futurepilot16
Topic Author
Posts: 1756
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:20 am

Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sat Aug 07, 2010 3:50 pm

Quote:
TEHRAN — Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Saturday the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks were exaggerated in a fresh broadside at the United States just days after President Barack Obama voiced willingness to talk to Iran.

Ahmadinejad said the Sept. 11 attacks with hijacked airliners on New York and Washington D.C. had been trumped up as an excuse for the United States to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.

Ahmadinejad also claims that the 3,000 lives lost in the attacks were false because the day before, the workers were all told not to go to work, and that if there had in fact been 3,000 lives lost, their names would have been released.

However, Ahmadinejad forgot to mention that there is a published list of September 11 dead from more than 90 countries available online, but I guess this was drummed up by the "Zionists" as well.

He also reiterated his beliefs that the holocaust was fabricated in order to justify the creation of Israel. We've heard this before.

I'm still appalled that this guy is the President of a country. I wonder what the requirements are to run for office in Iran? As much as I don't take him seriously, you have to imagine the effect that he has on his supporters in Iran.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38605348/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/
"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13227
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sat Aug 07, 2010 4:04 pm

Quoting futurepilot16 (Thread starter):
Ahmadinejad also claims that the 3,000 lives lost in the attacks were false because the day before, the workers were all told not to go to work, and that if there had in fact been 3,000 lives lost, their names would have been released.

Obviously he missed U2's half time performance from that season's Super bowl where they displayed a scrolling list of all the victims on a giant screen during their perfomance of "where the street's have no name:.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sat Aug 07, 2010 5:27 pm

The sad part is the number of non-Americans who not only will defend this guy, but agree with him.   Even worse are the few Americans here who are dumb enough to think the attacks were a conspiracy.

  B4e-Forever New Frontiers  
 
einsteinboricua
Posts: 4710
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sat Aug 07, 2010 5:54 pm

Just more utter nonsense from a person who should NOT be president.

Quoting futurepilot16 (Thread starter):
I'm still appalled that this guy is the President of a country.

His first term was widely accepted as an election. The second one was just pure blah. How can you congratulate a person when the counting has not even begun? His second term was already picked out. Just you wait. Iranian laws state that a president cannot run for a third consecutive term;rather, he must sit out one term. You'll see how the law will be changed in order to allow him to stand for a third term.

Quoting futurepilot16 (Thread starter):
you have to imagine the effect that he has on his supporters in Iran.

Which supporters? The hard-line clerics who know that as soon as a reformist is elected, their jobs are over? This is just a "rally the people against the enemy"...
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
 
us330
Posts: 3413
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2000 7:00 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sat Aug 07, 2010 6:08 pm

What the guy said (and will say) is absurd, but look at this through the lens of Iranian politics. Some of this has to do with political strategy--he temporarily deflects attention from more pressing and valid issues (ie nuclear policy, human rights) to these sideshow statements that he makes. There's also the added benefit that A'jad can avoid having the grenade-like Iranian political accusation of being backed or supported by the U.S.--something akin to being associated with communism in any form in the U.S.

I'm less worried about what comes out of this guy's mouth than what actions he chooses to undertake.
 
DeltaRules
Posts: 3728
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2001 11:57 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sat Aug 07, 2010 7:30 pm

Quoting futurepilot16 (Thread starter):
Ahmadinejad also claims that the 3,000 lives lost in the attacks were false because the day before, the workers were all told not to go to work, and that if there had in fact been 3,000 lives lost, their names would have been released.
Quoting futurepilot16 (Thread starter):
He also reiterated his beliefs that the holocaust was fabricated in order to justify the creation of Israel. We've heard this before.

Alrighty...where are those roughly 6,003,000ish people, then, Mr. Ahmadinejad?
A310/319/320/321/333, ARJ, BN2, B722/73S/733/734/735/73G/738/739/744/757/753/767/763/764/777, CR1/2/7/9, DH6, 328, EM2/ERJ/E70/E75/E90, F28/100, J31, L10/12/15, DC9/D93/D94/D95/M80/M88/M90/D10, SF3, SST
 
futurepilot16
Topic Author
Posts: 1756
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sat Aug 07, 2010 8:32 pm

Quoting DeltaRules (Reply 5):
Alrighty...where are those roughly 6,003,000ish people, then, Mr. Ahmadinejad?

He claims they never existed, so the family of those people I guess are all paid gov't actors.
"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
 
Sabena332
Posts: 14938
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 3:57 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sat Aug 07, 2010 10:02 pm

It is beyond me that the international press is still paying attention to this retard! All of his comments are utter bullshit and a waste of ink! When I would be the Chancellor of Germany I would hire (a crack addicted) guy just to answer Ahmadinejad's commutation.

Patrick
NZ1's mother is a disgusting crack-whore and his father is a worthless alcoholic!
 
Yellowstone
Posts: 2821
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:32 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sat Aug 07, 2010 11:04 pm

The only slight grain of truth in what Ahmedinejad said is that, yes, the US government did play up 9/11 to increase domestic support for the Iraq war. But then things like

Quoting futurepilot16 (Thread starter):
Ahmadinejad also claims that the 3,000 lives lost in the attacks were false because the day before, the workers were all told not to go to work, and that if there had in fact been 3,000 lives lost, their names would have been released.

take him from critic of US policy to raving nutjob.
Hydrogen is an odorless, colorless gas which, given enough time, turns into people.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sat Aug 07, 2010 11:21 pm

His comment needs context .... I am assuming he was trying to claim that our response to 911 is not balanced and that we are using it as a excuse to invade his neighbours. He uses this same line of thinking when he refers to the Holocaust and Israel . When you give it context its not that far off from what some have said here in the US ...they just nuance the idea.
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sat Aug 07, 2010 11:31 pm

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 7):
It is beyond me that the international press is still paying attention to this retard!

