Israel no match for Iran military might

Originally posted by Tw0Sides
reply to post by Aeons

 

Im not going to buy this whole Iman crap.
We are talking about nuclear power, and the off chance of nuclear weapons.

Bogeymen on either side is not what this OP or the Iran threat is about.

I see; you use religious Meta-Narratives and appeals to the views of the insane-religious only when it suits you. Okay then.

Originally posted by Aeons

I see, you use religious Meta-Narratives and appeals to the views of the insane-religious only when it suits you. Okay then.

Please sir
Try to keep up.
My narrative was in response to Sonny calling Irans leaders religeous nutjobs.
I pointed out to him, their are plenty of nutjobs on both sides, I dont use religion to make a point.

Thats for weak based arguements to rely on.

Originally posted by g146541
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

Ummm...
You did not read your history correct, it was 4 not 3.
The stain we call israel attacked the US and was victorious, but in our defense we did not shoot back, mostly because our fighters were recalled.
Remember the U.S.S LIBERTY.
Here you will find a wealth of factual information.
So, yeah israel is more than a match for whatever country they go up against, as long as they controll "key" people.
Backstabbing country should be cleansed.

You and Hitler would get along. As for me, I'll stand for all people to live in peace and free from the threat of tyrants and dictators. There are two sides to this story. There is the one side that the leaders stand on and the side that the people of each nation stand on. The same goes for our country. Do we need a good cleansing too? Which group here in the states would you cleanse? Hate cannot dispel hate. Only love dispels hate. Prejudice stands on the side of the enemy that steals, kills and destroys. The people of Israel are not the problem.

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by Aeons

I see, you use religious Meta-Narratives and appeals to the views of the insane-religious only when it suits you. Okay then.

Please sir
Try to keep up.

Keep up Sir?

She has told you a few times already that she isn't a "Guy nor Sir"

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by Aeons
I am not siding with Israel.
Again, Iran would be rich beyond imagining if their leaders were not tools.

A lot of countries would be rich beyond if their leaders werent tools.

You sure bash the Muslims,Persians a lot for a guy with no dog in the race, along with your Huckleberries.

I ain't a guy, so I have no huckleberries at all

Pay attention to what others are writing then maybe some will start taking your argument a bit more seriously.

reply to post by SLAYER69


My use of the word Sir is not a slant, I do it in most of my posts.
The page turned and I was replying to two posters, I missed that reply denoting she, was a she.
I try to remain polite , even though I get worked up, but Sexist Im not.
I enjoy Aeon,s debates, she is very informed.

Im sorry you felt the need to come to her rescue.

well i think even Isreal knows that, thats why they have a pact with America stating that the US will back up Isreal if they are attacked.

Let's keep the commentary on topic...

...shall we?

The topic, since some appear to have misplaced it, is:

Israel no match for Iran military might.


Post to the topic, not each other.

Originally posted by Awen24

Originally posted by RizeorDie
If Iran is attacked, it will start a chain reaction of events that eventually leads to the muslim liberation of palestine, and occupation of Israel and who ever dwells there. Simple as.

Exactly. Just like in 1967, where the muslim armies triumphed over Israel, drove all the Jews into the sea, and liberated the Dome of the Rock from the Zionist oppressors.

Right?

Iran wasnt amongst that army.

You are yet to witness the weight of Iran.

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by Aeons


There is a reason why the Islamic countries use guerrilla warfare. It allows them to make people with down syndrome or they've raped into martyr-walking-bombs and not have to spend money on training people who suck with expensive equipment.

edit on 2012/2/4 by Aeons because: (no reason given)

Cant wait for someone to try and disprove this........

Star for ya.........

How can you disprove conjecture? Conjecture is a proposition that is unproven but is thought to be true and has not been disproven.

Originally posted by Aeons
So if anyone has them, everyone should. But no one should have them.

I don't get you guys. You are anti-proliferation....except where you are for total proliferation.

If that is how you want to misconstrue it, go right ahead. I know that I have stated before that I do not believe any country should have nuclear weapons, but, if one country (US) has them, they do not have the right to go and tell another country (Iran) not to have them. Make sure your house is clean before you tell someone their house is dirty. The US has MUCH more pressing issues than Iran's potential to have a nuclear bomb.

People have been saying this for decades oh wait Israel has kicked ass and is still around.

Yawn Iranian tv?

Going back to sleep oh if people really want to talk about "stolen land" guess the never looked at the British Mandate but alas the only country who stole land is Israel when history shows otherwise.

