UAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3564 times:
Seems Iran is stepping up the rhetoric, and the US is responding with sending another (3rd) aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf. President Obama said in the State of the Union address that he would not take any option, including a military option, to make sure that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon.
The people who run that country aren't stupid, and they have to know that the US, but also the world in general, is just itching for a reason to remove them from power. Attacking anyone is going to be that reason. Especially if it's a NATO country. It wouldn't be like Iraq, where there was serious debate over the validity of the war, and only a few countries went in. It would be like Afghanistan, where the entire world was in support, and helped out.
lewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3096 posts, RR: 6 Reply 2, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3533 times:
Unless by US soil you mean an embassy or something, I am not sure how they would even come close to doing that before being blown back to the 10th century.
That's all Iran is doing it. What's his name, president or Iran? The bearded dude? He's just the "weasel" behind the bully.
Not that there's any bully on this case. But there's always a little guy, behind any bullies and those - the little guys - are always barking stuff. But never do anything.
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 4, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3486 times:
Quoting lewis (Reply 2): Unless by US soil you mean an embassy or something, I am not sure how they would even come close to doing that before being blown back to the 10th century.
I would guess terrorism.
Come on Iran, you are only feeding into the war propaganda machine, it's really not helping your case at all
jetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1518 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3453 times:
Well good luck with that. That third carrier group is a go ahead, we dare you type of deal IMO. I don't think Obama is at all provoking them, but it does send a clear message. I understand they have a large military but how strong is their capability to actually hit the US mainland? I'm going to guess pretty small.
Blue
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 6, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3406 times:
Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 5): I don't think Obama is at all provoking them, but it does send a clear message.
What message is that? How is it not provoking them? Why don't we quit pissing them off so we don't have to call their bluff. Sure we could wipe them off the face of the Earth, but what good would that do, and at what cost? I don't want another (preventable) 9/11
Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 5): I understand they have a large military but how strong is their capability to actually hit the US mainland? I'm going to guess pretty small.
Conventionally, basically 0. But all it took was 19 guys to kill 3000 of our civilians.
And I'm not being a biatch or anything. We as a country need to stand up for ourselves and not let others push us around. But this whole Iran thing is completely unnecessary. They don't like us, they have reason not to like us, so why do we have to "assert our power" in the region?
steeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 8524 posts, RR: 22 Reply 7, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3388 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 1): The people who run that country aren't stupid, and they have to know that the US, but also the world in general, is just itching for a reason to remove them from power. Attacking anyone is going to be that reason. Especially if it's a NATO country. It wouldn't be like Iraq, where there was serious debate over the validity of the war, and only a few countries went in. It would be like Afghanistan, where the entire world was in support, and helped out
I think I could name quite a few countries that would like to send Iran back to the stone age... That is one scary country run by some very scare fellows...
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
Quokkas From Australia, joined Jan 2012, 440 posts, RR: 6 Reply 8, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3384 times:
So for years the US and others have publicly stated that they are prepared to attack and/ or invade Iran, in addition to attempts to economically cripple the country and this is not seen as being threatening or provocative. When Iran, having seen the US and others invade other countries in the region and having been invaded by Iraq with the encouragement of the West, responds by saying that if attacked it will respond in whatever way it can, this is called a threat and a provocation?
Credible evidence? Now where have I heard that before? Oh yes, those weapons of mass destruction that were spirited out of Iraq in the back of a taxi, maybe? I well remember the footage on television after the invasion of Iraq purporting to show the discovery of a potential chemical weapons factory. The "inspector" used the very scientific method of ascertaining the precise nature of the dangerous chemical of sticking his finger into some powder and licking it! I suppose that had he dropped dead on the spot that would have been proof enough. Fortunately this particular "weapon of mass destruction" turned out to be milk powder, despite the "credible evidence" to the contrary.
Have you noticed that when someone else has or may have something it is a weapon of mass destruction, but when the "good guys" have the same thing it is a defensive shield?
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 9, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3377 times:
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 8): Have you noticed that when someone else has or may have something it is a weapon of mass destruction, but when the "good guys" have the same thing it is a defensive shield?