It is absolutely necessary to pay attention to this guy. Ignoring him or not taking him seriously (be it by a crack-addicted nuthead as spokesperson) would be dangerous.
We here, however, don't need to start a new thread whenever Ahmadinejad says something.
I support the right to arm bears
 
Sabena332
Posts: 14938
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 3:57 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sun Aug 08, 2010 12:07 am

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 10):
not taking him seriously (be it by a crack-addicted nuthead as spokesperson) would be dangerous.

No, that would be fun after a while! 

Seriously: He is becoming annoying, the same shit over and over again. I can't take this moron seriously anymore. No Jews were murdered under Hitler in WW II, the Iran doesn't plan to have WMDs, and Sept. 11 was not as it was... sure!  

He is an attention grabbing moron! If he would be not, then nobody would pay attention to him.

Patrick
NZ1's mother is a disgusting crack-whore and his father is a worthless alcoholic!
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6430
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sun Aug 08, 2010 12:17 am

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 10):
It is absolutely necessary to pay attention to this guy. Ignoring him or not taking him seriously (be it by a crack-addicted nuthead as spokesperson) would be dangerous.

What guys like Ahmadinejad says must always be interpreted in the right context.

We often have a tendency to believe that he is somehow speaking to us, and then the whole thing seems so unbelievably idiotic. But that's not the case. His words are for internal use. He is in great trouble at home. His only chance for survival is to constantly tell at home that the rest of the world is an enemy to the people of Iran, and then of course to block ordinary information flow.

If we want to trace his real message, then first of all we must investigate what information is available for the Iranian people, false or right information, and what information from outside is effectively blocked, and what is not. And then we can put his words into that context and maybe interprete what message he is delivering.

We Europeans should be sort of experts in such interpretation since we certainly made ourselves some training courses during the first half of 20th century. And in the east the last traces didn't disappear until 1990.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sun Aug 08, 2010 12:54 am

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 12):
We often have a tendency to believe that he is somehow speaking to us, and then the whole thing seems so unbelievably idiotic.

I know what you mean and agree, but claiming that 9/11 did not cause the death of 3,000 people or that Shoa didn't exist is abominable no matter if his gibberish was intended to be heard by Iranians only.
I support the right to arm bears
 
CaliAtenza
Posts: 1626
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 1:43 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Sun Aug 08, 2010 2:02 am

I hope there is a second revolution in Iran, in which the people overthrow this idiot and the Mullahs behind him. He is just a puppet for them really. The ruling Mullahs put him there, not the people. I know Persians/Iranians are decent people just trying to earn a buck and get by...this guy isnt helping their case one bit.
 
rolfen
Posts: 1539
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:03 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Mon Aug 09, 2010 12:48 am

I've heard these rumors, but I didn't expect them to find foot with the president of Iran.
rolf
 
CPH-R
Posts: 6059
Joined: Thu May 03, 2001 5:19 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Mon Aug 09, 2010 4:01 am

Yeah, those rumors are quite popular with various anti-semitic and 9/11 "Truth" groups. Sadly, a website that used to deal with the particular rumor of 'Israelis/Jews/Zionist being told not to go to work in WTC on 9/11' has closed down, but fortunately, the Web Archive still have the page cached.

It's an interesting read, especially as it shows how such a stupid rumour can created out of thin air, with the help of some carefully selected reading..

http://web.archive.org/web/200807300...e.org/~terry/wtc_4000_Israeli.html
 
MingToo
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:07 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Mon Aug 09, 2010 6:32 am

Quoting caliatenza (Reply 14):
I hope there is a second revolution in Iran, in which the people overthrow this idiot and the Mullahs behind him. He is just a puppet for them really. The ruling Mullahs put him there, not the people. I know Persians/Iranians are decent people just trying to earn a buck and get by...this guy isnt helping their case one bit.

That will depend on who gets into power after the revolution. The Iranians have already had one revolution where they threw out and vicious dictator puppet, something that should be applauded. But instead they have had 30 years of sanctions and aggression from the West because he was our vicious dictator puppet. The Iranians were also decent people just trying to earn a buck prior to 1980 when the CIA were training the Shah's secret police to 'disappear' political opponents.

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 12):
What guys like Ahmadinejad says must always be interpreted in the right context.

And part of that context is that he speaks in Farsi, which is then translated and fed to us through the biased Western media. He is two cards short of a deck, but that doesn't mean it isn't exaggerated along the way as well for our consumption.

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 11):
Seriously: He is becoming annoying, the same shit over and over again. I can't take this moron seriously anymore. No Jews were murdered under Hitler in WW II, the Iran doesn't plan to have WMDs, and Sept. 11 was not as it was... sure!

But yet you are obviously taking American claims that Iran plans to have WMD seriously still, despite only a few years ago a massive war being launched against Iraq because of WMD that turned out to be non-existent and a pack of lies.

He is a nut-job for sure, but he is not suicidal or completely stupid and does not hold nearly as much power as we are often made to believe.

Put it this way. If Ahmedinejad resigned tomorrow do you think it would alter Western / US / Israeli policy towards Iran even slightly ?
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Mon Aug 09, 2010 2:18 pm

One problem is that sometimes the idiotic stories are mixed with matters that are perfectly true. And all the Ahmads need is for one little bit to be true and off they go. But great post US330, that is exactly why he says these things, for internal consumption.

Here is an example where it is easier to disentangle the various bits.

With the Bali bombing, the Ba'asyir story goes roughly as follows:

1. It was a small nuclear bomb - UNTRUE.

2. It was planted by the CIA - UNTRUE either for a nuclear bomb or the actual fertiliser bomb.

3. The prosecutions were made at US and Australian insistence under a law that did not apply - TRUE.

The US and Aus got the Indonesians to pass an anti-terrorist law AFTER the bombing and then insisted Ba'asyir be prosecuted under it (also Amrosi and co).