Originally posted by neo96
People have been saying this for decades oh wait Israel has kicked ass and is still around.

Yawn Iranian tv?

Going back to sleep oh if people really want to talk about "stolen land" guess the never looked at the British Mandate but alas the only country who stole land is Israel when history shows otherwise.

What wars has Israel been a part of? Surprise attacks on the PLO? Cease fire brokered by the UN does not qualify as a "win". When have they actually attacked an enemy capable enough to fight back?

I agree the Iranian TV is a little biased.

As for Israelis "stealing" land, well I think that is quite a big over simplification of things.

reply to post by superman2012


Seriously with that?


en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by superman2012

 

Seriously with that?


en.wikipedia.org...

edit on 4-2-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

Yes. Any wars where it wasn't against the PLO and within the last 40 years and with an enemy that was close in fire power like Iran? I know, there are restrictions on what I want, but, c'mon, technology has changed since the battle for their independence and the Yom Kippur war was quite awhile ago.

Edit:

When have they actually attacked an enemy capable enough to fight back?

reply to post by superman2012


Didn't read the link did you cause if you have you would have your answers.

reply to post by neo96


No, I read the link that is why I clarified it for you.

Edit: Sorry, I meant clarified my question for you.

It's kind of bad when you have to clarify a clarification right?

Originally posted by superman2012

Originally posted by Aeons
So if anyone has them, everyone should. But no one should have them.

I don't get you guys. You are anti-proliferation....except where you are for total proliferation.

If that is how you want to misconstrue it, go right ahead. I know that I have stated before that I do not believe any country should have nuclear weapons, but, if one country (US) has them, they do not have the right to go and tell another country (Iran) not to have them. Make sure your house is clean before you tell someone their house is dirty. The US has MUCH more pressing issues than Iran's potential to have a nuclear bomb.

Ridiculous. That you do not understand the consequences of your views is horrendously irresponsible.

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by superman2012

Originally posted by Aeons
So if anyone has them, everyone should. But no one should have them.

I don't get you guys. You are anti-proliferation....except where you are for total proliferation.

If that is how you want to misconstrue it, go right ahead. I know that I have stated before that I do not believe any country should have nuclear weapons, but, if one country (US) has them, they do not have the right to go and tell another country (Iran) not to have them. Make sure your house is clean before you tell someone their house is dirty. The US has MUCH more pressing issues than Iran's potential to have a nuclear bomb.

Ridiculous. That you do not understand the consequences of your views is horrendously irresponsible.

Enlighten me then if I am so ridiculous.

Edit: Oh I get what you are saying, but again, you are misconstruing what I am saying.

When I say that the US shouldn't tell another country not to have them, I am not saying that Iran should have them, I may have at the beginning of this Iran debacle, but, I am starting to clarify what I mean when I say that. I mean that I am for global nuclear disarmament. Everyone should use Thorium reactors if they want nuclear power. So no. It is not "horrendously irresponsible" you just saw what you wanted to see.

Originally posted by superman2012

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by Aeons


There is a reason why the Islamic countries use guerrilla warfare. It allows them to make people with down syndrome or they've raped into martyr-walking-bombs and not have to spend money on training people who suck with expensive equipment.

edit on 2012/2/4 by Aeons because: (no reason given)

Cant wait for someone to try and disprove this........

Star for ya.........

How can you disprove conjecture? Conjecture is a proposition that is unproven but is thought to be true and has not been disproven.

Why do you think this is conjecture? I happen to keep up on these things, and this isn't conjecture at all. This is a known Islamist terrorist ... er.... "freedom fighter" .... tactic. You can relieve your dishonour by becoming a martyr. You can be taken care of by providing your mentally deficient child to be a martyr. It is an HONOUR.

See, I wanted to believe the people like you. I did. Desperately.

But you fail to live up to the standards of reality. And the standards of the Middle East, North Africa's leaders are disgusting.

I did always prefer the Dark Knight. Or Lobo.

Originally posted by RizeorDie

Originally posted by Awen24

Originally posted by RizeorDie
If Iran is attacked, it will start a chain reaction of events that eventually leads to the muslim liberation of palestine, and occupation of Israel and who ever dwells there. Simple as.

Exactly. Just like in 1967, where the muslim armies triumphed over Israel, drove all the Jews into the sea, and liberated the Dome of the Rock from the Zionist oppressors.

Right?

Iran wasnt amongst that army.

You are yet to witness the weight of Iran.

All that practicing on their wives ought to help on the battlefield?