You know that Iran completed it's nuclear program. Now U.S should make a decision. What will U.S do? What would you do if you were U.S and What would you do if you were Iran??? 
Iran Completed It's Nuclear Program
| rabbani wrote: |
| You know that Iran completed it's nuclear program. Now U.S should make a decision. What will U.S do? What would you do if you were U.S and What would you do if you were Iran??? |
Finish the job and invade the country. We know that the Iranian Government is anti-semetic, It calls for the elimination of Israel, Supports Hamas and other terrorist organizations and is involves in the black market. Supports oppresive regimes and is a huge menace to society.
I don't like the idea of another front for the United States, and Iran isn't going to be so easy as Iraq and Afghanistan. I think Israel is ready to protect its own ass right now. Plus I don't think Iran has enough balls to attack anyone, especially with Israel's nukes pointed at Iran
errr completed yeah right, echoes of iraq all over again, sounds like the bush admin is trying a bid to take over the world, in a cowardly lying sort of way.
I think what'll happen in the next year is the U.S. will go to war, but not without the EU (the EU has shown a less hesitance in getting involved with this than with Iraq). I hope that this won't happen, but it's unreasonable to expect that Iran will stop being so erratic, especially with a leader who thinks the holocaust never happened.
| alkady wrote: | ||
Finish the job and invade the country. We know that the Iranian Government is anti-semetic, It calls for the elimination of Israel, Supports Hamas and other terrorist organizations and is involves in the black market. Supports oppresive regimes and is a huge menace to society. |
Even though we know this, the left would give us heat if we even whispered that we *might* do something. They'd rather us sit back and wait until Iran nukes somebody, or us. And then when Iran nukes us, they will start criticising Bush and saying "You knew, why didn't you go!" Funny how Democrats have a tendency to just make everything bad.
| druidbloke wrote: |
| errr completed yeah right, echoes of iraq all over again, sounds like the bush admin is trying a bid to take over the world, in a cowardly lying sort of way. |
What are we to do? Sit back and watch Iran nuke other nations? Wait until it's too late? As the saying goes, better safe than sorry. I would rather see us invade Iran then a nuclear bomb landing somewhere in the U.S.
For Iran to initiate any kind of nuclear offensive would be disastrous on a global scale, it certainly wouldn't just be the US landed in the shit. Although I think that is still some way away; uranium enrichment is still several steps away from the creation of weapons. I'd be in support of a pre-emptive strike if the matter cannot be resolved through diplomacy.
attacking IRan at this point of time is very very bad idea .
even the usa is feeling the pinch of high oil prices, and the oil companies making huge profits , it will give them another excuse .
anyway i dont think iran is even near to making a bomb right now , it should take them atleast 2 years .
what the world should do is impose sanctions on iran , kill its economy ,
and let them sit and think what is more important , nuke or food .
Iran is a good country , but they have a bad regime , Iran was good freedom loving country , before the revolution , where the mullahs in the name of islam brainwashed people . and now sit on top of thier heads ruling them ,
even the people of iran want freedom from this regime ,
where the USA went wrong ?
usa should have attacked iran first ,before iraq
now usa is in iraq ,but still fighting terrorists coming from iran , had it been the other way round ,it would have been a lot easier
but isnt the usa always want to do it the hard way
i feel really sad for bush , he has many issues at hand right now ,
like illegal immigrants ,
iran
Iraq
and then there osama (always )
i hope he gets wisdom from god and makes the right decision . cuz what ever he decides its gonna affect a lot of people around the world
cheers
even the usa is feeling the pinch of high oil prices, and the oil companies making huge profits , it will give them another excuse .
anyway i dont think iran is even near to making a bomb right now , it should take them atleast 2 years .
what the world should do is impose sanctions on iran , kill its economy ,
and let them sit and think what is more important , nuke or food .
Iran is a good country , but they have a bad regime , Iran was good freedom loving country , before the revolution , where the mullahs in the name of islam brainwashed people . and now sit on top of thier heads ruling them ,
even the people of iran want freedom from this regime ,
where the USA went wrong ?
usa should have attacked iran first ,before iraq
now usa is in iraq ,but still fighting terrorists coming from iran , had it been the other way round ,it would have been a lot easier
but isnt the usa always want to do it the hard way
i feel really sad for bush , he has many issues at hand right now ,
like illegal immigrants ,
iran
Iraq
and then there osama (always )
i hope he gets wisdom from god and makes the right decision . cuz what ever he decides its gonna affect a lot of people around the world
cheers
| alkady wrote: | ||
Finish the job and invade the country. We know that the Iranian Government is anti-semetic, It calls for the elimination of Israel, Supports Hamas and other terrorist organizations and is involves in the black market. Supports oppresive regimes and is a huge menace to society. |
Thats the craziest thing I ve ever heard.