Now why ever do that? He was guilty of being an accessory before and after the fact of murder which is still a crime in Indonesia.

Net result, he appealed and was released. A bit of a miracle Amrosi is not also strolling the streets. What wonderful result would have been obtained if they had pinned the word terrorist on him rather than murderer?

Anyway, now it appears Detachment 88 has him banged to rights.

But for sowing confusion, all you need is a skerrick of a relationship, and that can be inflated, conflated into who knows what.

Why cannot the west keep its fingers out of where they do not belong?

There are similar problems with the evidence relating to Megrahi.
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9320
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 4:03 am

Quoting MingToo (Reply 17):
But yet you are obviously taking American claims that Iran plans to have WMD seriously still, despite only a few years ago a massive war being launched against Iraq because of WMD that turned out to be non-existent and a pack of lies.

Well, it is a fact that Iran has a nuclear programme. The question is if they will use it only for civil purpose or not. I don't think it is hard to imagine that the leaders in Iran would like nuclear weapons, so Israel can't threaten them or at least so Iran could threaten Israel back.
 
MingToo
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:07 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:34 am

Quoting AirPacific747 (Reply 19):
Well, it is a fact that Iran has a nuclear programme.

It is also a fact that they are allowed to have one under the NPT. If I were them, I'd want nuclear weapons. They are surrounded by military based from a country that has shown nothing but aggression towards them for 30 years all because they kicked out a nasty puppet dictator.

Sometimes people seem to forget that, depending on whether or not you include deforestation agents in Vietnam, Iran is the only country beside Japan to have suffered mass casualties from WMD when Saddam killed around 100,000 Iranian troops and civilians with chemical weapons. The US were supporting him at the time and even refused to condemn it at the UN.
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9320
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:57 am

Quoting MingToo (Reply 20):
It is also a fact that they are allowed to have one under the NPT. If I were them, I'd want nuclear weapons. They are surrounded by military based from a country that has shown nothing but aggression towards them for 30 years all because they kicked out a nasty puppet dictator.

Sure, but they don't have a democratically elected government. Also, what is the point of having nuclear weapons if everyone gets them? They are placed strategically around the world to make the world more stable. Also, who knows who the Iranian government might give them to if they develop them? Iraq is out of the way, so there is no point in getting them for Iran.
 
MingToo
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:07 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 7:03 am

Quoting AirPacific747 (Reply 21):
Sure, but they don't have a democratically elected government.

That is your assessment of the situation in Iran based on a hardly neutral western press. They do at least have elections though. Saudi Arabia has none and is a far more repressive regime, spawned the 9/11 hijackers and is a hot bed of extremism, yet they not only get to be allowed nuclear technology, the are assisted with it by the US. As was Iran when they were far less democratic under the puppet Shah in the 1970s.

Quoting AirPacific747 (Reply 21):
Also, who knows who the Iranian government might give them to if they develop them?

They aren't that stupid. Iran won't give away nuclear weapons, that is just scaremongering.

Iran has lots of oil. It isn't friendly to the West. It's not surprising given what we have done to them over the past 60 years. We don't want them to have nuclear weapons because it will allow them to defend themselves against us.
 
GulfStreamGirl
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:51 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 7:20 am

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 2):
Even worse are the few Americans here who are dumb enough to think the attacks were a conspiracy.




I think there are MANY people who don't agree with the "official" story of that fateful day , so to call anyone who thinks it is a conspiercy in any way shape or form are dumb , is a little nieve







  
 
MingToo
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:07 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 7:51 am

Quoting gulfstreamGirl (Reply 23):
I think there are MANY people who don't agree with the "official" story of that fateful day , so to call anyone who thinks it is a conspiercy in any way shape or form are dumb , is a little nieve

It has been in the interests of the Bush administration to promote conspiracy theories. Gets people focussing on extreme scenarios and deflected from asking the real questions about incompetence or any kind of complicity at whatever level.

Did Cheney organise the whole thing ? Seems very unlikely.

But a discussion like this:

"There's increasing intel about a serious attack on US soil"
"Is there anything we can do to stop it"
"Perhaps"
"Well lets not worry too much, if it happens then it happens and it will give us an excuse to go into Iraq"

Quite plausible.
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9320
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 11:23 am

Quoting MingToo (Reply 22):

That is your assessment of the situation in Iran based on a hardly neutral western press.

Be careful of what you say. There are many trustworthy news sources out there, and common for the media in the western world, is that they are not under political pressure.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 22):
Saudi Arabia has none and is a far more repressive regime, spawned the 9/11 hijackers and is a hot bed of extremism, yet they not only get to be allowed nuclear technology, the are assisted with it by the US. As was Iran when they were far less democratic under the puppet Shah in the 1970s.

Two wrongs doesn't make a right.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 22):
They aren't that stupid. Iran won't give away nuclear weapons, that is just scaremongering.

How do you know? It is a corrupt regime, and if Pakistan can do it, so can Iran.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 22):
Iran has lots of oil. It isn't friendly to the West. It's not surprising given what we have done to them over the past 60 years. We don't want them to have nuclear weapons because it will allow them to defend themselves against us.

Wrong. If it had a fairly elected government, I am sure many people would have no issue with them developing nuclear weapons as a mean of defense, but they don't.

[Edited 2010-08-10 04:31:35]
 
MingToo
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:07 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 11:47 am

Quoting AirPacific747 (Reply 25):
There are many trustworthy news sources out there, and common for the media in the western world, is that they are not under political pressure.

You are joking I hope.

Quoting AirPacific747 (Reply 25):
Two wrongs doesn't make a right.

