, it means that any Iranian national in Iraq actively engaged in hostile actions towards US personnel is fair game. Makes perfect sense to me.

Nodinia: If Iran is allowed a major foothold as a pan islamic state, encompassing both Iran and Iraq, another Sept 11 wont be a matter of IF, it will be WHEN.

As well as tortured and locked up indefintely. And thats Guantanamo. What about the various "black" detention units?

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/06/17/181653.php

1. The detainees have direct access to the International Red Cross represenatativies contrary to the accusations that they have no outside contact. Also, all the detainees are allowed to write and receive mail from family.

2. The detainees have their food prepared according to Islamic guidelines. The call to prayer is broadcast for them to go to prayer. Each detainee has the direction to Meccah painted in their cell. They are allowed to practice their religion wihtout interference and are given the religious items they need to do so. They are allowed to observe Ramadan.

3. There are strict guidelines and training concerning human rights protections. If a service member sees a violation they are to report it and if asked to violate someone's human rights they are to consider it as an unlawful order. Those who violate are subject to prosecution

http://www.slate.com/id/2083612/

Upon leaving, it has been reported, each man received two parting gifts: a brand new copy of the Koran as well as a new pair of jeans. Not the act of generosity that it might first appear, the jeans, at least, turned out to be a necessity. During their stay (14-months on average), the detainees (nearly all of them) had gained an average of 13 pounds.

Now then....would you REALLY like me to post photos of what conditions are like for US troops and civilians taken by "insurgents"?

There is one HUGE difference between Gitmo and the terrorists, buddy,, and one you have yet to even begin to address.

The prisoners taken by the US and the Coalition are ALIVE AND WELL.

Oops....sorry, wrong,

The UN has officially endorsed the US presence in Iraq. Nice try.]
The presence has been legalised but the war and invasion was conducted "outside the charter".

Um..Iran has the right to cross the border into another nation to attack US troops? Since when? And they have been killing IRAQIS....in case you hadn't noticed, thats an act of war..]

They have far more justification to sponsor insurgency in Iraq than America had to invade. The US force is a belligerent and bellicose power on its border, and in order to defend itself it feels the need to help tie American forces down by sponsoring certain Shia groups.


What makes you think that he isn't serious and that he would not hesitate to use a nuclear weapon in Israel? Your assurance is...astounding...]

The fact that Israel has an advanced NCB program and approx. 400 warheads?


Nodinia: If Iran is allowed a major foothold as a pan islamic state, encompassing both Iran and Iraq, another Sept 11 wont be a matter of IF, it will be WHEN....]

Iran had nothing to do with NYC. Iran is a majority Shia state. Al Qaeda are Sunni. They attack Shia in various countries, including Iraq. Islam is not a monolith.



http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/06/17/181653.php


"An American soldier has revealed shocking new details of abuse and sexual torture of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay in the first high-profile whistleblowing account to emerge from inside the top-secret base. "
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1479040,00.html

"FBI Inquiry Details Abuses Reported by Agents at Guantánamo "
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/torture/27816prs20070103.html

And, as stated earlier, this doesnt cover the "black" detention centres, from which we know little. Similar abuses have been reported from Afghanistan.

There is one HUGE difference between Gitmo and the terrorists, buddy,, and one you have yet to even begin to address.

The prisoners taken by the US and the Coalition are ALIVE AND WELL.


Lets not get into "coalition". Its the Brit and Yank WASP show at the end of the day, not a big posse come to save the day. And the prisoners taken, are - as far as we know - alive. However as the CIA is not releasing the names of all the people held in various places, we've no way of knowing.

Okay...

They have far more justification to sponsor insurgency in Iraq than America had to invade. The US force is a belligerent and bellicose power on its border, and in order to defend itself it feels the need to help tie American forces down by sponsoring certain Shia groups.

I repeat the question.Under what "right" does Iranm have to croiss the border,send its own military in, under civilian garb, to attack US soldiers?.What you are describing is an act of WAR

The fact that Israel has an advanced NCB program and approx. 400 warheads?

What makes you think that he wont do it anyway?

Iran had nothing to do with NYC.

Never said it did. Stick to the point. I said that if they succeed the next 9/11 wont be ifm it will be when.

Fact.

Live with it.

Iran is a majority Shia state. Al Qaeda are Sunni. They attack Shia in various countries, including Iraq.

Al Qaeda did 9/11. Al Qaeda would dance in the streets to see more Americans die...or Australians, or New Zealanders , or Britons...

Kuta, Jakarta, USS Cole, Khobar Towers, WTC 1996, Nahar'ia, Ma'lot, Entebbe,TWA, Beirut Barracks........ want me to go on??

ALL of which happened BEFORE Pres Bush took office.

Islam is not a monolith.

Iran is an Islamic terrorist state, and a direct threat. If they get a nuclear weapon what in God's name makes you think they wont use it?

Ahmedinajad has stated repeatedly that he wants Israel destroyed. Going to now tell me he didn't say that?.

They dont CARE if they die.All they care about is how many they can kill in the process.

