Why do you love Iran?

Who says i 'love' Iran


they do wrong too...

i just support their need to not be attacked by the USA/NATO/Israel/the Western Empire

So I ask all of you arguing about the causes of this war, why would you not side with the USA?

Why side with Iran? What are they going to do for you?

America is far from perfect, but when World Wars are concerned, we WIN and we WIN big!

In the case of war, you hardly ever want to go with the little guy. Only in miraculous circumstances will Iran ever win this war by itself.

reply to post by kellynap43


My first reaction to your response was to puff my chest and say "are you calling me stupid?" But considering that you did not read the link you posted, which was footnoted due to errors in translation, and used that information in an attempt to prove Ahmadinejad said something that he in fact did not, I will throw off your insult as being as silly as your link.

The fact is that you are using false information to posit a theory in which the original information is contextually false. Your link is a lie.

As my father used to say: "Lie to me and I'll kick your ass!"

reply to post by jjf3rd77


What a cute little troll you are…. I'll play with you... but only until I have to leave

So all of the official reports I am hearing about, you know ones that top officials tell the MSM to tell us about Iran makes me sick to my stomach everyday

Then I guess the governments "War mongering propaganda efforts" through the MSM are effective...

Iran wants Israel wiped off the map.

Probably because the Muslims are still pissed about Muslim/Arab land being taken away by foreign aggressors Arab–Israeli Conflict & The Six Day War

Iran leader visits Latin American communist countries

AMERICA Not only visits with Communist China… we provide them with $#!+ loads of money with our ever surmounting debt … we ship our manufacturing jobs there… everything you find in 90% of stores comes from there... So where EXACTLY is the problem?!?

Iran creates suicide bombers

Israeli conducts “raids” on Muslims Google Search - "Israeli Raids"

Iran set to announce new nuclear advancements

Wow!!! It’s about time they made it on this list Timeline of nuclear weapons development

Iran creates stealth flying boat...

Please tell me your joking???…. Fine, then I challenge you to a duel… you get Iran’s Super-Duper New Stealth Flying Boat… and I’ll get this “Out-Dated” “ Stealth Tech” from the 80’s Clunky Old Stealth Tech

Iran sends Obama model toy drone

…. Ya …. Because it’s a known fact that “you must declare war” upon receiving a toy

Iran will not stop nuclear program

Ummm, and neither will these countries….. Countries that will not stop their nuclear programs

US is ready with lethal weapons if Iran attacks (YES ATS this is a good thing! Do you not want to be protected?)

But what about when they decide YOU are the threat….

To me, it seems that this poorly put together administration has done everything in it's power to not go to war with Iran and Iran is not showing any signs of stopping their threats against the west. So why do people on ATS which the government (for now) allows to operate, love Iran so much?

Oh wow… now we live in the America where we are “allowed” to have free speech… what happened to unalienable “god given” rights



Oops times up gotta go [pats troll on head]

Bye-bye now

Originally posted by theBigToe

Originally posted by casenately
reply to post by theBigToe

 

I said I use allot of sources. You think MSM is news....pfft...you just went down a notch IMO

I think any publication with credibility is news.

"Any publication with credibility", huh? Talk about a non-statement. That's how EVERYBODY IN THE WHOLE WORLD feels.

The difference is in WHAT sources to you consider "credible" for WHICH issues, and WHY do you feel that way.

HINT: Most Universities and Academics do not consider TV news, major newspapers, or major magazines to be "credible" sources of information given their strong biases towards advertisers. Therefore, it is still acceptable to quote a magazine in the sense of "The New York Times recently stated in that ________". However, it is NOT acceptable to use that assertion as being evidentiary of fact, as pretty much anybody with an IQ over that of a common fern realizes special interests, corporate money, and corrupt politicians have run away with the media and destroyed any shred of journalistic integrity in the industry.

So please...explain what you consider "credible".

reply to post by jjf3rd77

Iran leader visits Latin American communist countries

Communism really? In no way do I support Iran, but throwing "communism" as a justification for military action is just stupid.

reply to post by jjf3rd77


Understand that just because we don't buy into the war propaganda does not mean we side with Iran.

The best way I can explain it is this: My brother was a big bully to other people in school. He would pick fights for the silliest of things. It was because he had some insecurity issues. Now there were a few times I had to stand up to my brother and knock him down when he bullied too much.