No, but it shows the contradictions in the policy when the western politicians media harp on and on about women's rights in Iran while conveniently ignoring their ally Saudi Arabia which is far worse.

Quoting AirPacific747 (Reply 25):
How do you know? It is a corrupt regime, and if Pakistan can do it, so can Iran.

Who do you think that Iran is going to give nuclear information to ? Pakistan has it. If Afghanistan wants it, then Pakistan are far more likely to give it to them. Libya has given up with it. Saudi is being supplied nuclear technology by the USA anyway and Iran would never give it to a local adversary. They aren't going to give it to non-state terror groups, that is just ludicrous.

Tell us who you think they will give it to ?

Quoting AirPacific747 (Reply 25):
Wrong. If it had a fairly elected government, I am sure many people would have no issue with them developing nuclear weapons as a mean of defense, but they don't.

So the US would be ok with Venezuela developing them ? Or perhaps Iraq or Afghanistan since apparently they have been turned into dream democracies by the benevolent US military and NATO ?

Iran did have a fairly elected government about 50 years ago ... what happened next ?
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9320
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 12:45 pm

Quoting MingToo (Reply 26):

You are joking I hope.

No. Why would I? Why would they not be trusted?

Quoting MingToo (Reply 26):
No, but it shows the contradictions in the policy when the western politicians media harp on and on about women's rights in Iran while conveniently ignoring their ally Saudi Arabia which is far worse.

Very true, and that seems wrong.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 26):
Who do you think that Iran is going to give nuclear information to ? Pakistan has it. If Afghanistan wants it, then Pakistan are far more likely to give it to them. Libya has given up with it. Saudi is being supplied nuclear technology by the USA anyway and Iran would never give it to a local adversary. They aren't going to give it to non-state terror groups, that is just ludicrous.

I disagree. A regime that is so controlled by religion is not to be trusted.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 26):

Tell us who you think they will give it to ?
Quoting MingToo (Reply 26):
non-state terror groups
Quoting MingToo (Reply 26):
So the US would be ok with Venezuela developing them ? Or perhaps Iraq or Afghanistan since apparently they have been turned into dream democracies by the benevolent US military and NATO ?

I am not talking for the USA, but my personal opinion here. Afghanistan and Iraq are still to unstable plus that leads me back to one of my original statements that the nuclear bombs are located strategically, and if everyone gets them, that destroys their purpose of stabilizing the regions.
 
MingToo
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:07 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 12:56 pm

Quoting AirPacific747 (Reply 27):
I disagree. A regime that is so controlled by religion is not to be trusted.

As far as I am aware, the only countries where the leading political ruler uses the word 'God' in speeches are either Islamic or the USA.
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9320
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 1:11 pm

Quoting MingToo (Reply 28):

As far as I am aware, the only countries where the leading political ruler uses the word 'God' in speeches are either Islamic or the USA.

And that is wrong to mix religion with politics. I completely agree.
 
tarheelwings
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 7:44 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 1:28 pm

Quoting MingToo (Reply 24):
Did Cheney organise the whole thing ? Seems very unlikely.

But a discussion like this:

"There's increasing intel about a serious attack on US soil"
"Is there anything we can do to stop it"
"Perhaps"
"Well lets not worry too much, if it happens then it happens and it will give us an excuse to go into Iraq"

Quite plausible.

Are you serious??? Sorry, but whatever credibility you have is totally undermined by the quoted statement. I am no fan of Bush, Cheney, and the rest of that group of incompetents but I can tell you this, there is no way the scenario you mention is plausible at all. You can criticize the western press all you want (particularly the US press) but CRIMINAL behavior like this would eventually come out.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 26):
Tell us who you think they will give it to ?

Hizbollah comes to mind, not a bomb obviously but radioactive material would do the job.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 26):
So the US would be ok with Venezuela developing them ? Or perhaps Iraq or Afghanistan since apparently they have been turned into dream democracies by the benevolent US military and NATO ?

Chavez the great demagogue with a nuclear weapon....there's a scary thought. Great way for him to promote his "Bolivarian Revolution" though.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 28):
As far as I am aware, the only countries where the leading political ruler uses the word 'God' in speeches are either Islamic or the USA.

You have a very big axe to grind with our government, don't you?
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 1:55 pm

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 30):
You can criticize the western press all you want (particularly the US press) but CRIMINAL behavior like this would eventually come out.

And that differs from arranging for torturing prisoners exactly how?
 
tarheelwings
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 7:44 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 2:17 pm

Quoting Baroque (Reply 31):
And that differs from arranging for torturing prisoners exactly how?

Not sure I understand your comment, are you saying that wasn't reported in the press? Or are you saying that torturing prisoners is also criminal conduct and that the gang of incompetents is not being prosecuted for it?

If it's the latter, two things: 1) there's still a debate as to whether "interrogation of prisoners" was allowed under the circumstances...and frankly while I would agree that waterboarding and similar practices are despicable in principle I have to admit that if I had to choose between defending my family/country and standing on principle.....you get the idea. 2) I will grant you that the press and public opinion treat criminal behavior towards US citizens differently from the same towards non US citizens.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 2:43 pm

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 32):
Or are you saying that torturing prisoners is also criminal conduct and that the gang of incompetents is not being prosecuted for it?

Check out what Wiki thinks about it.

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

You can read through the various court cases but how about the words of the guy who set up GITMO?

Michael Lehnert, who as a US Marine Brigadier General helped establish the center and was its first commander for 90 days, has stated that was dismayed at what happened after he was replaced by a US Army commander. Lehnert stated that he had ensured that the detainees would be treated humanely and was disappointed that his successors allowed harsh interrogations to take place. Said Lehnert, "I think we lost the moral high ground. For those who do not think much of the moral high ground, that is not that significant. But for those who think our standing in the international community is important, we need to stand for American values. You have to walk the walk, talk the talk."