Lets not get into "coalition". Its the Brit and Yank WASP show at the end of the day, not a big posse come to save the day.

It's nothing of the sort, and how dare you minimise the contribution of the many nations involved.Debate me, fine, but don't ever insult my intelligence, or the very REAL contribution Australia has made in Iraq, Afghanistan and a dozen other places.

And as for WASP...thats utter rubbish.

Okay...
I repeat the question.Under what "right" does Iranm have to croiss the border,send its own military in, under civilian garb, to attack US soldiers?.What you are describing is an act of WAR.

The right of self defence, given that Bush and co had turned down a deal earlier and are threatening their borders.


What makes you think that he wont do it anyway?.

Because he does not have absolute power.


Never said it did. Stick to the point. I said that if they succeed the next 9/11 wont be ifm it will be when.?.

As Iran had nothing to do with the first attack, why has it got anything to do with the possibility of a second? Its an entirely false premise. Therefore its not a "fact", nor do I (or anybody else, IMO) have to "live with it".



Al Qaeda did 9/11. Al Qaeda would dance in the streets to see more Americans die...or Australians, or New Zealanders , or Britons...

Kuta, Jakarta, USS Cole, Khobar Towers, WTC 1996, Nahar'ia, Ma'lot, Entebbe,TWA, Beirut Barracks........ want me to go on??

ALL of which happened BEFORE Pres Bush took office...

Thats all lovely. It does not have anything to do with Al Qaeda being a Sunni muslim grouping who attack shia, or the fact that Iran is a Shia majority theocracy.

"Beirut barracks" was not carried out by Al Qaeda by the way. Entebbe was carried out by the secular Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the German RZ. Your grasp of the facts seems to be loose.

I also have no idea what the inaugral date of the Chimp in Chief has to do with anything I've so far covered.


Iran is an Islamic terrorist state, and a direct threat. If they get a nuclear weapon what in God's name makes you think they wont use it?...

Its an Islamic shia state. The Soviets had the bomb and didnt use it for much the same reasons I mentioned earlier. They had far more than Iran could ever hope to produce.


They dont CARE if they die.All they care about is how many they can kill in the process..

Thats the Sunni jihadists. They are not Shia Iranians. Again you seem confused.


It's nothing of the sort, and how dare you minimise the contribution of the many nations involved.Debate me, fine, but don't ever insult my intelligence, or the very REAL contribution Australia has made in Iraq, Afghanistan and a dozen other places..

Me? Mock the contribution of the stalwart supporters of freedom...like Togo...and Uzbekistan....Or those like Poland, who seem to have received various contracts and investement just before realising the middle east needed 'freedom and democracy' and needed it quick...

How many Australians are deployed in Iraq vs Americans?

And as for WASP...thats utter rubbish.

By nature if nothing else. Arrogant, dismissive, hypocritical, essentially racist, colonially minded. When I think of a better term, I'll use it.

Great,

First you state that Shi’a Iran is causing the Sunni insurgency…
Then you start attacking Iranian agents, drawing the US into a useless conflict with Iran…

Iran has gained a lot of influence in Iraq, but they are not supporting insurgents.
Not yet, do you really want to fight the Shi’a groups as well??!

Anyone else immediately think of this when they read the thread title:
http://wbzcrew.fanspace.com/images/elmer-fudd.jpg
"Be vewwy vewwy qwiet! I'm hunting Iwanians!"
Okay, it rarely happens - but this one caused me to burst into tears laughing. Well deserved:
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/Pergament.jpg

How many Australians are deployed in Iraq vs Americans?

Proportianately, considering relative population, recruitment pool and restrictions, and size of force maintained? Taking full acount of the fact that the US, being the largest power involved by a long way, naturally provides most of the command and logistical infrastructure?

Probably a number that is noticably, but not ridiculously, smaller.

But that's not the most important bit. The important bit is dismissing the entire armies of all countries as "WASPs". American Black soldiers? Small numbers of non-whites in other armies? Jews? Catholics? Athiests?

By nature if nothing else. Arrogant, dismissive, hypocritical, essentially racist, colonially minded. When I think of a better term, I'll use it.

So you're arogantly dismissing all White Anglo-Saxon Protestants as racist imperialists? How hypocritical. Not to mention racist.

I repeat the question.Under what "right" does Iranm have to croiss the border,send its own military in, under civilian garb, to attack US soldiers?.What you are describing is an act of WAR
Under the same right the USA had to go in Iraq in the first place. President Bush was the one to introduce "preemptive strike" to defend the motherland. It's just sweet irony that it bites the USA in the ass afterwards.



What makes you think that he wont do it anyway?
Mutually Assured Destruction.
The fact that the Mullah hold the control and that the president is mostly for show.
The fact that the statement wasn't a threath so much as a statement of his opinion. Much like I might say "The USA should be removed and replaced by 50 smaller countries."
The fact that the meaning of the statement was changed in the translation.


Never said it did. Stick to the point. I said that if they succeed the next 9/11 wont be ifm it will be when.

