It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I understand fully the heavy burden it will put on us, but it is our responsibility to not only give the people of Iran and Palestine our help against those that enslave them, but its also our responsibility to finance and help them in whatever way we can to get their new government off the ground and help sustain that until they are capable of doing so on their own.
Originally posted by theBigToe
In light of the several events that have transpired between Iran and the worlds powers that be, the argument whether to appease Ayatollah Khomeini’s ambitions to harness that ‘peaceful’ nuclear energy into a bomb to avoid a military conflict, or to prevent what could be the most heinous act of terrorism this world will have ever seen, has escalated into an emotional, political battle back and forth with both sides showing no signs of conceding. Many feel very strongly that the intervention of Western countries like the United States in the affairs of nations like Libya, Syria, Egypt, Iran, etc., is unwelcome and that any case for a military conflict should be instantly disregarded as a front for “American Imperialism" that they feel was ‘proven’ during the decade long wars against ‘terror’ in Afghanistan and Iraq. This, they feel, should thus convince Western governments and its people that their foreign policy be converted into a military isolationist ideology that many of us in the West feel would only serve to produce an even greater atmosphere ripe for war and gratify a handful of known, narcissistic, war criminals who actively perpetrate violent crimes against Humanity, and who think they’re above the international communities law and entitled to commit whatever kind of atrocity they so desire.
So where does this debate start? Im somewhat compelled to begin where so many in support of Iran’s right to develop nuclear energy usually do (at the Islamic Revolution), and make very clear that its no secret the CIA helped to overthrow a pro-Western leader in Iran with a religious fanatic to prevent the further spread of the growing influence Communism had in the Middle East, but I will instead stick to what we know for sure and open this debate at the philosophy of governments and the clash of cultures that in the end, ultimately sabotage any chance we have for diplomacy.
There exists beneath religions veil of deceit the unquenchable drive to impose an absolutist, totalitarian, unquestionable, and universal morality on everybody and to categorize any criticism of the policies of that religion as ‘blasphemy’. Many will argue that this is absolutely ludicrous and untrue and then offer their perspective that religion is in the eye of the beholder and that individually, ‘we make it what we want’. While this is true when religion is injected into a multi-cultural society where people of all race and religion live together beneath a secular law thats void of the prejudices associated with religious ideology’s, the same cannot be said for when religion has been strictly injected into governments, like the ones that use the teachings of Muhammad via the Quran to formulate legislation in the country. When presented with their scripture that holds the intimidated citizens of Iran hostage and which makes it very clear that their religions stated goal is to, in a nutshell, take over the world, one cant help but perceive that a very real threat exists there in the leadership of Iran, and that letting them sit behind their borders with immunity while developing the means to produce nuclear weapons and sponsoring terrorist cells like Hezbollah to wage Jihad on the infidel, is not only a ridiculously naive approach to handling the situation, but a lethal one. The same scriptures, mind you, that the Mullah’s who hold power over the proud people of Iran, impose on all children and indoctrinate them with the bigotries of Islam before they have even had a chance to think for themselves. If you’re a bit light on the details, or if you have simply forgotten, let me refresh your memory:
Quran (2:191-193) - "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution of Muslims is worse than slaughter of non-believers... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah."
The context of this passage is not that it only advocates defensive war as Muhammad and his gang had just relocated to Medina and were under no threat of attack by Meccan’s. The purpose of this passage is to encourage offensive warfare, or Jihad, and drive the Meccan’s from their own city (which they achieve in doing). This does not only apply to the Meccan’s, as later verses reveal that what is being mandated to them is the authority to wage war on the infidel, on unbelievers, and to not halt until the world either submits to Allah, converts to Islam, or is exterminated.
Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by redoubt
I respect your point of view but I must point out that FREEDOM is not an ideology...it's a God given right.
Second, the Iranians are quite capable of changing their own regime, but that ability will be significantly diminished if the Mullahs are permitted to acquire nuclear weapons.
Finally, if they don't change the regime we are now faced with a huge threat. They've had 10 years to get it done and have been stopped before.
Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by theBigToe
S&F !!! Very well written and well thought out position.
I truly believe that a large percentage of Americans agree with your assessment and are willing to go along with your call. I don't think the American dissenters here on ATS represent the majority.
You're absolutely right that conspiracy theory and a general distrust of America's intentions are getting in the way of doing the logical thing. What seems like a great reason to act for some folks sparks skepticism and fear in others. Many are far too skeptical to consider that Americans might actually care more about the Iranian people than Iran's fanatical, oppressive leaders.
In the end, I think Iranian leaders with bring about their own demise very soon; be it at the hands of the world community or powers within their own country.
I just don't see another way out of this.
Why are Iran's leaders always portrayed as normal everyday people? Truth is, they only have one agenda on their mind and that is sadly to spread Islam around the world. They brainwash their society into thinking that they are good people, 1000X more than the Politicians in America do.
I always hear about the libertarian dream of isolationism and leaving everybody alone. Do you think Iran will leave Israel or us alone? We are not on their soil now, and they are already attacking each other in covert operations.
Originally posted by seabag
You’re asking a logical question. Why would anyone think that Iran wouldn’t attack if they had the means? I hear people say “Iran has never attacked anyone” but this is false. Iran has been attacking and killing Israelis and Americans through their terrorist proxies for decades!!edit on 17-2-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by jjf3rd77
Well, nobody REALLY knows what Libertarians are all about (kidding)! You’re asking a logical question. Why would anyone think that Iran wouldn’t attack if they had the means? I hear people say “Iran has never attacked anyone” but this is false. Iran has been attacking and killing Israelis and Americans through their terrorist proxies for decades!!
I always hear about the libertarian dream of isolationism and leaving everybody alone. Do you think Iran will leave Israel or us alone? We are not on their soil now, and they are already attacking each other in covert operations.edit on 17-2-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)
So where does this debate start? Im somewhat compelled to begin where so many in support of Iran’s right to develop nuclear energy usually do (at the Islamic Revolution), and make very clear that its no secret the CIA helped to overthrow a pro-Western leader in Iran with a religious fanatic to prevent the further spread of the growing influence Communism had in the Middle East, but I will instead stick to what we know for sure and open this debate at the philosophy of governments and the clash of cultures that in the end, ultimately sabotage any chance we have for diplomacy.