Probably more guilty of a crime than Old Nick was (and I don't mean Lehnert either!!!).
 
mffoda
Posts: 1017
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:09 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 3:08 pm

The strategy page sums up Ahmadinejad and his peer's well.....

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htlead/articles/20100810.aspx

Quote:

"These bogus claims are intended primarily for domestic consumption, since these strongmen find it useful to pretend dictatorial rule is essential to protect their countries from the dread foreign imperialists."

"But why would any rational “foreign imperialist” want to bump off these guys? They’re some of the most inept national leaders in history, each of whom has run his country into poverty, isolation, and brutality on the pretense of protecting it from evildoers, foreign and domestic, while enriching himself and his cronies."

"Knocking off a relatively efficient and charismatic dictator like Adolf Hitler would certainly have benefited Germany’s enemies, since without him the regime would probably have collapsed from internal tensions among various factions. Bumping of the likes of a Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Mugabe, Gaddafi, or Kim could actually be counter-productive, leading to his replacement by a more effective strongman. So unless you are going to replace the rotten government (as was the case with Saddam Hussein), it's better to leave the dummies alone."

[Edited 2010-08-10 09:00:10]
harder than woodpecker lips...
 
tarheelwings
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 7:44 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 3:26 pm

Quoting Baroque (Reply 33):
Probably more guilty of a crime than Old Nick was (and I don't mean Lehnert either!!!).

Don't disagree and I believe I already admitted that we tend to treat criminal behavior differently depending on who it's inflicted on. And yes, taking the moral high ground is always the preferred choice.....but making that choice becomes harder when you've got a foe that doesn't even think or worry about that choice.

But, back to the topic at hand.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 3:34 pm

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 35):
But, back to the topic at hand.

OK, points accepted. It does however, relate to the present topic in that it does lead to easier cynicism when the US complains about some of the truly awful practices in Iran.

Not entirely irrelevant are the goings on in the Charles Taylor trial with stars such as N Campbell and Mia Farrow is aimed at deterring ANY international leader from behaving the way that Ahmad does and Bush and co did. You never know, given time, they just MIGHT succeed. Blair has already been tried on TV.
 
tarheelwings
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 7:44 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 3:43 pm

Quoting Baroque (Reply 36):
Not entirely irrelevant are the goings on in the Charles Taylor trial with stars such as N Campbell and Mia Farrow is aimed at deterring ANY international leader from behaving the way that Ahmad does and Bush and co did. You never know, given time, they just MIGHT succeed. Blair has already been tried on TV.

Sounds to me like we are in agreement for the most part.......I do take issue with you mentioning Charles Taylor and Bush in the same sentence though. As mentioned before, I am no fan of Bush and do think he was one of the worse presidents this country has ever had but, I would never equate what he did to what Taylor did. Or for that matter with anything Ahmadinejad has done to date.

Just my   
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 4:00 pm

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 37):
Sounds to me like we are in agreement for the most part.......I do take issue with you mentioning Charles Taylor and Bush in the same sentence though. As mentioned before, I am no fan of Bush and do think he was one of the worse presidents this country has ever had but, I would never equate what he did to what Taylor did.

I agree we agree, the point about Taylor is that there like Milosevic is a former head of state who thought he was clear and safe but is to use a phrase up before the beak. No intention to equate the record just the process.

However, when you remind me about record, we do probably have to add half to a million dead Iraqis and god knows how many crippled Iraqis to the ledger.And then there are the US, UK and other casualties to add in. Quite a case to answer as it happens.
 
MingToo
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:07 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 4:05 pm

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 30):
Are you serious??? Sorry, but whatever credibility you have is totally undermined by the quoted statement. I am no fan of Bush, Cheney, and the rest of that group of incompetents but I can tell you this, there is no way the scenario you mention is plausible at all.

Are you familiar with Operation Northwoods ? A plan that reached the highest levels of US government to fake the downing of an American airliner and / or to instigate terrorist bombings in Florida in order to justify an attack on Cuba. Or the Tuskagee syphillis experiments on black Americans ?

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 30):
Hizbollah comes to mind, not a bomb obviously but radioactive material would do the job.

Iran already has radioactive material and has had it for some time. It could have already given it to Hezbollah and hasn't done so. It isn't in Iran's interests to do that. I would think that in fact Hezbollah is under strict instructions not to obtain and use such materials because of the problems it would cause for Iran.

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 30):
Chavez the great demagogue with a nuclear weapon....there's a scary thought.

I don't find it remotely scary. When did Venezuela attack anyone ? The point was that apparent you have to be a 'democracy' and then you are ok to have certain things. Well Venezuela is a democracy. But it isn't one that likes the US so it isn't allowed regardless. Saudi is a hideous dictatorship and the home of the majority of the 9/11 bombers yet it gets nuclear help from the US.

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 30):
You have a very big axe to grind with our government, don't you?

And with the UK government too. Because the foreign policy is destructive and puts lives at risk both at home and overseas. And it isn't as though it is in the main for the benefit of the people of the UK and US either. It is for the benefit of an elite minority and corporations.

Worst of all, it is a horrific abuse of the men and women of the armed forces. Here are people who are willing to put themselves in the firing line and make the ultimate sacrifice for their nation and the politicians are abusing that and sending them off on adventures for corporate profit in place like Iraq. That is one of the biggest crimes of all.

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 32):
there's still a debate as to whether "interrogation of prisoners" was allowed under the circumstances...and frankly while I would agree that waterboarding and similar practices are despicable in principle I have to admit that if I had to choose between defending my family/country and standing on principle.....you get the idea.

Torture is a slippery slope even when it seems that there is no argument about it.