If i were US, I would shut my *** and sit right at home because
1. I have enough on my platter like iraq(where i am making a large scale mess)
2. I have bitten of more than I can chew. Anymore and I will choke to death.
3. I must know that I am not the ruler of the world
4. Every country has its right to independence.
5. I even have nuclear weapons and how would I feel if all the other countries kick my *** because I have such weapons
6. I ve done enough to damage the world. Its high time I looked at problems in US and kept myself there
Although I agree with you on points 1. and 4., I don't with the rest.
2. The U.S. military is more than capable of going into Iran- but I promise you if it did, it would have help from the EU. The EU has said on many occasasions that it feels Iran is a threat to security in the area, and has hinted at getting involved militarily.
3. Ruler of the world- Iraq is less of a just cause than Iran as far as international security (I would definatley say if we were going to play the "humanitarian" angle, we should have gone to Africa and done something). We won't be "ruling the world" because there is a very good chance other nations in the area will go in with us (again, EU hinting at military action soon), so we won't be ruling the world, the world will be ruling itself.
5. Iran having nulcear weapons and the U.S. having nuclear weapons are completely different scenarios. One nation has a substantial reputation for irrational thought and action, with a clearly unstable leader. Although the U.S. may seem irrational and unstable, as far as other countries currently go we are near the stop as far as reasonable and rational actions and rulers (even though I don't think very higly of President Bush, I still think he is a much more competant ruler than Iran's ruler).
6. If we don't do anything abroad, we threaten our security at home. The whole purpose of a government is to protect it's people; if our government were to not get involved abroad, we would be asking to get owned (Al-Queda, no matter what they say, would still hate the U.S. and still strike us even if we pulled out of everything). If you want the U.S. economy to die, and it's people to suffer greatly, then not being involved abroad is a great way to go about it. If a government fails to protect it's people, it will get overthrown and chaos will ensume.
2. The U.S. military is more than capable of going into Iran- but I promise you if it did, it would have help from the EU. The EU has said on many occasasions that it feels Iran is a threat to security in the area, and has hinted at getting involved militarily.
3. Ruler of the world- Iraq is less of a just cause than Iran as far as international security (I would definatley say if we were going to play the "humanitarian" angle, we should have gone to Africa and done something). We won't be "ruling the world" because there is a very good chance other nations in the area will go in with us (again, EU hinting at military action soon), so we won't be ruling the world, the world will be ruling itself.
5. Iran having nulcear weapons and the U.S. having nuclear weapons are completely different scenarios. One nation has a substantial reputation for irrational thought and action, with a clearly unstable leader. Although the U.S. may seem irrational and unstable, as far as other countries currently go we are near the stop as far as reasonable and rational actions and rulers (even though I don't think very higly of President Bush, I still think he is a much more competant ruler than Iran's ruler).
6. If we don't do anything abroad, we threaten our security at home. The whole purpose of a government is to protect it's people; if our government were to not get involved abroad, we would be asking to get owned (Al-Queda, no matter what they say, would still hate the U.S. and still strike us even if we pulled out of everything). If you want the U.S. economy to die, and it's people to suffer greatly, then not being involved abroad is a great way to go about it. If a government fails to protect it's people, it will get overthrown and chaos will ensume.
To emphasise a point made above, the fact is that this is a potential threat on a global scale, so to assume that it is simply the US mock-imperialism at work again is plain wrong. The UN would certainly be behind action if diplomacy breaks down completely.
| SunburnedCactus wrote: |
| To emphasise a point made above, the fact is that this is a potential threat on a global scale, so to assume that it is simply the US mock-imperialism at work again is plain wrong. The UN would certainly be behind action if diplomacy breaks down completely. |
Agreed.
| Quote: |
| 3. I must know that I am not the ruler of the world
4. Every country has its right to independence. 5. I even have nuclear weapons and how would I feel if all the other countries kick my *** because I have such weapons |
3. The United States IS the SINGLE most powerful nation in the world. Now imagine if we used that power like places like Iran, Iraq, NK and many others would use it. You should thank your lucky stars that the United States is not hostile in the sense that many other nations are.
4. Your independance stops when you threaten others.
5. See 4 above. The US does not threaten to use nukes unless provoked.
I don't think it's fair for USA to go around saying what goes and what doesn't bottom line is Iran is only trying to protect itself from any potential enemies, like so many other countries do, the USA is only scared of other countries creating nuclear weapons, especially a country like Iran wich is not scared of using them. Why does the USA get to have weapons of mass destruction and others can't? Also USA can't just go around waging war agaisn't different countries it has already got alot of opposition for what happend in Iraq...
| AzTeK wrote: |
| I don't think it's fair for USA to go around saying what goes and what doesn't bottom line is Iran is only trying to protect itself from any potential enemies, like so many other countries do, the USA is only scared of other countries creating nuclear weapons, especially a country like Iran wich is not scared of using them. Why does the USA get to have weapons of mass destruction and others can't? Also USA can't just go around waging war agaisn't different countries it has already got alot of opposition for what happend in Iraq... |
You're wrong on so many levels.