You know, China might be the next to strike. Or South Korea...
We better attack them too. Just in case.


Al Qaeda did 9/11. Al Qaeda would dance in the streets to see more Americans die...or Australians, or New Zealanders , or Britons...

Kuta, Jakarta, USS Cole, Khobar Towers, WTC 1996, Nahar'ia, Ma'lot, Entebbe,TWA, Beirut Barracks........ want me to go on??

ALL of which happened BEFORE Pres Bush took office.

And none of which has to do with Iran, I might add.
One has to wonder why USA gets targetted so much. Maybe it has something to do with their shitty foreign policy.


Iran is an Islamic terrorist state, and a direct threat. If they get a nuclear weapon what in God's name makes you think they wont use it?

Ahmedinajad has stated repeatedly that he wants Israel destroyed. Going to now tell me he didn't say that?.

They dont CARE if they die.All they care about is how many they can kill in the process.
Israel =/= USA. Iran is not, in any way, shape or form, a direct threat to the USA. Saying they are is delusional.

The only quote that says Ahmedinajad want to destroy Israel is the one you quoted earlier that has been explained to be empty rethoric. IT's just like when Bush says he's a uniter, empty rethoric.

I can guarantee you that those in power in Iran care a great deal if they die. Same with Al-Quaeda. Otherwise, Bin LAden would have strapped a bomb to his chest a long time ago.


It's nothing of the sort, and how dare you minimise the contribution of the many nations involved.Debate me, fine, but don't ever insult my intelligence, or the very REAL contribution Australia has made in Iraq, Afghanistan and a dozen other places.

And as for WASP...thats utter rubbish.

How dare you claim a coalition when half the contries are there because of incentive, coercion or have pulled out already. As for australians, the majority of the population is against their soldiers being there. Same as the UK. So much for a coalition.

*snip*

East Canuck! Long time no see! :D

About damn time. In fact, 28 years late. Props to President Bush for taking the gloves off and doing what we should have been doing all along. Hopefully we'll start publishing photos of dead Iranian agents.

Anyone who thinks "diplomacy" is going to stop Iran from supporting subversion in Iraq, let alone acquiring nuclear weapons, is dreaming. The only "diplomacy" the moolahs in Tehran and their butt-monkey A-Muddy-Dinner-Jacket are entitled to is a bullet.

Hopefully we'll start publishing photos of dead Iranian agents.


Yeah. Then you wouldn't have to search rotten.com for stuff to masturbate to.


Anyone who thinks "diplomacy" is going to stop Iran from supporting subversion in Iraq, let alone acquiring nuclear weapons, is dreaming. The only "diplomacy" the moolahs in Tehran and their butt-monkey A-Muddy-Dinner-Jacket are entitled to is a bullet.

I support Iran's right to nuclear deterrence. It seems like it's the only way to defend them against ass-pirates such as yourself.

East Canuck! Long time no see! :D

:D
Yeah, been lurking for a while what with being busy. Can you imagine: they make me work for my wage? The nerve!

Anyway, hiya. Hope all's going well.

But that's not the most important bit. The important bit is dismissing the entire armies of all countries as "WASPs". American Black soldiers? Small numbers of non-whites in other armies? Jews? Catholics? Athiests?

So you're arogantly dismissing all White Anglo-Saxon Protestants as racist imperialists? How hypocritical. Not to mention racist.

The term "WASP" has been used to describe a particular mindset/group with strictly referring to anglos etc for some time.

"Some people use it to refer to any powerful elite, with little regard to actual ethnicity or religion. "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WASP

About damn time. In fact, 28 years late. Props to President Bush for taking the gloves off and doing what we should have been doing all along. Hopefully we'll start publishing photos of dead Iranian agents.

Anyone who thinks "diplomacy" is going to stop Iran from supporting subversion in Iraq, let alone acquiring nuclear weapons, is dreaming. The only "diplomacy" the moolahs in Tehran and their butt-monkey A-Muddy-Dinner-Jacket are entitled to is a bullet.


Arent you supposed to be boycotting muslim pork products, or taking up some other equally brave frontline stance in the "war of terror"?

About damn time. In fact, 28 years late. Props to President Bush for taking the gloves off and doing what we should have been doing all along. Hopefully we'll start publishing photos of dead Iranian agents.

Anyone who thinks "diplomacy" is going to stop Iran from supporting subversion in Iraq, let alone acquiring nuclear weapons, is dreaming. The only "diplomacy" the moolahs in Tehran and their butt-monkey A-Muddy-Dinner-Jacket are entitled to is a bullet.
Some people never learn, do they?

About damn time. In fact, 28 years late. Props to President Bush for taking the gloves off and doing what we should have been doing all along. Hopefully we'll start publishing photos of dead Iranian agents.

Anyone who thinks "diplomacy" is going to stop Iran from supporting subversion in Iraq, let alone acquiring nuclear weapons, is dreaming. The only "diplomacy" the moolahs in Tehran and their butt-monkey A-Muddy-Dinner-Jacket are entitled to is a bullet.