Quokkas From Australia, joined Jan 2012, 440 posts, RR: 6 Reply 11, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3347 times:
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 9): But Iran said they want to wipe Israel off the map!
Iran clearly wants the end of the Israeli state as a Zionist construct in pretty much the same way as the West wanted to see the end of the former USSR. This did not mean exterminating the entire population of the USSR but the desire to see a country that was capitalist based and democratic. In Iran's case it means the recognition of Palestine but not genocide or extermination of the Jewish population.
Iran is unusual in that it doesn't support a two-state solution but many of those who profess support take actions that make one unlikely. However, that's perhaps the theme of another thread.
UAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3347 times:
I think by attack, they are saying some sort of state funded terrorist attack in the US against transportation, infrastructure, and buildings that hold some sort of US national sentiment or importance. I highly doubt they are going to saddle up as a country and come our direction.
However, even a state funded terrorist plot would render themselves bleeding from the inside with the response. I'm fairly certain it's rhetoric, but it seems the rhetoric is escalating more than it has before.
Of course, this is an election year too for the US, perhaps the Obama administration is flexing it's vocal muscles as well to appease the war-happy people of this country.
Personally, I don't see either side attacking each other, especially the us in anything preemptive. Iran it would equal death for their nations political system, as well as many civilians. For the US, world condemnation and reminiscence of the Bush era.
ltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 11686 posts, RR: 8 Reply 13, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3323 times:
Of course, most of what is going on is a lot of saber rattling on both sides as well as huge questions as to the accuracy and impartiality of info on Iran's nuke program. I suspect much of it is via Israel who may be hyping up the alleged nuke bomb development in Iran to gain support for their often controversial policies.
There is 70+ years of bad history between Iran and the USA. Because of the oil there and the fears of an expanding Soviet Union in the 'cold war' era, we supported a government to be friendly to the West, mainly with the forceful placing of the Shah Pavali family that repressed the conservative Islamic Imams. That in turn caused the rise of the Islamic Republic, the chasing out of the Shah, the USA Embassy Hostage Crises from late 1979 to the day Ronald Reagan took office in 1981 and a largely hard core Islamic state. Since then, they have pushed a message of and have supported hate toward the Western governments (although not most people), especially the USA and Israel They have supported terror against Israel (via Syria and Lebanon) and given moral support to those against the USA. In recent years, there is good reason to consider they getting a nuke weapon, even a 'dirty' one to be used vs. Israel, to gain position in the Islamic world.
Of course too, you have the extreme right wing, pro-military, anti-Islamic powers in the USA who are looking for an enemy and Iran looks to be a good target for their hate.
einsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 1639 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3320 times:
Kinda reminds me of back in the 2004 elections where a bit before the elections Osama bin Laden published a video message. I think that may have had an impact on Bush's reelection. Maybe Iran is bluffing and if they aren't it because they are waiting for an excuse to close the Strait of Hormuz (which is even more of a reason to wean off of oil altogether: bluffs like this won't affect us).
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 15, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3319 times:
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 11): Iran clearly wants the end of the Israeli state as a Zionist construct in pretty much the same way as the West wanted to see the end of the former USSR. This did not mean exterminating the entire population of the USSR but the desire to see a country that was capitalist based and democratic. In Iran's case it means the recognition of Palestine but not genocide or extermination of the Jewish population.
Lol I know, I was trying to be sarcastic. But yeah that is a big problem, people think that the Israel government = the Israeli people. Also, the Iranian people are not like the clerics. The do not like the Israel GOVERNMENT, the way it treats Palestine, and the threats the government makes to Iran. That being said, Iran is far from perfect. But the minute both sides can see their wrongs, the sooner we might see peace
Quoting MD-90 (Reply 10): If only they'd kowtow to the US and abase themselves before their imperial masters! Then they would be a great country.