The US has EVERY right to protect it's interests, especially when those interests are shared by the majority of the free world. If Iran would stop threatening to nuke people, and stop threatening to give nuke tech to "other nations" (gee, I wonder who...), and stop threatening to wipe other nations off the map, then they wouldn't have MOST OF THE WORLD against them and face a very real possibility of being spanked like the out of control children they are acting like.
(BTW, I don't think the US is "scared" of any country)
USA should back off! George Bush and hiss ass-smelling team makes the most and biggest world crap. I'm not saying that what Iran's doing is right, but anyway, USA should learn that their word is not the only one which counts something.
p.s.: I think USA should be scared of some countries. But some of her policitians are just way too dumb to see this.
p.s.: I think USA should be scared of some countries. But some of her policitians are just way too dumb to see this.
Oh well, the U.S. should just leave them be. Then when they nuke everyone, we'll get blamed for it (like always), but hey... we'll be gone up in smoke by nukes as well, so there won't be an America for anyone to complain about.
There's no complaining, it's only truth. Why are some Americans so hard to understand that their will isn't saint?
| spletko wrote: |
| There's no complaining, it's only truth. Why are some Americans so hard to understand that their will isn't saint? |
What is the rest of the world's will. To allow possibly devastating and dangerous technology into the hands of one of the most unstable areas in the world? To let them be, and free to kill whomever they please? Is that the will of the world?
Is the will of the world to be under USA will? To do anything USA wants others to do? Come on, don't be so patriotic...it's stupid.
BTW, I'm very sure that USA has many more dangers things as Iran, North Korea,... But, as always, USA goverment denies everything...liers.
BTW, I'm very sure that USA has many more dangers things as Iran, North Korea,... But, as always, USA goverment denies everything...liers.
| spletko wrote: |
| Is the will of the world to be under USA will? To do anything USA wants others to do? Come on, don't be so patriotic...it's stupid.
BTW, I'm very sure that USA has many more dangers things as Iran, North Korea,... But, as always, USA goverment denies everything...liers. |
Well no, but you can pick I suppose. Big weapons in unsafe hands, or people trying to stop those weapons from getting there. I don't feel the way I feel because I'm patriotic (and I am), I feel the way I feel because I think it's (mostly, not all) right.
And justify how "dangerous" the American government is.
American government is dangerous because everything it says, most of Americans believes. Even to lies.
And who are you to say whose hands are more dangerous. USA wants oil, wants more and more money, wants everything - including thing that do not belong to her. That's why USA attacked Iraq and Afghanistan. And now wants to attack Iran. American government isn't interested what most of other countries thing about her plans, it just wants to be "the one and greatest". And that STINKS!
Down with George Bush! He's a real terrorist!
And who are you to say whose hands are more dangerous. USA wants oil, wants more and more money, wants everything - including thing that do not belong to her. That's why USA attacked Iraq and Afghanistan. And now wants to attack Iran. American government isn't interested what most of other countries thing about her plans, it just wants to be "the one and greatest". And that STINKS!
Down with George Bush! He's a real terrorist!
| Soulfire wrote: | ||
Well no, but you can pick I suppose. Big weapons in unsafe hands, or people trying to stop those weapons from getting there. I don't feel the way I feel because I'm patriotic (and I am), I feel the way I feel because I think it's (mostly, not all) right. And justify how "dangerous" the American government is. |
america is the only country to have ever used nukes on other country ,
so who should be scared ?
but i do not want iran to get nukes too , cuz it will only increase tension in the middle east ,
the top 5 countries who are also the permanent members of the UN , are the biggest suppliers of weapons in the world , including terrorists ,
these 5 countries have the right to posses nuke, and use it against any other country , THat is so BS!
the UN is the biggest problem , cuz the members of the Un allow these 5 countries to dominate thier fate .
just think only 5 countries decide what should happen in this world , how bad is that ,
Mainly the UN is the Pupet of the usa , USA attacked Iraq without the support of the UN , and what the UN did ? nothing ,
what would happen if india would attack pakistan or iran attacked isreal without the approval of UN , then these countries would face sanctions ,
but for the usa , its all forgiven ,
my point is that no country should be allowed to have WMD .
and every country should be treated equally in the UN , there should be no permanent members in the UN , there should be a rotation policy ,where every one gets a chance ,
I hope that Mr Bush will not attack Iran, not only because of defeating them with their nuke program.
The prices of the oil market will go up to price that i can better leave my car at home. The price now is almost nutsy
now at the moment.