I may not agree with his bullying, and will stop it if I have too, but I still love him no matter what.

Same thing applies to the USA and Iran. I may have to put the USA in it's place for bullying Iran, but I still love it.

Does that make sense?

Here are some examples of how when in those videos of the midle east the caption reads "death to this or that"
Marg bar = death to/ DOWN WITH. It is always used to express discomfort and displeasure for. NOT DEATH LIKE KILLING!!!!


They are saying: "Marg bar basiji" (down with the baisjis)
www.theatlantic.com...

Outing Iran: Marg Bar
By The Daily Dish

Jul 19 2009, 10:09 AM ET
by Patrick Appel

A reader writes:


I wanted to make a few comments on the slogan of "death to Russia" from the Friday prayers:

1. "Death to ..." is not a correct translation for "Marg bar ..." although it is a literal translation, the real meaning is closer to "down with ..."; it is an expression of extreme dissatisfaction rather than the wishing of death. Remember "death to potatoes" from the campaign (as a sign of dissatisfaction with Ahmadinejad's distribution of potatoes among likely voters)? My guess is that it originated with "Marg bar shah", which at the time probably was literally meant; it was a particularly powerful and defiant slogan at the time and that memory has perpetuated this line of sloganeering.

www.theatlantic.com...

Khomeini is quoted as saying on November 5, 1979, "[America is] the great Satan, the wounded snake."[2] The term was used extensively during and after the Islamic Revolution,[3] but it continues to be in used in some Iranian political circles. Use of the term at rallies is often accompanied by shouts of "Marg bar Amrika!" ("Death to America" is an inexact translation of "Marg Bar Amrika", but is supposed to mean "Down with America").[4] The term has also found in political statements of Muslim and anti-American activists throughout the world. It is used in academic journals and media.[5]

en.wikipedia.org...

a generic reply to these threads.

I agree that he never said, wipe of map, he said wipe regime of the pages of history, referring to a political entity and not a racial or religious one.

when in all those videos they say (marg bar Esraiil), that does not mean death to Israel,
it means DOWN WITH, like if I say down with Ron Paul, I don't mean DEATH TO RON PAUL.

the words "marg bar " literally mean death to, but they are never meant to be taken literally. like if I say cool, it doesn't mean cold but rather nice or agreeable.

The focus is always on ZIONISM, not Jews since they have plenty of them in Iran, and it is not about Judaism, since the Iranian Jewish community even has its own schools and places of worship.

I know that the regime in Iran is terrible, but the people are just fighting against Zionism since they think it has caused too much suffering to the Palestinians, a people they identify with. The regime uses this to their advantage. That's all


yeah I never get why the line "has ties with the Iranian government" has anything to do with formalizing a newspapers garbage content with their government or its people. The fact that the government has its own servers in its own country make this very suspect. It's like if I say I have ties to the democratic national committee, when in reality I might just get a news letter or I may just be a member.

This is propaganda and every thread that is started using what has been proven to be fake and bias news from sources far removed from the person or people in question should be put in the hoax section. It is a government hoax, but a hoax none the less.

It's like if I was to put the Martian landing that was aired over the radio that caused mass hysteria, and say it was proof of an alien invasion. In the interests of informing people and keeping facts with facts and lies with lies this should be immediately treated as a propaganda effort.

If china by proxy of a newspaper located in Germany said that the USA was filled with reptilian leadership, it would immediately be put in skunk works or hoax section, no matter the offence the OP felt or the people who believed it felt. It is a lie and since ignorance is not to be tolerated, this slander of the Iranian people should not be tolerated. It is usually used to fuel xenophobia and anti Muslim sentiment. Not very tolerant or educated in my opinion.

just facts, not state sponsored BS. This is provable, not like 9/11. The facts are there.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
So I ask all of you arguing about the causes of this war, why would you not side with the USA?

Why side with Iran? What are they going to do for you?

America is far from perfect, but when World Wars are concerned, we WIN and we WIN big!

In the case of war, you hardly ever want to go with the little guy. Only in miraculous circumstances will Iran ever win this war by itself.

Correction. We WON big. The harsh truth is that the best the US has been able to pull off in the last 67 years is one stalemate along with a huge string of lengthy, expensive, and crushing defeats.

Planning a World War based upon the fact that we used to win them just shy of 100 years ago is just plain stupid.

reply to post by jjf3rd77


I don't.