Yeah I don't see why they don't see this either. We didn't take their oil in the 50s, we didn't overthrow their government and put in a dictator, we didn't supply Iraq with weapons, we didn't accidentally down a civilian jet, we aren't sanctioning the crap out of them, and lastly, we didn't invade the 2 countries next to it! When will those dumb Iranians learn? (sarcasm just in case anyone didn't pick up on that)
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 8): So for years the US and others have publicly stated that they are prepared to attack and/ or invade Iran,
Don't forget the drone of ours they shot down, and all those dead scientists (well that could have been Israel, but that is probably the same thing in their eyes)
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 16, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3259 times:
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 6513 posts, RR: 25 Reply 17, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3219 times:
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 6): Conventionally, basically 0. But all it took was 19 guys to kill 3000 of our civilians.
all it took was 16 different US secret services who did not talk to each other, did not match their knowledge to make that happen. Instead of menacing millions of air travellers daily they should have got their act together by now, having had 10 years time to do that.
If not, you'll get the same surprises again. But compared to what 3 aircraft carriers and a number of bases in the Emirates can do, this is a mouse attacking an elephant.
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 18, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3213 times:
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 17): If not, you'll get the same surprises again. But compared to what 3 aircraft carriers and a number of bases in the Emirates can do, this is a mouse attacking an elephant.
I don't want even a mouse attacking us. I don't want our military to kill any Iranians either. I firmly believe we can get past this mess with a net loss of 0 lives. Even terrorists, it's better if there wasn't a conflict that encourages a son to strap a bomb to him and kill himself (and others.)
That being said, I don't see this ending very well. What do I do this election when I want to vote for a candidate that will quit provoking Iran?
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 6513 posts, RR: 25 Reply 20, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3149 times:
I am with you, DeltaMD90, but the problem started when you weren't even born.
If you so want, it was the French' fault , allowing Khomeini to return to THR anfd they even paid for the flight I guess, an AF 742. Not too long after, so called "students" stormed the US Embassy in THR, staying there and keeping 52 US diplomats hostage for 444 days. It was at the end of President Carters term that this was solved, the hostages freed and flown out to Frankfurt and taken from the re to Lindsay Air Station, a hospital in Wiesbaden. Reagan was already President but he allowed Carter to fly to FRA to meet the hostages here and take credit for solving the case. A noble gesture by a noble President.
Iran has ever since provoked the US, Israel and the Western Nations. IMHO, the Iranians don't deserve the political leaders they have, they are fine people, intelligent, but what can you do as a singlke person when a criminal gang takes over, regardless on what type of religion their ideology is based. The average people try to make a living and cope with the situation.
It would be great if that could be solved without violence, my usual optimism is reluctant to make me believe that. Sending aircraft carriers to the region and standing up against a regime that provokes is better than the appeasement politics in the Europe of the 1930s.
It is up to you guys to elect a responsible President.
Rara From Germany, joined Jan 2007, 1374 posts, RR: 3 Reply 21, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3066 times:
Iran willing to attack on US soil, US willing to attack on Iran soil - seems pretty fair to me.
Seriously, no country in the world, democracy or not, is looking for open conflict with the United States. It's entirely in America's hands to deescalate this situation. The US acts in a way that it would never accept from any other country, and that needs to stop.
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 18): What do I do this election when I want to vote for a candidate that will quit provoking Iran?
Very good point. For fear of appearing weak, no candidate (except for Ron Paul) would dare to take a stance that a significant part of American voters would no doubt agree with, which is: stop messing with the situation.
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 22, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2971 times:
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 20): Sending aircraft carriers to the region and standing up against a regime that provokes is better than the appeasement politics in the Europe of the 1930s.
Don't get me wrong, I'm on neither side. I'm for non-intervention, but if a country is blocking/threatening/provoking us when we are doing something legitimate in our interests that doesn't harm legitimate governments/populations, I say fully use our powerful military that we spend trillions on. I'd hate to see another Hitler (from any country) and hope the US, in addition to others, would prevent that. Iran is not Hitler, it's another Iraq. I wish they wouldn't get a nuke, but really, all you have to do is not blindly believe the western MSM, do a little bit of research, take off the tin foil hat, admit that some actions we have done are wrong, and bam! It doesn't look so grim anymore.