So when are you shipping out, Rambo?

"Delusional"?? Iran has been financing and sponsoring terrorism for years.

You didnt know that? Sad.

So he was "misquoted" or taken out of context??

You're the one with delusions. He has said it more than once...and anyone who is a holocaust denier is already in lala land.

"Delusional"?? Iran has been financing and sponsoring terrorism for years.
So's the USA. What's your point? That they will finance groups to further their own iterest? Shocking!

You didnt know that? Sad.
Yes because I come here only to be patronized by other poster who have a post count below 20.

So he was "misquoted" or taken out of context??

You're the one with delusions. He has said it more than once...and anyone who is a holocaust denier is already in lala land.

Alright, buddy. Sources?
Come on, it shouldn't be so hard.

"Delusional"?? Iran has been financing and sponsoring terrorism for years.
Yeah. And? We invaded two countries thought to be supporting terrorism. One wasn't, the other we're still in. Even if it wasn't morally wrong and impossible to fund, finance and fight, it wouldn't work anyway.

You didnt know that? Sad.
Yeah. We did. We just don't nuke every country that hasn't sent us a Christmas card in the last 20 years. Speaking as a mother. (Bill Bailey Joke)

So he was "misquoted" or taken out of context??
Where did I say that, or anyone else on this thread, for that matter?

You're the one with delusions. He has said it more than once...and anyone who is a holocaust denier is already in lala land.
Are you accusing me of being a holocaust denier?

-snip-


Alright, buddy. Sources?
Come on, it shouldn't be so hard.

Let's see here...here's a warning to all supporter's of Israel:

Speaking to tens of thousands of supporters at a pro-Palestinian rally in the capital, Tehran, the Iranian leader addressed Israel’s allies: “It is in your own interest to distance yourself from these criminals... This is an ultimatum. Don’t complain tomorrow.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15343184/

and this...

TEHRAN, Iran — The president of Iran again lashed out at Israel on Friday and said it was "heading toward annihilation," just days after Tehran raised fears about its nuclear activities by saying it successfully enriched uranium for the first time.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,191819,00.html

hmmm...here's this too: (this is probably the most known)

"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, referring to Iran's revolutionary leader Ayat Allah Khomeini.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/archive/archive?ArchiveId=15816

Sorry, to many to list so here's this:

During his presidency, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speeches and statements have contributed to increased tensions between Iran and Israel, and between Iran and a few Western nations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel

I agree with those who have stated it's a declaration of war. I agree with the USA on eliminating the threat. Iran is probably the most responsible for making the Iraqi situation worse with Syria close behind. Both nations should have been warned from the beginning to not allow your citizens crossing over the border into Iraq and there will be harsh penalties.

Firstly, I'm sorry about this, because I might be a bit rude, but you are being ridiculous, and your argument needs to be torn to the ground and then possibly set on fire, due to it being utterly flawed.
Um..Iran has the right to cross the border into another nation to attack US troops? Since when? And they have been killing IRAQIS....in case you hadn't noticed, thats an act of war.
Since forever, it's a sovereign state, you moron. It can cross any border and attack anyone it likes. It might get its arse kicked, but it's perfectly allowed to.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/10/26/ahmadinejad/

What makes you think that he isn't serious and that he would not hesitate to use a nuclear weapon in Israel? Your assurance is...astounding.
The fact that that "wipe Israel off the map" shite has nothing to do with foreign policy and everything to do with Geography lessons in education.

Plus he's not going to use a nuclear weapon in Israel, the Persians are much cannier than that, and they know that it's a much better tool as a deterrent, and as one of the few states left by 2025 with oil, they're going to want all of the deterrents they can get come that time.

Ahmujenidad is not stupid. His regime might be nationalistic, and often anti-Semitic, but he knows full-well that he's not going to be able to defeat Israel by the way of force.
Nodinia: If Iran is allowed a major foothold as a pan islamic state, encompassing both Iran and Iraq, another Sept 11 wont be a matter of IF, it will be WHEN.
*sighs*

Yes, obviously that's the case, because the Persians are really up for a war with the US at the moment, just when it's getting fully rebuilt after the Iran-Iraq war. Obviously. And patently clearly.
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/06/17/181653.php

1. The detainees have direct access to the International Red Cross represenatativies contrary to the accusations that they have no outside contact. Also, all the detainees are allowed to write and receive mail from family.
I'm not even the beginnings of interested in hearing a blog post written by someone else, talking about the accounts of someone who is in the US Military.

There are more shocking reports from people who have been let out of Gitmo, and are still being tracked today, in the UK (see Jon Ronson's The Men Who Stare At Goats), and the International Red Cross has said itself that it doesn't get let in.

And that is utter bollocks. Let me ask you...why is that the Swiss represent the US in Iran? The Iranians have no problem with having a US consular presence. Its the US that has withdrawn direct diplomatic representation.


A consular presence eh? Look what happened when we had an embassy there? So what we should just willingly hand hostages over to the terrorists?