I hope that the US will think about another plan to let Iran stop their nuke program.
The prices of the oil market will go up to price that i can better leave my car at home. The price now is almost nutsy
now at the moment.
I hope that the US will think about another plan to let Iran stop their nuke program.
| Quote: |
| alkady wrote:
Finish the job and invade the country. We know that the Iranian Government is anti-semetic, It calls for the elimination of Israel, Supports Hamas and other terrorist organizations and is involves in the black market. Supports oppresive regimes and is a huge menace to society. |
Statements like these sound familiar, Arent such Moron Statements used by USA for evrey country or group it hates?
| ibay wrote: |
|
Statements like these sound familiar, Arent such Moron Statements used by USA for evrey country or group it hates? |
Statements like that (i.e. yours) do sound familiar: the oh-so-boring "usa sux lol i hate bush" statement which shows you have nothing interesting to say.
Global strategy analysis for dummies, v1.
---Module A, American history
---------------------------------------------
MEXICANS ARE EVIL!!! -> USA invades Mexico down to Texas -> We love Mexico
NAZIS ARE EVIL!!! ->USA imports 95% of the nazi scientists after their defeat->We love the new Germany!
COMMUNISM IS EVIL!!! -> Dictatorships trained and funded by the USA ravage America to 'fight the communist menace'-> We openly make business with the commies and import russian guns, oil, gems and other interesting stuff. And now those dumb guys down South obey us quietly.
AFGHANS ARE EVIL!!!! -> Afghanistan now lays a burning ruins pile ruled by american hating warlords-> Everything is ok with Afghanistan!! We even have American -capital A, of course, never forget the A- industries there
VENEZUELA IS EVIL!!! -> Venezuela stays #2 or #3 source for petrol even when it keeps rising
IRAQ IS EVIL!!! -> The gross failure of the war is now openly acknowledged even by the repugs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now you tell me that IRAN is evil and you demand seriousness?
It's just plain funny pal, there's nothing you can do to stop all of us from laughing in your face when you try to play that card AGAIN.
---Module A, American history
---------------------------------------------
MEXICANS ARE EVIL!!! -> USA invades Mexico down to Texas -> We love Mexico
NAZIS ARE EVIL!!! ->USA imports 95% of the nazi scientists after their defeat->We love the new Germany!
COMMUNISM IS EVIL!!! -> Dictatorships trained and funded by the USA ravage America to 'fight the communist menace'-> We openly make business with the commies and import russian guns, oil, gems and other interesting stuff. And now those dumb guys down South obey us quietly.
AFGHANS ARE EVIL!!!! -> Afghanistan now lays a burning ruins pile ruled by american hating warlords-> Everything is ok with Afghanistan!! We even have American -capital A, of course, never forget the A- industries there
VENEZUELA IS EVIL!!! -> Venezuela stays #2 or #3 source for petrol even when it keeps rising
IRAQ IS EVIL!!! -> The gross failure of the war is now openly acknowledged even by the repugs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now you tell me that IRAN is evil and you demand seriousness?
It's just plain funny pal, there's nothing you can do to stop all of us from laughing in your face when you try to play that card AGAIN.
| rabbani wrote: |
| You know that Iran completed it's nuclear program. Now U.S should make a decision. What will U.S do? What would you do if you were U.S and What would you do if you were Iran??? |
lets hope bush doesnt pull an iraq in invade there, hes ruined our reputation here :/
[quote="SunburnedCactus"]
And what has Bush to say? Almost everything he says, are lies. And, as seen, most of Americans believes him. That's sad... It's sad that people are such a sheeps and don't why they have their own brains.
Well, however, sooner or later the position will changed and the one attacked will be USA.
| ibay wrote: |
|
Statements like that (i.e. yours) do sound familiar: the oh-so-boring "usa sux lol i hate bush" statement which shows you have nothing interesting to say. |
Well, however, sooner or later the position will changed and the one attacked will be USA.
Hey spletko I didn't make this statement which u have written in your post:
Statements like that (i.e. yours) do sound familiar: the oh-so-boring "usa sux lol i hate bush" statement which shows you have nothing interesting to say.
My statement was:
Statements like these sound familiar, Arent such Moron Statements used by USA for evrey country or group it hates?
Please edit your post!
Statements like that (i.e. yours) do sound familiar: the oh-so-boring "usa sux lol i hate bush" statement which shows you have nothing interesting to say.
My statement was:
Statements like these sound familiar, Arent such Moron Statements used by USA for evrey country or group it hates?
Please edit your post!
Had USA played its role in a more friendly manner in this world , these issues would not have arose....But let me tell u one thing there iz a decline to every rise, look at Germany, Russia etc etc.... so i think the decline of USA is very near and who knows it might b by the hands if the iranians...... if all 5 UN members can hav NUKES so its the right of any country in the world to have em...............JUSTICE SHUD PREVAIL
I've missed so much...