Quoting Rara (Reply 21): Very good point. For fear of appearing weak, no candidate (except for Ron Paul) would dare to take a stance
And welcome to my dilemma! lol. I know it would be a "throw away vote" but maybe, just maybe, it'll send a message or show support for a 3rd party in the future, or something. At least I can say "I voted, and President ______ doing this to Iran is not my fault!"
(And no, I wouldn't just write in someone like Frank Lorenzo just so I can go up to people and tell them that the country is messed up and it's not my fault because my guy didn't get elected)
Stabilator From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 374 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2962 times:
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 18): That being said, I don't see this ending very well. What do I do this election when I want to vote for a candidate that will quit provoking Iran?
You vote Ron Paul
It's getting to a point, for me as a conservative, where all this warmongering talk and chest-thumping is getting tiring. The Iranian clerics know if they try another 9/11, swift and relentless vengeance will be brought upon them and upon their country. Quite simply, the puppet and his string pullers will die. And there is something all humans seek: self preservation. Let's stop paying so much attention to the crying baby in the room and perhaps it'll shut up.
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 24, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2952 times:
Quoting Stabilator (Reply 23): Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 18):
That being said, I don't see this ending very well. What do I do this election when I want to vote for a candidate that will quit provoking Iran?
You vote Ron Paul
Plan on it (or perhaps Gary Johnson if the Libertarian Party gains a lot of momentum)
And I agree with the rest of your post. I will point out though:
Quoting Stabilator (Reply 23): Let's stop paying so much attention to the crying baby in the room and perhaps it'll shut up.
Some of the "crying" they do, I'll admit, is somewhat legitimate. Before I get flamed, the legitimate complaints are the same thing many Europeans say and many Americans here say, I'm not some strange jihadist anti-American hippy person
Ron Paul 2012!
25 MD-90: I can't wait for March to get here so I can vote for Ron Paul in Alabama's Republican primary.
26 steeler83: Chalk one up for me, too, regarding a third party candidate, particularly someone from the Libertarian Party. I'm not too sure about Ron Paul, tho...
27 DeltaMD90: Because they are seen as having "no chance in winning so why bother." Many people are interested in a third party, but the lack of organization scare
28 canoecarrier: Do you know what a US carrier battle group looks like to an Iranian when it goes through the Strait? It is only 34 miles wide at its narrowest point.
29 DeltaMD90: But that is the issue here. I heard that and used to believe that until I looked at the arguments for that, and most don't hold water. Mr A did not s
30 canoecarrier: Isn't that the same argument that North Korea uses for their nuclear program? Unlike N. Korea Iran has consistently been able to project influence in
31 DeltaMD90: Well I base it mostly off Iran's history. Also, look at what we (or the UN, I forgot) said to Libya in 2003 or 2004--do not develop nukes, we'll give
32 canoecarrier: We'll see China hasn't really followed the sanctions at all. They trade goods for oil and they make up around 20-30% of the Iranian oil exports. The
33 EA CO AS: I obviously do not want the Iranian government to succeed in building a nuclear weapon, however it appears to me that the easiest manner to ensure the
34 MadameConcorde: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil? DEBKA Psyop: There is an Iranian hiding in your closet! DEBKAfile Special Report February 2, 2012, 3:21 PM Iran ha
35 ltbewr: What some commenters (as well as I) very much fear is Israel attempting or partially succeeding in an air or terror attack upon nuke facilities in Ira
36 luckyone: It goes back even further than that, and it's not just the US, it's much bigger. Just before the US overthrow of the Mossadeq government the Iranians
37 Quokkas: I readily admit that I do not know what propaganda the regime in Iran depends upon to maintain itself today on a daily basis. In a way it is immateria
38 DeltaMD90: Oh boy, well first off, that is kind of obvious--Iran knows if they screw around too much with any of our allies it's basically screwing around with
39 luckyone: Were it not for hydrocarbons, my friend, we would have done that long ago. As it is, unfortunately, oil is the world's blood right now. Iran obviousl
40 canoecarrier: I wouldn't say its "basically nothing". There are some similarities between NK and Iran. Both are run by people who see a neighbor country as a threa
41 kaitak: And the best way to do this is not to go down this road in the first place; Iran could now be a totally different country from the pariah it has now
42 Quokkas: I am not sure how to read your comment, but be assured that I am not attacking you, merely seeking clarification. Do you see NK attacking SK and Iran
43 canoecarrier: Can't disagree with anything in your post. Well said.