If you had intel that in an hour a bomb was going to explode and kill 10s of thousands in your city and you also knew with almost complete certainty that a guy at a certain desk in a building knew the location of the bomb, should you torture him to find out the location ? It's hard to say no really.

What if you knew that is was sent from that building but from a desk in a particular office where 10 people worked ? Would you torture all 10 knowing that 9 would be innocent ? After all, you are saving 10s of thousands of lives.

And what if of those 10 people in the office, 7 were white and 3 were of a darker foreign complexion. Do you still torture all 10 ?

It's very easy to go down a very bad path.
 
tarheelwings
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 7:44 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 5:18 pm

Quoting MingToo (Reply 39):
Are you familiar with Operation Northwoods ? A plan that reached the highest levels of US government to fake the downing of an American airliner and / or to instigate terrorist bombings in Florida in order to justify an attack on Cuba. Or the Tuskagee syphillis experiments on black Americans

Yes, familiar with both: the first was never executed and the second belongs to a dark period of our history. Both can be analyzed in the historical context of when they took place....but what does this have to do with the topic at hand? Are you saying that because these things happened this is proof that we as a people (and the government is us) will make the same mistakes again? My answer is an emphatic NO.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 39):
Iran already has radioactive material and has had it for some time. It could have already given it to Hezbollah and hasn't done so. It isn't in Iran's interests to do that. I would think that in fact Hezbollah is under strict instructions not to obtain and use such materials because of the problems it would cause for Iran

Whether Iran has given Hezbollah these materials is not the point, whether they would do it if was in their interests is IMO the point.....and I believe that is a distinct possibility.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 38):
I don't find it remotely scary. When did Venezuela attack anyone ? The point was that apparent you have to be a 'democracy' and then you are ok to have certain things. Well Venezuela is a democracy. But it isn't one that likes the US so it isn't allowed regardless. Saudi is a hideous dictatorship and the home of the majority of the 9/11 bombers yet it gets nuclear help from the US

You are right, Venezuela has not attacked anyone, it is however governed by an individual who is both smart and somewhat unstable with an obvious persecution complex....not a good mix IMO. As far as Saudi Arabia, while they are getting help from the US, that help does not include developing nuclear weapons. And yes, the majority of the 9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia, the more reason for us to remain engaged with their government and excert a positive influence where possible.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 39):
And with the UK government too. Because the foreign policy is destructive and puts lives at risk both at home and overseas. And it isn't as though it is in the main for the benefit of the people of the UK and US either. It is for the benefit of an elite minority and corporations.

Worst of all, it is a horrific abuse of the men and women of the armed forces. Here are people who are willing to put themselves in the firing line and make the ultimate sacrifice for their nation and the politicians are abusing that and sending them off on adventures for corporate profit in place like Iraq. That is one of the biggest crimes of all.

I can't speak for the UK although I would agree that for the most part, our governments have common interests. I do not for one minute believe however that those interests are driven by or done for the benefit of "an elite minority and corporations"......in the case of the US, I truly believe that our policies were driven by an arrogant and messianic belief that we could go in and change history and turn Iraq into a democracy in our own image.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 39):
What if you knew that is was sent from that building but from a desk in a particular office where 10 people worked ? Would you torture all 10 knowing that 9 would be innocent ? After all, you are saving 10s of thousands of lives. [quote=MingToo,reply=39]And what if of those 10 people in the office, 7 were white and 3 were of a darker foreign complexion. Do you still torture all 10


Interesting scenario and difficult to respond to since most if not all of us have never been in that situation. I can tell you that if what you describe actually took place, the thousands that were saved would say you did the right thing.

As far as the second part of your scenario, and based on how we're doing things here in the US at least, the answer is yes. After all we are still asking 80 year old white grandmas to remove their shoes and go through added scanning at airport security lines.
 
MingToo
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:07 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 5:35 pm

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 40):
Yes, familiar with both: the first was never executed and the second belongs to a dark period of our history. Both can be analyzed in the historical context of when they took place....but what does this have to do with the topic at hand? Are you saying that because these things happened this is proof that we as a people (and the government is us) will make the same mistakes again? My answer is an emphatic NO.

You have just made the same mistake. Believing your government spin that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that it had links to Al Qaida. And you are now again doing the same, believing that Iran if it had a nuclear weapon would fire it suicidally at Israel.

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 40):
You are right, Venezuela has not attacked anyone, it is however governed by an individual who is both smart and somewhat unstable with an obvious persecution complex....not a good mix IMO. As far as Saudi Arabia, while they are getting help from the US, that help does not include developing nuclear weapons. And yes, the majority of the 9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia, the more reason for us to remain engaged with their government and excert a positive influence where possible.

Have you not heard the saying "Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean that they aren't out to get you". There is substantial evidence that the US was involved in the attempted coup in Venezuela in 2002 and they certainly acknowledged the 'new government' very quickly despite it having been a completely anti-democratic overthrow of an elected leader. US policy in South America has been doing this for years, attempting to drive out any form of nationalism usually expressed as left-wing politics so that US companies can move in and reap the benefits of the resources of the region (and usually leave an environmental catastrophe behind. Summed up as:

""I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves." — Henry Kissinger"

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 40):
I can't speak for the UK although I would agree that for the most part, our governments have common interests. I do not for one minute believe however that those interests are driven by or done for the benefit of "an elite minority and corporations"......in the case of the US, I truly believe that our policies were driven by an arrogant and messianic belief that we could go in and change history and turn Iraq into a democracy in our own image.