I think we should bomb them back to the stone age!!

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
So I ask all of you arguing about the causes of this war, why would you not side with the USA?

Why side with Iran? What are they going to do for you?

America is far from perfect, but when World Wars are concerned, we WIN and we WIN big!

In the case of war, you hardly ever want to go with the little guy. Only in miraculous circumstances will Iran ever win this war by itself.

Correction. We WON big. The harsh truth is that the best the US has been able to pull off in the last 67 years is one stalemate along with a huge string of lengthy, expensive, and crushing defeats.

Planning a World War based upon the fact that we used to win them just shy of 100 years ago is just plain stupid.

We have won all "official" world wars. This is a fact. We didn't use to win them, we DID win them ALL. I'm talking about WWI and WWII because this war will be rightly entitled WWIII, although some people don't think it will escalate that big.

reply to post by milkyway12


that site all you people keeping using has been proven to be very questionable before. They are even the one that originated the misquote "off the map" that has been debunked around the world. The site owner is an Iraqi /Iranian. He was highly criticized and eventually had to step down as former head of the Iranian Judicial System PIO. Iraq and Iran were mortal enemies.

The owners / managing director is the former head of the Iranian Judicial System PIO.

Sadeq Larijani replaced Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi,

Grand Ayatollah Seyyed Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi (آیت الله سید محمود هاشمی شاهرودی) (Born 1948 in Najaf, Iraq[1]) is a moderate [2] Iraqi-Iranian politician and Twelver Shi'a Marja.[3][4][5] Hashemi Shahroudi was the leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, which has caused objections to his serving as the head of Iran's Judiciary System upon his appointment to the post. He served as head of the Judicial System till 2009. He is currently a member of the Guardian Council.

en.wikipedia.org...

Criticism

Mahmoud Shahroudi has received criticism from a number of Iranian scholars and lawyers. Mostafa Mohaqqeq Damad, a well known Iranian scholar and expert on Islamic law, wrote a letter of criticism in August 2009.[24][25][26]

en.wikipedia.org...

What Khatami and the reformist ulama’s discourse purported to was to limit the powers of the Supreme Leader and create a synthesis between the concept of the Islamic state and democracy

fis-iran.org...

Mostafa Mohaghegh Damad

Ayatollah Seyyed Mostafa Mohaghegh Damad is an Iranian Shia cleric, and reformist who has been called "a leading instructor" in Iran's major seminary city of Qom.[1] He gained some prominence in English-language news sources after he was reported by "reformist Web sites"[2] to have "sought to rally other clerics to oppose the use of moharebeh charges against political protesters," following the conviction and death sentence of Mohammad Amin Valian, a student who threw rocks at a 2009 election demonstration.[1]

According to his web site he received his traditional Islamic education in Arabic language and literature, Qur’an and hadith, Islamic philosophy, theology and jurisprudence at the Fayzieh School at Qom and achieved the status of Mujtahid (Ayatollah) in 1970. In addition he "pursued a modern academic education", receiving a B.A. in Islamic Philosophy (1969) and an M.A. in Islamic Jurisprudence (1980) from Tehran University. Following that he earned a Ph.D. in Law (Doctorat en Droit) at the Catholic University of Louvain-la-Neuve in Belgium in 1996. As of 2007 he was a professor in Faculty of Law at Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, and has been a fellow member of The Iranian Academy of Science since 1988. [3] He reportedly has held such posts in Iran as Chief of the State Inspectorate Organization, head of the Department of Islamic Studies of the Academy of Sciences of Iran, head of Commission of Judicial Bill Collection of Iran, and head of Commission of Compiling Judicial Acts.[4]

At a September 2005 speech in the United States written up by an Iranian American doctor, he gave his opinions that there are no irreconcilable differences between the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Islamic jurisprudence, that no compulsion is permissible in religion, that apostasy should be punished only if it involves undertaking actions to destabilize the social order, and that "nothing should be forced on the people by the government, not even daily prayers."[4]

so Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi does not represent the Iranian people who are currently trying to depose the regime...Give them time and let them win. Lets not get involved in yet another civil war in yet another country.

reply to post by casenately


I find all these people so scared of Iran hilarious.. www.globalfirepower.com...

Just look at the comparison. Its like MMA fighter Jon Jones being scared of Pee Wee Herman...

