The Real Iran, What Many People Don't Know

reply to post by Oldnslo


Oldnslo....we need more people like you!

Speaking of old and slow....you're describing me, right???

Originally posted by justamomma
no, the lunatics and felons will get them illegally leaving those good citizens waiting to get their background checks finished unarmed to protect themselves against the lunatics and felons.

Apparently you missed the point. I know it can be difficult to comprehend logic, but I'm sure you will get the hang of it.
Of course lunatics and felons will get then illegally when they cannot get them legally. This is not in dispute. So of course Iran will try and develop nukes regardless. The point I was making was in reference to a question about why other countries have the right to try and stop Iran from aquiring nukes. Please try and focus and comprehend was is being discussed. This way you will not embarrass yourself with comments which show your lack of understand the point at hand.

reply to post by WhatTheory


i am not easily embarrased, but thanks for the concern. seems to be about the only concern you have shown for anyone and anything other than war and pushing your warped views on others since you have started posting on this thread.



[edit on 5-7-2008 by justamomma]

Originally posted by justamomma
i am not easily embarrased, but thanks for the concern.

I never said I was concerned. Just pointing out the obvious.

seems to be about the only concern you have shown for anyone and anything other than war and pushing your warped views on others since you have started posting on this thread.

I am not pushing anything. Again, just stating the obvious. What other concerns should I have? Again, you show your lack of understanding because I am not for war. War should be a last step. However, the OP was such obvious propaganda and nothing but how people 'feel' that someone has to try and talk about realities and logic.

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Originally posted by justamomma
I am not pushing anything. Again, just stating the obvious. What other concerns should I have? Again, you show your lack of understanding because I am not for war. War should be a last step. However, the OP was such obvious propaganda and nothing but how people 'feel' that someone has to try and talk about realities and logic.

alright.. given this. slate cleared. i have a hard time reading your posts and understanding your "logic" because it does seem so filled w/ hate and simply put, you seem to just want to be right to be right. perhaps you just feel passionate.

so, could you, in a kind way, explain to me why you feel that we have the right to go into any country and "dictate" (for lack of a better term.... i am sure you will have no problems correcting me here and if you are correct, i will accept) what they can and can't do, what they can and can't have, blah blah. please, bc i am just not understanding the view points you have had thus far.


Congressman Jim Moran says "US action against Iran is proposed only because it is a threat to Israel. No one's suggested that Iran is a potential threat to the United States, any more than Iraq could ever have been a threat to the United States."

"In effect, all the same groups and individuals who were pushing for war against Iraq are pushing for war against Iran."


so, given the above, according to the principles that this country was founded, namely not to make alliances w/ any other country, how do you, in your mind, justify us going to war?

or is it just that someone gave another view to iran as opposed to the propaganda the media puts out?

you are right. i am not understanding YOUR logic. but to insult my intelligence does nothing to help me or anyone else understand where you are coming from.

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Originally posted by harvib
Either Nukes are acceptable in war or they are not. If they are not we should not be trying to justify our use of them. If they are we should not be trying to force other Countries to disasemble theirs. It's hard to preach the moral high ground against WMDs and then condone their usage when we use them.

Not quite right.
Look at it like the laws for gun control. Before someone can purchase a gun they must have their background checked because we don't want lunatics and felons getting guns legally. The same applies to nukes. We don't want lunatics like the government of Iran to have nukes because they will use them as a first strike weapon and to blackmail their neighbors. This is why most other countries in that region are dead set against Iran getting nukes.

I see. And who is responsible for performing the background check? Did they give the current administration the right to have nukes? What qualifies as making a Government "lunatics"?

Originally posted by justamomma
i have a hard time reading your posts and understanding your "logic" because it does seem so filled w/ hate

Having a different opinion does not equal hate. I don't see how you are getting 'hate' filled posts when I am nothing but considerate to others except of course when someone starts spewing insults first.

explain to me why you feel that we have the right to go into any country and "dictate" (for lack of a better term.... i am sure you will have no problems correcting me here and if you are correct, i will accept) what they can and can't do, what they can and can't have, blah blah. please, bc i am just not understanding the view points you have had thus far.

I never said we have a 'right' to dictate what a country can or cannot do except when nukes are involved because that will affect us directly.

Iran should not have nukes because their government is run by crazy people who would use them as an offensive weapon and to blackmail other countries. Iran's government has stated many times that they would destroy other countries. Iran also could do this indirectly by providing the bomb to one of the terrorists groups they support.

Congressman Jim Moran says "US action against Iran is proposed only because it is a threat to Israel. No one's suggested that Iran is a potential threat to the United States, any more than Iraq could ever have been a threat to the United States."

First of all, this is the opinion of one person. Others have a different opinion. Iran is a threat as I stated above. If it were not for Israel destroying Iraq's nuclear facilities years ago, saddam would have had the bomb way before the first gulf war.

so, given the above, according to the principles that this country was founded, namely not to make alliances w/ any other country, how do you, in your mind, justify us going to war?

I don't believe your premise is correct. What do you mean it is a principle of this country not to make alliances with other countries? Where is this stated because I have never heard of it.

but to insult my intelligence does nothing to help me or anyone else understand where you are coming from.