And the US saved untold tens of thousands of lives on both the US and Japanese sides by doing so. It also brought a close to the threat of the Axis taking over the world.
Nobody, unless you're building nukes and threatening other countries with them.
| Devil wrote: |
|
america is the only country to have ever used nukes on other country , |
And the US saved untold tens of thousands of lives on both the US and Japanese sides by doing so. It also brought a close to the threat of the Axis taking over the world.
| Quote: |
| so who should be scared ? |
Nobody, unless you're building nukes and threatening other countries with them.
| S3nd K3ys wrote: |
| I've missed so much...
And the US saved untold tens of thousands of lives on both the US and Japanese sides by doing so. |
And killed much more.
| spletko wrote: | ||
And killed much more. |
It is widely accepted that the lives saved far out-weighed those lost, (especially if you're an American)
Hi, K3ys, nice to see you back.
Exactly. But that perspective you are only told in US Highschools, my school in Germany just left it out. Still, they didnt make you look bad, they just didnt mention it.
| Billy Hill wrote: |
|
It is widely accepted that the lives saved far out-weighed those lost, (especially if you're an American) |
US (high)school teach only what's good for USA name.
Good Day all,
Here are my points regarding this matter.
We might hate the present Iranian regime, or do not agree with some/all of its policies, but the facts are:
1- Iran had already signed the nuclear treaty that prevents the spread of nuclear weapons, while other countries in the region such as Israel, India, Pakistan refuse to do so.
2- Iran is allowing the international nuclear agency to do regular inspections, including surprise visits, while other countries such as those mentioned above refuse to do so.
3-Iran had clearly announced that their nuclear program is for civil purposes and that they will never develop nuclear weapons. The international nuclear agency can provide such guarantees through its cooperation with Iran and its regular inspection to nuclear facilities. Bear in mind that other countries in the region, including those mentioned above, have already announced the development of their own nuclear weapons.
4- The present Iranian regime did not initiate any attack on any other country. In fact, Iran was subjected to several types of attacks from other countries such as Iraq and USA. The previous regime in Iraq has even used chemical weapons on Iran during the Iran-Iraq war. When the US navy fired a rocket on civilian airplane and knocked it down killing hundreds of civilians on board, the Iranian government did not even retaliate.
Based on these facts, there is no reason to attack Iran.
I urge the Amercians and the rest of the world to avoid the choice of war and to continue all other diplomatic negotiations and dialogue to prevent military operations in the region. War is a catastrophe and we should avoid it whenever possible.
Peace on all.
Bangala, from the Persian Gulf
Here are my points regarding this matter.
We might hate the present Iranian regime, or do not agree with some/all of its policies, but the facts are:
1- Iran had already signed the nuclear treaty that prevents the spread of nuclear weapons, while other countries in the region such as Israel, India, Pakistan refuse to do so.
2- Iran is allowing the international nuclear agency to do regular inspections, including surprise visits, while other countries such as those mentioned above refuse to do so.
3-Iran had clearly announced that their nuclear program is for civil purposes and that they will never develop nuclear weapons. The international nuclear agency can provide such guarantees through its cooperation with Iran and its regular inspection to nuclear facilities. Bear in mind that other countries in the region, including those mentioned above, have already announced the development of their own nuclear weapons.
4- The present Iranian regime did not initiate any attack on any other country. In fact, Iran was subjected to several types of attacks from other countries such as Iraq and USA. The previous regime in Iraq has even used chemical weapons on Iran during the Iran-Iraq war. When the US navy fired a rocket on civilian airplane and knocked it down killing hundreds of civilians on board, the Iranian government did not even retaliate.
Based on these facts, there is no reason to attack Iran.
I urge the Amercians and the rest of the world to avoid the choice of war and to continue all other diplomatic negotiations and dialogue to prevent military operations in the region. War is a catastrophe and we should avoid it whenever possible.
Peace on all.
Bangala, from the Persian Gulf
| faker_phil wrote: |
| Exactly. But that perspective you are only told in US Highschools, my school in Germany just left it out. Still, they didnt make you look bad, they just didnt mention it. |
And until just recently, the kids in Japanese schools were taught that THEY won the war...
| bangala wrote: |
|
1- Iran had already signed the nuclear treaty that prevents the spread of nuclear weapons, 2- Iran is allowing the international nuclear agency to do regular inspections, 3-Iran had clearly announced that their nuclear program is for civil purposes and that they will never develop nuclear weapons. 4- The present Iranian regime did not initiate any attack on any other country. |
Briefly, bangala,
1) Iran CONTINUES to blatently say they will "share" their nuke technology with others.
2) Iran has threatened to block these Inspectors.