A consular presence eh? Look what happened when we had an embassy there? So what we should just willingly hand hostages over to the terrorists?
That was a fair while ago and IIRC it's only been about 3 weeks since the US stormed a Persian Embassy in Iraq.

Nice.

"Delusional"?? Iran has been financing and sponsoring terrorism for years.




So has America and Israel. What makes their shit smell any better?

Anyone else immediately think of this when they read the thread title:
http://wbzcrew.fanspace.com/images/elmer-fudd.jpg
"Be vewwy vewwy qwiet! I'm hunting Iwanians!"

Yup, in fact I was just starting to hunt down that cartoon.

That was a fair while ago and IIRC it's only been about 3 weeks since the US stormed a Persian Embassy in Iraq.

Nice.

May have been less then 30 years ago but does not make it any less realistic since the same militant regime is still in power, as the saying goes "a leopard does not change it's spots". And in the political world of today 30 years is nothing, especially if it helps your side you will use it but if it does not agree with your own points of view it becomes "irrelevant". One can not have it both ways.

The Iranians aren't better than animals, so it makes sense for us to hunt them.

The Iranians aren't better than animals, so it makes sense for us to hunt them.

Please MTAE, just get lost, your not fooling anyone.

Okay, it rarely happens - but this one caused me to burst into tears laughing. Well deserved:
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/Pergament.jpg
Yay! I finally get recognition for my labours!

I'm a happy hamster.

and your point? ? ?
Can't speak for the OP, but maybe his point was not that the US tracking Iranians in Iraq is dumb, it's the public way they're going about doing it that's dumb.

By turning it into a media circus, it only serves to alienate Iran even more and harden their position against the US. It gives them ammo in their own propoganda war against the US to brainwash their citizens even further into hating the US.
It also gives al Qaeda further 'proof' that the US hates all things Islam.
And it just makes Bush look like a boorish fool with his public statements. They're barely above his, "He tried to kill my Daddy" outburst 5 years ago which just goes to show he's learnt nothing in the intervening years as to international diplomacy.

Yay! I finally get recognition for my labours!

I'm a happy hamster.
Glad I could brighten your day. :)

I noticed earlier several people talking about "the Iranians" want to do this, "the Iranians" are trying to do that. 70% of Iranians are dissatisfied with the Shiite theocracy (sound like any numbers from here in the US?). 80% of Iranians have no problem with the American people, whatever their opinions about our politics. Likewise, a majority of Americans are opposed to the Iranian government but have no beef with their people. The Iranian people tend to look unfavorably upon our current administration but don't buy into the "death to America" propaganda. The only mutual hostility is between two increasingly unpopular regimes staring at each other over a blasted country (Iraq) and a controversial constructed state (Israel).

"But they're killing Iraqis!" So are we. We're killing the Iraqis we think deserve it (generally insurgents). So are they. We said it was OK to send forces, including many non-government-sponsored forces (yes, we have mercs in Iraq), into the country to conduct military operations and install a government aligned to our politics. All Iran is doing, in this case, is following our precedent. Now I think that Iran's government is reprehensible and I think that the operations they are conducting in Iraq are dangerous to the country's safety, stability, and well-being, but they are justified in doing so by the precedent we set.

Also, I'm sick of people using worse evils to justify lesser evils. Just because Iran has a really bad human rights record does not mean it's permissible for us to conduct human rights abuses of our own just because ours are less terrible than theirs. Using evil to justify evil is how most of the evil in the world is perpetrated.

Whilst allowing Iranian groups to go over the border (along the lines of not observing the part of the border a small group might cross over) they can clamp down on the border if they have the proper incentivesraq has become self sustaining by this point though.

Australia sent troops (2000 personel, 500 of which were specialist ground troops along with a frigate, some transport ships/planes 14 fighter aircraft, som other items also) and the leadership wholeheartedly committed itself some massive brown nosing, though I have to say that Tony got on top. Australia's PM wins hands down for admitting even less than bush!

And what did Australia get out of it? A crappy 'free' trade deal that almost guarantees a heavy reduction in the strength and range of quarantine measures.

Oh, and the invasion of Iraq more than likely prompted Iran to shift to a massive increase in the rate of nuclear material created. If they had not wanted to make a nuclear weapon before 2003 then events then showed that they would need one to survive as a states (this was confirmed later by the non invasion of North Korea testing a nulcear bomb).

I think you missed something here.

Australia sent troops (2000 personel, 500 of which were specialist ground troops along with a frigate, some transport ships/planes 14 fighter aircraft, some other items also) and the leadership wholeheartedly committed itself some massive brown nosing, though I have to say that Tony got on top. Australia's PM wins hands down for admitting even less than bush!

http://www.defence.gov.au/minister/Hilltpl.cfm?CurrentId=3897

For extraordinary gallantry in combat operations in Iraq from 19 March 2003 (20 March AEST) to 30 April 2003 in support of the denial of the threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

Conducting a mission of vital importance and strategic in nature, 1 Special Air Service Squadron executed bold and innovative plans with outstanding gallantry to deny the Iraqi forces the ability to employ weapons of mass destruction against regional neighbours or Coalition Forces.