How am I insulting your intelligence? I don't get it.
Does having a different view from you regarding this issue make you feel this way?

Originally posted by harvib
I see.

Apparently you don't.

And who is responsible for performing the background check? Did they give the current administration the right to have nukes?

What are you talking about?
Nobody wants Iran to have nukes. This includes the U.S., EU, UN and most of the countries in the middle east.

reply to post by mr-lizard


Who are you to judge? Plain and simple really.

Someone must have struck a nerve.

reply to post by WhatTheory


the house of reps. released a repots that 500 chemical weapons were found in iraq but the liberal media dosent think that is enough evidence..


www.foxnews.com...

www.foxnews.com...

Originally posted by DaleGribble
reply to post by WhatTheory

 

the house of reps. released a repots that 500 chemical weapons were found in iraq but the liberal media dosent think that is enough evidence..


www.foxnews.com...

www.foxnews.com...

Yeah, I read about that some time ago. I still believe Iraq moved their weapons and evidence to Syria.

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

You don't hear the liberal media or everyday liberals for that matter talking about this point.

reply to post by WhatTheory


i though that would also have been the case the day the war started. hussien thought it would be like the first war and when we didnt find anything we would just let him go on killing his own people.


boy was he wrong.

[edit on 15amu122007 by DaleGribble]

reply to post by WhatTheory

Look at it like the laws for gun control. Before someone can purchase a gun they must have their background checked because we don't want lunatics and felons getting guns legally. The same applies to nukes. We don't want lunatics like the government of Iran to have nukes because they will use them as a first strike weapon and to blackmail their neighbors. This is why most other countries in that region are dead set against Iran getting nukes.

I will try again...

You compared having nukes to gun control laws. You mentioned that just like a background check is necessary for the ownership of a gun the same applies to the ownership of a nuke. My question is if that is true who is put in charge of this background check. In otherwords who or what organazation has jurisdiction to determine that certain Nations can and certain Nations can not have nuclear weapons?

reply to post by harvib


The nations of the world have the right! America, France, Spain, China, Australia, Japan, Germany,every nation, every person has the right to their opinion. And those with the power are the ones to enforce it, that is how this planet has been doing business for centuries! Come on people you think some lowsy nature pics are going to prove something for Iran. Look at Iran's history, the government there is set on destroying the west and its allies, and will remain this way for years. Something needs to be done, and it shall be done... for my future and the future of this world.

C.I.A stirred things up over there covertly and that is the basis that lead to this terrorism plot.



(Just like the C.I.A is planning something with one of our bridges in the world.) in 2008. A small detonator of some type strapped to a bridge, could be an atom bomb. I believe it took place in August of this year. Looked to be a foreign country. I was told a very HIGH PROBABILITY on this by dream guide.

This was one of my lucid dreams.




But whats behind this is more -Space Wars- from past memories.

[edit on 6-7-2008 by menguard]

[edit on 6-7-2008 by menguard]

Iran will be lied about as it's next on the list. Justification is necessary. After Iran it will be Syria. The world will never know peace until the Middle East is left alone. Iraq was of no threat to the world, however, like Iran and Syria, they are a threat to Israel. Israel should be left to fend for themselves and stop receiving support from the U.S. Israel should work towards co-existing peacefully with the Islamic nations, but they chose to wipe out the enemies at the cost of lives of the soldiers and victims of terrorism.

reply to post by uberfubar


no comment except....'uberfubar' is quite possibly the BEST screenname EVER!!!!

Welcome to ATS!!!!!!

This wont stop the ignorant masses from supporting a nuclear strike on that country.

reply to post by caballero


There is only one hope. IF, and that's a big if, there are ETs who over-see this planet, then they won't allow the 'nuking' of Iran.

Frankly, I see only the best solution.....take out the leaders of the countries involved. Leave the innocent people alone!!

Originally posted by DaleGribble
reply to post by WhatTheory

 

the house of reps. released a repots that 500 chemical weapons were found in iraq but the liberal media dosent think that is enough evidence..


www.foxnews.com...

www.foxnews.com...

What cracks me up then is you make the claim about the 'Liberal' media hiding things and then gives links to the most 'CONSERVATIVE' and biased news agency on this planet!

This debate has moved completely off topic I'm afraid. It was originally about trying to show that the general Iranian is pretty much like you and me here in America (if you are from here.) That they live, love, laugh, and so on. This wasn't about their corrupt government.

Then again, where do we get most of the jibberish about what their leader is saying all of time? Oh yeah, primarily from.......drum roll........

FOX NEWS!

You see, it's the liberals vs. the conservatives. The conservatives are always for war. It's the reasons for starting them that usually cause them problems. The liberals (the extreme left) are for communism with a twist. I have found that the majority of Americans are right down the middle. The majority don't want war and do want to help their fellow man.

It's usually the MSMs like Fox that get the middle ground Americans all in an uproar for war. Then, after the 'TRUTH' comes out the majority begin to move further away from the middle towards the left because they feel that the 'conservatives' have betrayed them.

I bet you probably listen to and 'BELIEVE' Bill O'Reilly too! There is the perfect example of corruptness.