3) Iran has clearly announced that they have intentions of 'wiping Israel off the map', and have planned attacks on the US and Europe. (See "A World Without Zion")
4) The Iranians are the single biggest supporter of terrorists world wide.
Do you think it's simply by chance that the US is in TWO countries that border Iran?
Then you've got Israel over there with their twitching finger on the button.
My guess is that Iran is going to continue to make these stupid threats and that soon they will be feeling the pinch of economic sanctions, then military strikes.
I saw a quote in your account S3nd K3ys about Quran:
Quran 8:39:"So, fight them till all opposition ends and the only religion is Islam."
you must know that you had a bad mistake. First you must know the meaning of previuos part. Second you must know the meaning of the part you are talking about. Here is the meaning of these parts:
( 38 )Say to those who disbelieve, if they desist (hostility), that which is past shall be forgiven to them: and if they return, then what happened to the ancients has already passed
( 39 )And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah But if they desist, then surely Allah sees what they do
As you see Muslims shouldn't fight with Christians and other people. they should fight with people who do not believe Allah or god. Also it says that the religion should be for Allah and Christians also pray for god(Allah). There isn't any different between allah and God. Please be careful. We don't want to fight anyone.
Quran 8:39:"So, fight them till all opposition ends and the only religion is Islam."
you must know that you had a bad mistake. First you must know the meaning of previuos part. Second you must know the meaning of the part you are talking about. Here is the meaning of these parts:
( 38 )Say to those who disbelieve, if they desist (hostility), that which is past shall be forgiven to them: and if they return, then what happened to the ancients has already passed
( 39 )And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah But if they desist, then surely Allah sees what they do
As you see Muslims shouldn't fight with Christians and other people. they should fight with people who do not believe Allah or god. Also it says that the religion should be for Allah and Christians also pray for god(Allah). There isn't any different between allah and God. Please be careful. We don't want to fight anyone.
Hmm.. IMO Iran should act responsibly now.
| rabbani wrote: |
| I saw a quote in your account "S3nd K3ys" about Quran:
Quran 8:39:"So, fight them till all opposition ends and the only religion is Islam." you must know that you had a bad mistake. First you must know the meaning of previuos part. Second you must know the meaning of the part you are talking about. Here is the meaning of these parts: ( 38 )Say to those who disbelieve, if they desist (hostility), that which is past shall be forgiven to them: and if they return, then what happened to the ancients has already passed ( 39 )And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah But if they desist, then surely Allah sees what they do As you see Muslims shouldn't fight with Christians and other people. they should fight with people who do not believe Allah or god. Also it says that the religion should be for Allah and Christians also pray for god(Allah). There isn't any different between allah and God. Please be careful. We don't want to fight anyone. |
This is a good point. It is important to take excerpts from the Quran (and in fact any text source) in the correct context, or the meaning can easily be skewed.
S3nd K3ys I was expecting a more rational argument from you, not to express your feelings and emotions lol. By the way, USA has military presence everywhere nearby Iran (NOT only in 2 countries that border Iran). In addition to the GCC countries and the Persian Gulf, US forces are present in all neighbours of Iran.
| bangala wrote: |
| S3nd K3ys I was expecting a more rational argument from you, not to express your feelings and emotions lol. |
Rational? Only expressing my feelings and emotions?
I must have missed one of my posts that must have contained that kind of stuff, because the post I'M reading has very little to do with my personal 'feelings' and more to do with the facts of the situation... something which you, bangala, fail to mention.
Also, I'm quite well aware of where the US military is in relation to the threats in the ME like Iran. Perhaps your confusion continues here, in that there is a difference in 'having a military presence' and 'having an active military presence'. The US is 'active' in Iraq and Afghan, with enough technology and firepower to take care of any threat some little turd can come up with over there.
| S3nd K3ys wrote: |
|
Also, I'm quite well aware of where the US military is in relation to the threats in the ME like Iran. Perhaps your confusion continues here, in that there is a difference in 'having a military presence' and 'having an active military presence'. The US is 'active' in Iraq and Afghan, with enough technology and firepower to take care of any threat some little turd can come up with over there. |
Let's see who is confused here:
You've mentioned at the begenning that " the US is in TWO countries that border Iran "
and now you are saying that you were referring to "an active military presence"
Are you aware that the US marines are monitoring (sometimes physically inspecting) all ships in the Persian Gulf to the south of Iran?
Did you hear about the US strike on a claimed terrorist meeting in Pakistan last January?
Are you aware that Qatar is the principal staging area for American ground forces in the Gulf? This is the US Army's largest pre-positioning facility outside the US.
If these examples are not described as " Active " how do you define them?