44 Quokkas: Iran is not the first, and will not be the last country to do as you have described. Indeed, some might argue that it is par for the course. Does Isr
45 canoecarrier: Israel is a country around 22,000 km(2) in area surrounded by hostile nations (or at least hostile in the past). At it's narrowest point it is just 1
46 Quokkas: Iran does not have a direct border with Israel but which country has in the past launched air strikes against nations that it deemed hostile? Don't g
47 luckyone: ". A coup installed the Shah in Iran." I just wanted to point out that Muhammed Reza was Shah before during and after Mossadeq. His power, however, w
48 Quokkas: Thank you for the clarification. I must be more precise in my postings. The salient point remains: the government was overthrown because it did not m
50 canoecarrier: 42 Scud missiles were fired into Israel from Iraq during the First Gulf War. In a direct attempt by Saddam to provoke Israel into an attack and widen
51 bhill: Rara, WTF? Why is it the US's responsibility to deescalate this? I think you really need to review the recent timeline to see how we are now at this p
52 Quokkas: I don't but the question of Iran's neighbours was raised and I ruled out an immediate threat from Afghanistan. From the Iranian perspective the threa
53 DeltaMD90: Both, I'd actually say Iran is at greater risk of attack than Israel. Israel has a very powerful military, are allies with the US, and have a bunch o
54 luckyone: I agree with you to a point, and this is this: Historically, Iran has been a patriarchal society, and has a very long history of turning authority ov
55 DeltaMD90: I agree, there is a huge difference between the Iranian people and the government/theocracy. I think the government is pretty crazy, and I wish they
56 luckyone: The Chinese economy has been doing a fabulous job of that all on its own. But hey, hopefully we've learned our own lesson (hope springs eternal, eh?)
57 Pu: These words are the moral equivalence fallacy. Moral, decent and law-abiding people and nations are correct in having weapons generally or WMDs in pa
58 zippyjet: As long as Iran has the faschist cretin in charge the people of this nation are lemmings ready to take their one way march.
59 luckyone: I'm not sure that's very fair. I have quite a few Iranian friends, many of whom have been back to Iran for one reason or another. It's quite surprisi
60 zippyjet: Then how did this lunatic get "elected" or into power in the first place? Scum like him use violence, fear and intimidation to squelsh the citizenry.
61 EA CO AS: And yet, there would be apologists all over the world (and in this forum, I might add) who would strongly argue against U.S. involvement against Tehr
62 luckyone: Well I believe you answered your own question. The last Shah was impotent, and a power vacuum developed. In Iranian society it was the religious lead
63 MadameConcorde: The people now in power in Iran have a history of invading countries around the world and killing people for greed and power.
64 soon7x7: Hardly sabre rattling...Ahmadinejad has been working steadfastly on a nuclear program, this is no secret...His disdain for Israel, denial that the Hol
65 AirframeAS: I would LOVE to see them actually try. LOL!
66 jcs17: I'd be willing to bet that it happens. I think that the second that Israel attacks Iranian nuclear sites, there will be suicide bombings throughout so
67 MadameConcorde: This is making the buzz all over the Internet WND EXCLUSIVE Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel Iran lays out legal case for genocidal attack
68 luckyone: Just another bit of hot air from a completely out of touch government. Have they somehow managed to rationalize the killing of 20,000 or so of their
69 Quokkas: Hasn't made the news here on the ABC, but the page seems to be plugging a book. Not sure how seriously we should take it. Even if real, the article s
70 Tupolev160: Iran is already a great country. Have you been there? I think the US could have been a great country, had it choosen another path in the history. US i
71 luckyone: It's so wonderful it has had the highest brain drain on the planet, and is currently number five, ahead of less developed countries due to no jobs fo