More like turn it into an economy in our own image and for our benefit. The (illegal) changes made by the Provisional Authority demonstrate that quite well.
 
tarheelwings
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 7:44 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:25 pm

Quoting MingToo (Reply 41):
You have just made the same mistake. Believing your government spin that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that it had links to Al Qaida. And you are now again doing the same, believing that Iran if it had a nuclear weapon would fire it suicidally at Israel

You are making assumptions that I find somewhat offensive, I NEVER believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (at the time of our invasion, it's obvious he had them before) or that Saddam had links to Al Qaida. Matter of fact, I have always thought that those were mere excuses to invade a country that we should NOT have been invading in the first place. My biggest frustration at the time of our invasion was knowing that our government was not considering one simple fact: a guy like Saddam only cares about one thing and one thing only, to preserve his hold on power. If having links to Al Qaida or stockpiling WMDs endangers his hold on power, then he does not engage in those activities, simple as that.
As far as Israel, remember we are dealing with individuals that have a vitriolic hatred of Zionism.....would it be smart to fire a nuclear weapon at them....no....is it beyond the realm of possibility....definitely not. And btw, I come to that conclusion on my own....not because the government says so.

Please don't make the assumption that all the persons you engage in online conversations are uneducated rubes, believe or not, intelligent and informed people can disagree. I am making the assumption that you are sophisticated enough to have an intelligent exchange of ideas, please extend me that same courtesy.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 41):
Have you not heard the saying "Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean that they aren't out to get you". There is substantial evidence that the US was involved in the attempted coup in Venezuela in 2002 and they certainly acknowledged the 'new government' very quickly despite it having been a completely anti-democratic overthrow of an elected leader. US policy in South America has been doing this for years, attempting to drive out any form of nationalism usually expressed as left-wing politics so that US companies can move in and reap the benefits of the resources of the region (and usually leave an environmental catastrophe behind

There you go again with the big bad nature destroying US companies driving our foreign policy. Methinks you are living in the 50s and possibly 60s when that sort of thing might have actually taken place (Nicaragua, Cuba, Honduras, etc).

Quoting MingToo (Reply 41):
""I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves." — Henry Kissinger"

As far as your Chilean example, yes, there is no doubt the US was actively engaged in undermining Allende (just as the Soviets and the Cubans were actively engaged in supporting him). But this struggle was ideological at its core and had nothing to do with business interests........rightly or wrongly (depending on what side you were on) it was the Chilean people who decided their fate. And before you accuse me of believing everything our government says, I am intimately familiar with what happened in Chile since I was living there at the time. I'd be happy to debate what happened there with you but that's topic for another thread.
 
MingToo
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:07 am

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:50 pm

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 42):
You are making assumptions that I find somewhat offensive, I NEVER believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (at the time of our invasion, it's obvious he had them before) or that Saddam had links to Al Qaida. Matter of fact, I have always thought that those were mere excuses to invade a country that we should NOT have been invading in the first place.

I didn't mean offence, but I think you place too much faith in your government. You accept that they lie in some circumstance such as Iraq and WMD, but then don't believe that they are capable of doing that in some other scenarios. Their lies over Iraq have taken the lives of more US soldiers than the number of people killed in 9/11. I don't implicitly trust any government to always have the interests of their populace in mind, whether democratic or not. A government needs to demonstrate its trustworthiness to its people and should not take it for granted. I feel often in the US people have the wrong default position of trust on this (you appear not to however).

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 42):
As far as Israel, remember we are dealing with individuals that have a vitriolic hatred of Zionism.....would it be smart to fire a nuclear weapon at them....no....is it beyond the realm of possibility....definitely not.

I would say that it is far more likely that we see an Israeli nuclear weapon fired at Iran then the other way round.

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 42):
Please don't make the assumption that all the persons you engage in online conversations are uneducated rubes, believe or not, intelligent and informed people can disagree. I am making the assumption that you are sophisticated enough to have an intelligent exchange of ideas, please extend me that same courtesy.

Of course.

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 42):
There you go again with the big bad nature destroying US companies driving our foreign policy. Methinks you are living in the 50s and possibly 60s when that sort of thing might have actually taken place (Nicaragua, Cuba, Honduras, etc).

In the UK in case you are not familiar with the setup, we have the civil servants who implement the policies that are directed by the elected government with the permanent secretary of the department being the most senior of those civil servant. In the UK foreign office in charge of international policy 4 of the last 5 permanent secretaries on leaving the service has become directors of major oil companies.

Cheney - Halliburton, Rice - Chevron etc.

The first acts of the US in governing Iraq were to (illegally) change the laws to allow US (and other) companies access to the Iraqi economy. You even had US politicians trying to force US CDMA mobile phone technology onto Iraq when the rest of the world and every other country in the neighbourhood uses GSM. That was a step too far and got quashed though.

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 42):
As far as your Chilean example, yes, there is no doubt the US was actively engaged in undermining Allende (just as the Soviets and the Cubans were actively engaged in supporting him). But this struggle was ideological at its core and had nothing to do with business interests........rightly or wrongly (depending on what side you were on) it was the Chilean people who decided their fate. And before you accuse me of believing everything our government says, I am intimately familiar with what happened in Chile since I was living there at the time. I'd be happy to debate what happened there with you but that's topic for another thread.

Again, it was business interests, that is part of the ideology argument. Communism and Islamic nationalism are not good for American business because they are less amenable to foreign companies.

Just as some in Islam which to force their ideology on the world and communism sought to impose its ideology so does the US wish to impose its capitalist ideology. You can argue that it is a better ideology, but that still does not make it right to force it on others that are unwilling through toppling their democratic process.

War is mostly economics. It isn't a charity gig.
 
tarheelwings
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 7:44 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Tue Aug 10, 2010 7:50 pm

Quoting MingToo (Reply 43):
I didn't mean offence, but I think you place too much faith in your government. You accept that they lie in some circumstance such as Iraq and WMD, but then don't believe that they are capable of doing that in some other scenarios. Their lies over Iraq have taken the lives of more US soldiers than the number of people killed in 9/11. I don't implicitly trust any government to always have the interests of their populace in mind, whether democratic or not. A government needs to demonstrate its trustworthiness to its people and should not take it for granted. I feel often in the US people have the wrong default position of trust on this (you appear not to however).