LMAO

Im much more fearful of our current administration than Iran.

reply to post by casenately


Pretty much any source is questionable. Use your common sense. We cant be there in person for everything that is going on outside of our lifes.

You are questionable , the government is questionable , the constitution is questionable , nearly everything is questionable.

I find your mentality questionable in all honesty. I am not trying to insult you , but your adamite denial of everything that says Iran is out for blood , is questionable.

---------------------------------

Wars (at least now a days) are not to ATTACK the civilians of that nation. It is the GOVERNMENT and their MILITARY we are going to kill. Their government represent the people whether they want them in power or not. Get over the people , stop looking at the people. The government has the ability to kill , and that is what we are after. The civilians can be the nicest people in the world , but the government is what is going to get them killed.

So stop saying " The People" the people havent been able to oust the regime. So the country they piss off the most or threaten the most , WILL oust him. Get over the people , we arent there to kill the people for the fun of it.

I have "faith" in humanity is an absolutely dumb statement. If you have "faith" in humanity , you missed about 6000 years of history. You have "faith" in your loved ones and hopefully your leaders to ensure you way of life. Having "faith" in humanity gets your country killed. Go back to school and learn a little history.

This also shows why you arent in government or politics because you arent a leader and arent capable to make hard decisions.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77

We have won all "official" world wars. This is a fact.

Honestly, you should send me some tutoring money.

I am constantly giving you an education.

The last clear "win" for the Marines , was the Superpower of Grenada.

Mind you, it was close.

reply to post by milkyway12


true, any source is possibly flawed. That´s why you need more than 1 or 2 sources for any information. The FARS news site is bust. Any newspaper agency that parroted this one source is either run by drop out journalists or is intentionally overlooking this blatant bad source. That is something taught in basic journalism. You don't lead with bad sources.

This one site, FARS NEWS is so questionable that a second, third or more alternative source is needed. Indeed the situation directly calls for it. Is there any other source that does not base its information on this one internet site? Is this lack of supporting evidence from unique and unrelated sources not indicative of foul play and deception?

Is questioning an obvious flaw in an argument not logical?

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
So I ask all of you arguing about the causes of this war, why would you not side with the USA?

Why side with Iran? What are they going to do for you?

America is far from perfect, but when World Wars are concerned, we WIN and we WIN big!

In the case of war, you hardly ever want to go with the little guy. Only in miraculous circumstances will Iran ever win this war by itself.

Taking sides implies support for the war. The world does not operate on black and white dichotomies alone.

One world war is hardly a "track record", for starters, since you're gloating (really, you're gloating???). Also, what does "winning" have to do with anything. I guess a serial killer "wins" when he slashes his victims' throats. I guess a sociopath "wins" when he effectively manipulates his target to do what he wants. In what way does "winning" constitute any value in this matter? We won Manifest Destiny, too....bravo.

i don't love Iran...

earlier in the thread people were talking about crimes against hummanity and someone brought up all these that he the believes are the US's fault

I'll see your list of naughty Iran vids and raise you Slavery, Genocide of Native Americans, Racial-Segregation, Japanese-American concentration camps, Guantanamo Bay, Waco, MK-Ultra, etc...

Slavery was around long before America was ever even found
Genocide of native americans yes bad there has been genocide all over the world
racial segregation has always been around again before the US was founded
Jap-American concentration camps can you blame them for doing that, the country was just attack by the japanese were it was believed that there was a lot of inside help prior to the attack
Guantanamo bay...ever hear of Unit 731 during WW2 or the Bataan Death march both much worse then G-Bay
Waco yea i crazed fanatic was held up in a compound with weapons, yea i feel bad for what happened to the innocent people
i got nothing to say about MK Ultra that was just stupid

People talk about how Iran is full of people like you and I which yes it probably is, they are also full of people who HATE you and I just because of what we stand for.

would you want to live in Iran, i doubt it
if Iran actualyl closes the Strait then the World is going to be in a real s***show not just the US, a lot of the worlds trade goes through those straits

Darius, himself a firm supporter of Ahura Mazda, the Zoroastrian god, said in the Behistun inscription that Ahura Mazda "gave" him his kingdoms, and with him Zoroastrianism became something like the national religion of the Persians. For the empire, however, he continued Cyrus's policy of toleration of local cults, and this mildness became and remained, except perhaps under Xerxes, a distinctive feature of Persian rule