As one of the first combat elements to enter Iraq, 1 Special Air Service Squadron’s deep operations typify the extraordinary skill, composure and valour of the individual members of this force. Their decisive and courageous actions during the most unpredictable and dangerous phase of the war were essential to set the conditions for future success. On night one of the conflict and without intimate conventional support or clear intelligence on enemy locations, capabilities or intentions, the men of 1 Special Air Service Squadron conducted complex and high-risk insertions to penetrate deep inside Iraq and rapidly dominate their area of operations.

Our Special Forces did a hell of a lot more than you realise. One word of advice, son, never underestimate the fighting Australians.

During WW2, a German commander was told he was to be fighting an Australian battalion.He promptly asked to be reassigned.

And I'd wager you cant even tell me what he is supposed to "admit" to.Exactly what do you know of Australian politics? Are you Australian?

John Howard has been elected and re elected with a sizable majority each and every time. Care to argue that?.

And what did Australia get out of it? A crappy 'free' trade deal that almost guarantees a heavy reduction in the strength and range of quarantine measures.

Try reading the agreement, and maybe you'll learn something.An d you know even less of quarantine measures for this nation, hell you cant even tell me which "range of quarantine measures" will be "reduced"?

The Free Trade Agreement is one of many that has been signed in the last ten years.You may also be interested to know that it looks very much like he will be re elected...and that means we APPROVE of his policies and his actions.

You see....we Aussies have better manners. We don't send people over to your country and try and influence your elections...and I refer to the Michigan Manatee (Michael Moore) and John Kerry's sister.

(She made a really great impression when she said that the Kuta bombing was because of the Iraq War and we should leave Iraq etc etc...until it was quietly pointed out to her that the bombing was in 2002 .)

And speaking as an Aussie who will vote FOR John Howard at the next election, I'd say he has done a damned good job.

We are proud of our troops and we are proud of all they have accomplished.

hmmm...here's this too: (this is probably the most known)

"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, referring to Iran's revolutionary leader Ayat Allah Khomeini.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/archive/archive?ArchiveId=15816



Bad translation.

Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad.

“The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time”

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article16218.htm

I am surprised at al Jeezera's bad reporting.

Lets see: The fighter planes (Hornets if I am not mistaken) would be that squadron.

I admit I wasn't particularily clear on the leadership; I mean the political leadership (in particular federal).

Also, aside from the fact that, whilst there was no WMD, they did a good job. Since when has criticising leadership meant you must automatically dislike the actual people on the ground (or ship floor/cockpit seat)?

I am proud of their capabilities and their efficiency. I am not proud of what they were used for.


Our Special Forces did a hell of a lot more than you realise. One word of advice, son, never underestimate the fighting Australians.

Of course the Australian Defence Force is highly trained, we spend more money on the average soldier (per capita) than many of the larger armies and thus it shows in the quality of the person's skills.

During WW2, a German commander was told he was to be fighting an Australian battalion.He promptly asked to be reassigned.

I'd like citation for that. Most German officers would not have much choice where they were assigned.

John Howard has been elected and re elected with a sizable majority each and every time. Care to argue that?.

Howard has been elected many times and has a habit of forgeting small election details (like saying he would not put a GST in place during his 1996 election campaign). He has used a mixture of appealing to nationalism and fear of 'boat people' (children overboard scandal anyone?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_overboard).

It didn't help that the opposition weren't good at actually functioning as a proper opposition. It is a bit disengenuous to say that the Liberal party would have gotten into power on its own (it had a partnership with the nationals). Even with Latham at the helm the Labor party still got only less than 3% (37vs40).

Try reading the agreement, and maybe you'll learn something.An d you know even less of quarantine measures for this nation, hell you cant even tell me which "range of quarantine measures" will be "reduced"?

The Free Trade Agreement is one of many that has been signed in the last ten years.*snip*
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/2004/1170673.htm

Now lets see: First of all they will be heavily pressured into using the U.S' more lax quarantine laws (thus potentially contaminating many agricultural products, which would reduce the amount of countries to sell to). That and the U.S has used the WTO to stop other 'free trade' (one of the principal exports that many hoped would get better penetration was sugar, of which nothing happened) signatories from having effective quarantine (all in the past decade of free trade agreements).

You see....we Aussies have better manners. We don't send people over to your country and try and influence your elections...

Wow, Victoria is the 51st state of U.S.A? When did we secede from Australia?

And speaking as an Aussie who will vote FOR John Howard at the next election, I'd say he has done a damned good job.

It is people like you that allowed Howard to let the questionable parts of his leadership slide (that and an apathetic voting population, poor effort of the major opposition party the tendency of an incumbant to get more votes, if all otherthings are considered equal.

What Howard has done over the past decade is ride off the boom in resource sales and increased petrol prices. He has hardly done anything to fix the skills shortage, done little to improve infrastructure.