I was never a big fan of Ronald Reagan but always liked a phrase of his when talking about dealing with the Soviets: "trust but verify". Yes, I believe that "government" has our best interests as its ultimate goal....having said that, I also believe it is up to us, the 'governed", to keep an eye on our elected offiicials so that they don't stray. If we don't, then we have no one to blame but ouselves and deserve whatever fate we get.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 43):
I would say that it is far more likely that we see an Israeli nuclear weapon fired at Iran then the other way round.

I would agree that that is the more likely scenario.....but only because the Israelis would feel their survival is at steak.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 43):
Of course

Thanks!

Quoting MingToo (Reply 43):
In the UK in case you are not familiar with the setup, we have the civil servants who implement the policies that are directed by the elected government with the permanent secretary of the department being the most senior of those civil servant. In the UK foreign office in charge of international policy 4 of the last 5 permanent secretaries on leaving the service has become directors of major oil companies.

Cheney - Halliburton, Rice - Chevron etc.

The first acts of the US in governing Iraq were to (illegally) change the laws to allow US (and other) companies access to the Iraqi economy. You even had US politicians trying to force US CDMA mobile phone technology onto Iraq when the rest of the world and every other country in the neighbourhood uses GSM. That was a step too far and got quashed though.

Rightly or wrongly, many in the US felt that since we were the ones doing the fighting, the least the Iraquis could do is reciprocate and use US companies for technology needs, re-building needs, etc. I still disagree with you in that I don't believe that was the reason we went there in the first place. I tend to have a less cynical view on the role of government apparently.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 43):
Again, it was business interests, that is part of the ideology argument. Communism and Islamic nationalism are not good for American business because they are less amenable to foreign companies.

Communism did not fall because it wasn't good for American (or any other nation's business for that matter), it fell because it violated fundamental individual liberties and it went against a basic human trait: competition. As far as what you label Islamic Nationalism, wouldn't you agree that it doesn't like foreign companies mostly because of those company's association with the West and therefore Christianity? I'm sure they have no problem with foreign Muslim companies.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 43):
Just as some in Islam which to force their ideology on the world and communism sought to impose its ideology so does the US wish to impose its capitalist ideology. You can argue that it is a better ideology, but that still does not make it right to force it on others that are unwilling through toppling their democratic process

Americans believe that capitalist ideology is what comes closest to giving individuals the ability to lead happy and prosperous lives.....you can agree or disagree that it does this but that is what most of us believe. Do we want to impose it on the rest of the world? Not sure about that.....do we believe the rest of the world shoud follow our example....probably.
If your comment is in reference to Allende, I can tell you that yes, he was democratically elected (even though through a quirkiness of the Chilean electoral laws in place at the time, he only received 36% of the popular vote), by the time he was deposed, his government was no longer truly democratic.

Quoting MingToo (Reply 43):
War is mostly economics. It isn't a charity gig

Some wars maybe, not all of them. I want to believe that WW2 was more about doing the right thing versus doing it to gain a buck. Hell, even our misguided war in Vietnam was because of a core belief that we had to fight the threat of Communist expansion and save the Vietnamese from themselves. In hindsight, they obviously would have preferred to be left alone.
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Wed Aug 11, 2010 12:47 am

Quoting gulfstreamGirl (Reply 23):
I think there are MANY people who don't agree with the "official" story of that fateful day , so to call anyone who thinks it is a conspiercy in any way shape or form are dumb , is a little nieve

If you seriously believe in "missile pods" or that the US government perpetrated this act, then yes, I can write you off as dumb.

All it takes is a little practical understanding of Aviation, physics, and material properties to disprove these stupid theories.

  B4e-Forever New Frontiers  
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iran President: Sept. 11 Exaggerated

Wed Aug 11, 2010 8:09 am

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 40):
Quoting MNIG TOO 39 in FACT - not Baroque (Reply 38):
I don't find it remotely scary. When did Venezuela attack anyone ? The point was that apparent you have to be a 'democracy' and then you are ok to have certain things. Well Venezuela is a democracy. But it isn't one that likes the US so it isn't allowed regardless. Saudi is a hideous dictatorship and the home of the majority of the 9/11 bombers yet it gets nuclear help from the US

You are right, Venezuela has not attacked anyone, it is however governed by an individual who is both smart and somewhat unstable with an obvious persecution complex....not a good mix IMO. As far as Saudi Arabia, while they are getting help from the US, that help does not include developing nuclear weapons. And yes, the majority of the 9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia, the more reason for us to remain engaged with their government and exert a positive influence where possible.

Not me! But I don't mind that at all. It is not as if the US has not been trying to overturn Hugo one way and another is it?

Quoting MingToo (Reply 43):
The first acts of the US in governing Iraq were to (illegally) change the laws to allow US (and other) companies access to the Iraqi economy. You even had US politicians trying to force US CDMA mobile phone technology onto Iraq when the rest of the world and every other country in the neighbourhood uses GSM. That was a step too far and got quashed though.

The redeeming aspect of what the US tried to foist on Iraq is that very few of the ideas seem to have stuck. But that small mercy hardly makes up for wrecking the joint. As I understand it, the UK got on far better with India in the days of Clive than when the Government of the UK tried to impose UK ideas. I thought the US tried to learn???

Quoting tarheelwings (Reply 44):
their survival is at steak.

I wonder if that unintentional error means that subliminally you think Israel is entitled to barbecue Iran?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: A332DTW and 4 guests