72 EA CO AS: On the whole, I'd be inclined to believe your opinion isn't shared by many.
73 airportugal310: Pretty sure we have a troll on our hands...either from CNN's comment section or Yahoos...take your pick
74 JetsGo: Eh, I'd be bitter too if I was still in denial over the failure of the Motherland.
75 MadameConcorde: Paris warns Israel against attack on Iran The French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe called on to do everything possible to prevent Israel from attacking
76 soon7x7: Think I'll pass...The US is currently a great country. Have you been here?...Our government, as the Iranian government suck, but the people, ...the c
77 DeltaMD90: A lot of countries put out a lot of misinformation about the US. I've talked to some foreigners that legitimately think that most the population here
78 zippyjet: Oh boy the Frence. No offense but they never liked my people. And they pander to the wack a doodles that plunder nations like Iran into a chamber of
79 kaitak: No, just run by them. This is Iran's big tragedy; it could be so successful in many ways - thriving oil industry, an entrepot between East and West (
80 petertenthije: Which explains why they were the first to support you guys in the revolutionary war.
82 DeltaMD90: I talk with several Iranians sometimes, they all hate their government. Some say they're just waiting for the right opportunity to rise, whatever tha
83 luckyone: From what I've read and heard from my Iranian friends is that many people hate it so much they've simply given up, and leave at their first opportuni
84 Flighty: Of course, Iran should not attack other countries unprovoked. But, if those countries attack Iran first (near equivalent to a Pearl Harbor against Ir
85 zippyjet: Should have clarified: My people, I'm Jewish. There has been and there's still a significant Anti-Semetic climate in France.
86 Powerslide: I fail to see how they would do so, besides activating their "cells" in the US. Iran's power to inflict any sort of damage to western nations is limi
87 soon7x7: As I stated above, most populations of most if not all countries are at the mercy of policies established by their governments. unfortunatelly most g
88 MadameConcorde: Iran building a nuclear bomb? How about looking the other way around? Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon Iranian intelligence
89 ltbewr: The Onion is a satirical media publication, with totally made up and humorous stories, but with a number of them done in a way to really bring out th
90 PanHAM: The difference is that Israel has a democratic government whereas Iran is a theocratic regime. Even though the Rabbinat is very influential, there is
91 MadameConcorde: We can all see how the Iranians have been bombing Gaza to hell making use of phosphorus bombs on civilians. They attack and invade everywhere every c
92 mal787: Oh dear yet another pointless post by you. I have met and know a few Iranian people bpth in Australia and on my travels around the world , and they a
93 SFBdude: Taking his/her full post into consideration (not just the part you quoted), I'm almost certain that was sarcasm[Edited 2012-02-13 07:11:46]
94 Quokkas: One of the major problems with communication over the Internet is that we lack the signals that are normally available in face to face conversation.
95 PanHAM: .... well, with all due respect to our cher Madame and her sarcasm, but she misses the point that Iran wants to wipe Israel off the world map and uses
96 Quokkas: Of course the Iranians are not the only people who have wanted to eradicate countries from the map. It has happened throughout history and the succes
97 PanHAM: Quokka, I just take this sentence, I am too tired to read the rest - I lived through the cold war, born in 1948, with Cuba crisis and all, Kennedy as
98 Aesma: I guess when the US used Saddam to attack Iran, that was alright.
99 OA260: Iran stops oil exports to six EU countries-state TV TEHRAN Feb 15 (Reuters) - Iran has stopped oil exports to six European states in retaliation for E
100 MadameConcorde: I never thought anyone would take that post seriously. I had the chance to visit Iran while the Shah was in power. I went to Shiraz, Isfahan, Tehran
101 MadameConcorde: I am too late to edit my last post. However... Re. Haaretz Iran is being blamed after attacks carried against Israeli embassies http://www.haaretz.com
102 luckyone: Sadly the current government is doing its best to obliterate much of that heritage, while the Shah emphasized it. Among many other things, Persian na
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3096 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jan 2012, 440 posts, 
)
From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 1639 posts, 
(sarcasm just in case anyone didn't pick up on that)
From Germany, joined May 2005, 6513 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8308 posts, 
(or perhaps Gary Johnson if the Libertarian Party gains a lot of momentum)
Printer friendly format 