This is the same person who, along with previous governments happily 'forgot' about East Timor's desire for independence in return for gaining the oil field in the ocean and when popular opinion forced him to intervene he coerced East Timor into giving up their oil after their independence (one of the few things that they could have used to help make the country stronger and more unified). http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2006/0706chaudhry.html

Also the same guy that has used GST as a way to centralise power to the federal government, while trying to spur nationalism along.

Now I'll probably vote for the Greens next federal election.

The Iranians aren't better than animals, so it makes sense for us to hunt them.
Pure genius.

So whose puppet are you, exactly?

Okay

Now I'll probably vote for the Greens next federal election.

Yeah,great idea, I heard they held their last meeting in a phone booth.

All policies of the Australian Greens have been reviewed, and the revised documents are nearing finalisation. As a result, our previous policy documents are no longer operative and have been withdrawn. We apologise for any inconvenience this may cause. The revised documents will be uploaded in February.

They have no idea of who they are, or where they are going, or what they want.

Oh wait, they do have policies...sort of....

http://www.ipa.org.au/files/greenpolicies.pdf

or here

http://www.nsw.greens.org.au/policies/summaries

The Greens support:

* improved drug and alcohol treatment and counselling services, partly funded from the tax on alcohol sales;

(More taxes)

* ending criminal sanctions for personal drug use, instead focusing on treatment and counselling as more effective approaches to minimising the harm done by drugs;

Free crack, free heroin....yeah thats a brilliant idea....:rolleyes:

* removing legal penalties for growing a small number of cannabis plants for personal use and an end to the use of sniffer dogs for general drug detection in the community;

Free marijuana with free rights to grow your own...and then when they are caught selling it...."hey its only for my friends"...a drug dealer is a drug dealer.Marijuana is not a "harmless drug".

* continuing the medically supervised injecting room, improved needle exchange and distribution programs, and a trial of heroin prescribed as part of a treatment program to registered addicts;

Yeah great, lets give them free drugs rather than wean them off them.

* supporting the prescription and regulated use of therapeutic drugs for medicinal purposes, regardless of their current legal status;

It was a Labor government that banned the use of Mist Brompton and Mist Ludwig for bone cancer patients.The Greens support that ban. Oh yeah, we're talking about drug addicts getting their drugs, not a proper review of drugs that actually HELP people.

Ever see someone in bone pain?I have.It aint pretty.

* banning advertising that promotes excessive alcohol consumption or tobacco use.

...whilst happily "redistributing " the tax rake ins from the same industry.

http://www.nsw.greens.org.au/policies/summaries/firearms

Gun grabbers.

http://www.nsw.greens.org.au/policies/summaries/lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender-and-intersex

recognition of gender diversity through the addition of “intersex”, “other” and “N/A” categories to gender descriptions; full funding of gender assignment and re-assignment services; and gender assignment for intersex people only with informed consent;

No thank you, my tax money does NOT go on someone having a sex change operation.Use that money to fund MORE NURSES and reopen all the closed beds.Reinstate hospital based nursing programs.

Oh this is cute....

http://www.nsw.greens.org.au/policies/summaries/multiculturalism-policy-summary

an increase in education in tolerance and diversity, and an end to all forms of racism;

Got a better idea. Kick Hilaly out of the country, revoke his citizenship, and remind all migrants that if they want to live here they better conform to our laws.

"End all racism"..except of course if you are muslim, then when you say kill all the jews, or women are cat meat, or Bilal Skaf is a "misunderstood victim of racism" you can claim "you were misquoted" or "taken out of context"...right,. Mr Trad?

The Green haven't got a clue.

O christ no, an Australian conservative....

Yeah,great idea, I heard they held their last meeting in a phone booth.

First of all that makes no sense except as a deliberate insult (and a rather poor one at that). If you are insinuating that you require money to be a proper party why don't you join in celebrating how the Liberals changed the law so that greater amounts of money could be donated without them having to say who it was?

They have no idea of who they are, or where they are going, or what they want.

Let me get this right. Revising the policies of the previous year (as you know, policies change even for conservatives) somehow means they have no clue? That redifining policies for the next year makes them incompetant? Look at Howard's backflip on emissions last year along with the rest of the government. So in their case not revising policies would not be political suicide?

Of course they know what they want. They want what all political parties want; the ability to enact their policies as much as pragmatically possible.



Oh wait, they do have policies...sort of....
http://www.ipa.org.au/files/greenpolicies.pdf
or here
http://www.nsw.greens.org.au/policies/summaries

The Greens support:
* improved drug and alcohol treatment and counselling services, partly funded from the tax on alcohol sales;
(More taxes)

Ok, lets look at this economically. So reducing the amount of overdoses (which cost a lot in health services) of both ilicit and legal drugs (such as alcohol) is wrong?

Then you get to the indirect costs; Divisions of family (increased cost of living if seperated/divorced), increased hosptial visits due to accidents (cars are the largest).

http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Institute_of_Public_Affairs

You actually used a 'think tank' that has ties to the current federal government, has a long line of denying enviromental damages caused by the disregard that some businesses have for the environment with little regulation would not target a political part that most likely will have the balance of power between the Labor party (centre left) and the coalition? (Liberals[centre right], Nationals [right/rural right]).