Before becoming " Active " in Iraq and Afghanistan anyway, the US was and had to be " Active " in Turkey, Kuwait, KSA, Pakistan, the Persian Gulf, .. etc. Without its active presence in these countries, invasion of Afganistan and Iraq wouldn't be possible.
if i was us , i won't give up to a country like iran .. that suddently come and want to bully the international rules ... another aspect is that giving up to iran means to accept the russian , and i think that cold war has not ended ... it's now goin on but in other zones ..
and if i was iran ,, i would change my policies .. and realize that i can not stand to will of international community
and if i was iran ,, i would change my policies .. and realize that i can not stand to will of international community
--> And the US saved untold tens of thousands of lives on both the US and Japanese sides by doing so. It also brought a close to the threat of the Axis taking over the world.
yeah save a few tens of thousands and kill quarter of a million, there is never ever a justifiable reason for bombing civillions, and this was an atrocity, what was commited by america at the end of wwII was nothing less than a war crime, and had every bit as much to do with showing the USSR who was boss than ending the war. Im not anti american, there are loads of good people over there, im jut not keen on their tastes in presidents.
yeah save a few tens of thousands and kill quarter of a million, there is never ever a justifiable reason for bombing civillions, and this was an atrocity, what was commited by america at the end of wwII was nothing less than a war crime, and had every bit as much to do with showing the USSR who was boss than ending the war. Im not anti american, there are loads of good people over there, im jut not keen on their tastes in presidents.
Heh... haate to drag up a very early post but I think this should be discussed.
As opposed to the USA from which members of the administration have made blatant anti-muslim comments, calls for the elimination of "rogue states" (anyone who opposes their views and has military capability to make a nuisance), supports terrorist organisations (the CIA funded and armed Al Quaeda cells so they could fight common enemies the middle east and sold weapons to Iraq in the last decade), supports oppressive regiemes (see: Israel, occupation and segregating walls to fence in palestinians.
I don't particularly disagree with the US stance on the above items except in a "serves you right" way for the Al Quaeda and Iraq thing but remember that it is very easy to take the US and take the same argument.
Also....
Yes I agree on the first part but you can't really play self-righteous and say you saved lives. The idea was to save American lives (saving Japanese lives was a nice side effect), if it were not for the A-Bomb then the US invasion of Japanese occupied islands was unsustainable due to the casualties they were taking.
I disagree with the act but that's easily done in retrospect. Bad things happen in war and remember that in WW2 American was actually doing its best to be isolationist.
Also, a minor point but they did not stop the axis taking over the world by using the A-bomb. That's an incredibly stupid thing to say. By this point in the war Germany had already been defeated and Japan was on the defensive having to defend its own soil from the Allies.
| alkady wrote: |
| Finish the job and invade the country. We know that the Iranian Government is anti-semetic, It calls for the elimination of Israel, Supports Hamas and other terrorist organizations and is involves in the black market. Supports oppresive regimes and is a huge menace to society. |
As opposed to the USA from which members of the administration have made blatant anti-muslim comments, calls for the elimination of "rogue states" (anyone who opposes their views and has military capability to make a nuisance), supports terrorist organisations (the CIA funded and armed Al Quaeda cells so they could fight common enemies the middle east and sold weapons to Iraq in the last decade), supports oppressive regiemes (see: Israel, occupation and segregating walls to fence in palestinians.
I don't particularly disagree with the US stance on the above items except in a "serves you right" way for the Al Quaeda and Iraq thing but remember that it is very easy to take the US and take the same argument.
Also....
| Quote: |
| And the US saved untold tens of thousands of lives on both the US and Japanese sides by doing so. It also brought a close to the threat of the Axis taking over the world. |
Yes I agree on the first part but you can't really play self-righteous and say you saved lives. The idea was to save American lives (saving Japanese lives was a nice side effect), if it were not for the A-Bomb then the US invasion of Japanese occupied islands was unsustainable due to the casualties they were taking.
I disagree with the act but that's easily done in retrospect. Bad things happen in war and remember that in WW2 American was actually doing its best to be isolationist.
Also, a minor point but they did not stop the axis taking over the world by using the A-bomb. That's an incredibly stupid thing to say. By this point in the war Germany had already been defeated and Japan was on the defensive having to defend its own soil from the Allies.
| druidbloke wrote: |
|
yeah save a few tens of thousands and kill quarter of a million, there is never ever a justifiable reason for bombing civillions, |
I have to disagree with you here. I think it's a great thing to TRY to avoid civilian casualties, but in war, it's gonna happen. In WWII, LOTS of cities were bombed and destroyed by both sides. Most books I've read agree that the loss on life from the 2 A-bombs, while horrific, saved more lives in the long run. Remember, this was a war we were staying out of until the Japanese attacked Pearl before a formal declaration of war was announced.