Free crack, free heroin....yeah thats a brilliant idea....:rolleyes:

Yeah, I mean counselling services to get people off drugs, greater education about the dangers of them is really the same as subsadising the sale of drugs or just plain giving them away.

So policy that exists right now really has stopped ilicit drug use?


Free marijuana with free rights to grow your own...and then when they are caught selling it...."hey its only for my friends"...a drug dealer is a drug dealer.Marijuana is not a "harmless drug".


Not suprisingly I think this will probably be dropped sometime in the next 2-3 years. That or like all things, it would be under regulation.


Yeah great, lets give them free drugs rather than wean them off them.

Same answer as before, counselling to reduce drug use. The heroin used in that would be similar to trying to reduce smoking with smoking patches. Also it is call a trial for a reason.


It was a Labor government that banned the use of Mist Brompton and Mist Ludwig for bone cancer patients.The Greens support that ban. Oh yeah, we're talking about drug addicts getting their drugs, not a proper review of drugs that actually HELP people.

Ever see someone in bone pain?I have.It aint pretty.


I have not heard of that, a news article would be handy to read.


...whilst happily "redistributing " the tax rake ins from the same industry.

http://www.nsw.greens.org.au/policies/summaries/firearms

Gun grabbers.

Let me get this right. In a politically stable country (where there is no need to use the U.S.A's excuse that they need their guns in case their government gets out of line) there is somehow a need for firearms outside of a farm.

Their 'gun grabber' policies are greater education about the dangers as well as a national gun licence with greater regulation to make sure that people unfit to own a gun cannot obtain one.


http://www.nsw.greens.org.au/policies/summaries/lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender-and-intersex

No thank you, my tax money does NOT go on someone having a sex change operation.Use that money to fund MORE NURSES and reopen all the closed beds.Reinstate hospital based nursing programs.

Considering the small amount of people that would actually use public when compared to private it is not really that big of a deal. Also, don't forget that a fair amount of that funding would be put into the healthcare system itself, thus forming new jobs, as almost all nurses/doctors that would be used in those procedures would be used in other fields.

Don't forget that there are many countries that would be more uptight about gender reassignment. Australia would attract many paying people.

And it does not reduce the amount decision making required for even the hormonal side of the process to continue.

[QUOTE=Free Pacific Nations;12287523]
Oh this is cute....

http://www.nsw.greens.org.au/policies/summaries/multiculturalism-policy-summary

Got a better idea. Kick Hilaly out of the country, revoke his citizenship, and remind all migrants that if they want to live here they better conform to our laws.

Personally, I am more worried about the centralisation done by the federal government (sometimes it is good to have the subnational state governments' to be the opposite party than the federal government).

However I (partially) agree with you. I think that some kind of account would have to be made with him. Aren't you sure that he has to comply with 'Australian Values'?

Why not kick out Danny Nalliah? He has made inflamatory comments about other religious groups. Oh wait, thats right, he supports the Family First party(christian right wing), and they give their preference to the Liberals (federal government). Don't forget those happy Exclusive Bretheren with their policy of not voting yet for some reason always fund the Liberal voting campaign

And how the federal government has allowed it's health minister to fund all family planning centres that are christian in nature and never even mention abortion.

We all know how well the Immagration department is :rolleyes: (note to non Australians; It has had some controversies)

"End all racism"..except of course if you are muslim, then when you say kill all the jews, or women are cat meat, or Bilal Skaf is a "misunderstood victim of racism" you can claim "you were misquoted" or "taken out of context"...right,. Mr Trad?


So, multiculturism which, apart from the extra knowledge and customs brought by others, as well as keeping a variable genetic stock and (usually) allowing more warmth in relations with other countries, is a bad thing?

Note that nowhere in the policies of the greens did it ever say being an apologist for someone comitting a serious crime. Skaf was a bastard and guess what? He was in put in gaol for comitting the crime.

The Green haven't got a clue

Wow, you had such a compelling argument.

O christ no, an Australian conservative....
Free Pacific Nations, have you encountered Potato Factory here yet? You'd get along famously.

Free Pacific Nations, have you encountered Potato Factory here yet? You'd get along famously.

QFT

Well, we all know the Iranians are working in Iraq. Now, as I was watching Scarborough Country, I found out that our forces are now going on missions to hunt down and kill Iranian militants in Iraq. Labeling them as KOS is one thing, but now we're actually hunting them? Has Bush ever heard of something called "diplomacy"? I mean, I myself haven't heard of any reports of the White House talking to Iran about these incidents.

Well, I guess everybody better get digging their fallout shelters.
This sounds more and more like Vietnam and Cambodia. What's next, a secret war?

It won't be another Vietnam until the people behind 'The Decider' tell him to get the war in Iraq (well occupation of Iraq) referred to instead as a 'Policing Action'