Maybe I missed it, but are those saying that we could finish of Iran easily forgetting that we still haven't finished off Iraq or Afghanistan yet? Both these were considered push-overs by our leaders... until it was to late.
They could've been push-overs. We could've just nuked their @$$3$ into the year 3000 and been on with our business. But we're actually trying to make change, and as we can clearly see, people don't accept change as easily as one would hope.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| They could've been push-overs. We could've just nuked their @$$3$ into the year 3000 and been on with our business. But we're actually trying to make change, and as we can clearly see, people don't accept change as easily as one would hope. |
Not many people like change being forced down their throat...But regardless, the point is we've got troops in Afghanistan, Iraq and now I guess the Mexican border. If we didn't get in and out of Iraq and Afghanistan quickly, why should Iran be any different? I'm not saying we should or shouldn't go in. I'm just saying show us the plan that will make this different first before we rush in again.
I agree, HoboPelican, there needs to be some sort of plan developed that can be implemented instead of the organized chaos we have going on right now.
But in reality, we need to let Iran use their technology to say, produce energy... Because it could help them a lot. But where do we draw the line, what if they have weapons, what if they aim them at us, then what do we do?
It's sort of a touchy situation, and given our current situation, it's not a good idea to do anything as drastic as invading Iran, maybe some good communication would be a start.
But in reality, we need to let Iran use their technology to say, produce energy... Because it could help them a lot. But where do we draw the line, what if they have weapons, what if they aim them at us, then what do we do?
It's sort of a touchy situation, and given our current situation, it's not a good idea to do anything as drastic as invading Iran, maybe some good communication would be a start.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| I agree, HoboPelican, there needs to be some sort of plan developed that can be implemented instead of the organized chaos we have going on right now.
But in reality, we need to let Iran use their technology to say, produce energy... Because it could help them a lot. But where do we draw the line, what if they have weapons, what if they aim them at us, then what do we do? It's sort of a touchy situation, and given our current situation, it's not a good idea to do anything as drastic as invading Iran, maybe some good communication would be a start. |
I agree whole-heartedly, man. Communication is a great place to start. But it is not gonna be easy, there is a whole lot of distrust between us...
I don't have the answer, but I personally think an attack would be a disaster....Of course, George seldom asks me anything anymore.
Sometimes I just want to personally grab every single world leader, sit them down, and give them some sort of therapy session where we work out all of the differences... Because in reality, we're all just people. When you stare at the earth from space, there are no lines drawn, there's no countries, there's just land... Our land. And we're all humans, all like each other. It's sort of weird to think about how truly unnecessary war is, because war has been going on since, well, forever.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| Sometimes I just want to personally grab every single world leader, sit them down, and give them some sort of therapy session where we work out all of the differences... Because in reality, we're all just people. When you stare at the earth from space, there are no lines drawn, there's no countries, there's just land... Our land. And we're all humans, all like each other. It's sort of weird to think about how truly unnecessary war is, because war has been going on since, well, forever. |
A world movement...Smack some sense into your leader! I like it.
Peace, all, I'm a ghost.
I have taken a glance at previous post, and I also want to express my opinions about this respect.
I live in Turkiye and as you may know Turkiye is the second nation that dislike United States. All we could see from here, America brought nothing but thousands of children's blood, rapes Iraqi people and severely damage every living creature in Iraq. But what Usa declared to whole world was quite different. She said "we will bring justice and democracy to Iraq". Everyone knew that It was not for democracy or sth else , It was for oil which ensure satisfaction of Americans. But nobody has objected because of Super Power's strength..
When Usa was about to declare war to Iraq they blamed Iraq goverment with same things. Now they blame Iran with having nuclear missiles within country. Come on, just be honest to yourself a minute and confess that you will do the same .... in Iran like Iraq and you won't find anything valuable to prove your blames.
Thats what most people in Turkiye thinks and even if Iranians betrayed to our ancestors (The Ottomans) we can't be the supporters of killing machines which will attack thousands of innocent muslims in the area..
I live in Turkiye and as you may know Turkiye is the second nation that dislike United States. All we could see from here, America brought nothing but thousands of children's blood, rapes Iraqi people and severely damage every living creature in Iraq. But what Usa declared to whole world was quite different. She said "we will bring justice and democracy to Iraq". Everyone knew that It was not for democracy or sth else , It was for oil which ensure satisfaction of Americans. But nobody has objected because of Super Power's strength..
When Usa was about to declare war to Iraq they blamed Iraq goverment with same things. Now they blame Iran with having nuclear missiles within country. Come on, just be honest to yourself a minute and confess that you will do the same .... in Iran like Iraq and you won't find anything valuable to prove your blames.
Thats what most people in Turkiye thinks and even if Iranians betrayed to our ancestors (The Ottomans) we can't be the supporters of killing machines which will attack thousands of innocent muslims in the area..
 |