Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Bashar Speech today (last 3 minutes)


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#16    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 13,799 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 07 January 2013 - 03:34 AM

View PostYamato, on 07 January 2013 - 01:10 AM, said:

At least be honest.   There's no evidence of a nuclear weapons program.  

The dishonest arguments are those that take the form of:
Humans develop nuclear weapons programs.   Iran has humans in it!   -->  Iran has a nuclear weapons program.
So logic and common sense mean nothing in this context?  Your example is specious at best and is NOT what I implied.  Governments - even wannabe theocracies - do not intentionally do self harm for no benefit.  There is no proof of a weapon because there hasn't been a weapon assembled yet.  Provision was made to fuel both power generation reactors and medical isotope reactors.  It was refused.  Iran will have their bomb when they choose to assemble it because the world has chosen to allow it.  Sort of like the gutless decision to allow Hitler his run up to WWII - and maybe with just as drastic results.  But hey - it's only FAIR, right?  The first time Iran even obliquely threatens Israel with a nuke they should deracinate  every proxy that Iran supports.  And they probably will.  Then the world will weep, moan and clench the fist but that's about all.  And the mullahs will watch and learn.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...

#17    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,638 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 07 January 2013 - 03:56 AM

View Postand then, on 07 January 2013 - 03:34 AM, said:

So logic and common sense mean nothing in this context?  Your example is specious at best and is NOT what I implied.  Governments - even wannabe theocracies - do not intentionally do self harm for no benefit.  There is no proof of a weapon because there hasn't been a weapon assembled yet.  Provision was made to fuel both power generation reactors and medical isotope reactors.  It was refused.  Iran will have their bomb when they choose to assemble it because the world has chosen to allow it.  Sort of like the gutless decision to allow Hitler his run up to WWII - and maybe with just as drastic results.  But hey - it's only FAIR, right?  The first time Iran even obliquely threatens Israel with a nuke they should deracinate  every proxy that Iran supports.  And they probably will. Then the world will weep, moan and clench the fist but that's about all.  And the mullahs will watch and learn.
Let the record show that I accept your admission that Iran has never even obliquely threatened Israel with a nuke.   Please join me in correcting others drunk on their Zionist fear-aid when they claim that Iran does this.

"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#18    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 13,799 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 07 January 2013 - 04:02 AM

View PostYamato, on 07 January 2013 - 03:56 AM, said:

Let the record show that I accept your admission that Iran has never even obliquely threatened Israel with a nuke.   Please join me in correcting others drunk on their Zionist fear-aid when they claim that Iran does this.
Yet you acknowledge none of the logic I explained.  This tells me that you are simply being partisan against Israel and that you support the eventual Iranian choice to have a nuke. So be it - honesty is all I ask on this point.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...

#19    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,638 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 07 January 2013 - 05:05 AM

View Postand then, on 07 January 2013 - 04:02 AM, said:

Yet you acknowledge none of the logic I explained.  This tells me that you are simply being partisan against Israel and that you support the eventual Iranian choice to have a nuke. So be it - honesty is all I ask on this point.
Not really in a party yet to be partisan but yes I would find opposing Israeli policy agreeable.   But you're wrong about one thing, I don't support anyone's choice to have a nuke and that puts me in a hypocritical spot if I try to impose the opposite on someone else.   Iran deserves to have their nuclear programs; on weapons specifically they do not.   But if we're going to take the international conventions seriously we have to insist that renegades like Pakistan and Israel get with the program.   It's a terrible danger to the world that Israel has nukes and all this warmongering over Iran really begs the question why aren't we making hay out of the terrorist nuclear powers who already have weapons of mass destruction?

"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#20    Corp

Corp

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 6,951 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa

Posted 07 January 2013 - 04:55 PM

Guys can we not derail the thread please?


On topic Assad makes promises of elections and a new constituation but vows to fight until the last "terrorist" is dead? Kind of a mixed message there. Really no surprises sadly.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse...A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

#21    Helen of Annoy

Helen of Annoy

    devil's aunt

  • Member
  • 21,926 posts
  • Joined:21 Jul 2008
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Croatia/Sucamore Beach

  • Where there's a will
    there's a way.

Posted 07 January 2013 - 06:52 PM

View PostCorp, on 07 January 2013 - 04:55 PM, said:

Guys can we not derail the thread please?


On topic Assad makes promises of elections and a new constituation but vows to fight until the last "terrorist" is dead? Kind of a mixed message there. Really no surprises sadly.

Promises elections with more than one candidate.
Elections, now with someone else but Me!
That’s like... anarchy :lol:

Seriously, I know I’m boring already, but did you guys know Assads were “elected” in elections with no other candidates?  
Isn’t that a bit... I don’t know... obvious?


It was like that in ex-Yugoslavia, where Broz was life-long president after it became distasteful to offend him with “elections”. There was never any other candidate because it was impossible to find an idiot who would - even for the sake of formality - pose as opposition. Then ex-Yu went to hell and Milosevic would win Serbian elections with 104% votes. I kid you not.

Dictators love elections, as long as they are certain they'll win.

Edited by Helen of Annoy, 07 January 2013 - 06:53 PM.

Posted Image

Have I ever lost the plot while reading one of your posts?
The will to live maybe, but not the plot...  -  Junior Chubb

#22    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 13,799 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 07 January 2013 - 08:34 PM

View PostCorp, on 07 January 2013 - 04:55 PM, said:

Guys can we not derail the thread please?


On topic Assad makes promises of elections and a new constituation but vows to fight until the last "terrorist" is dead? Kind of a mixed message there. Really no surprises sadly.
I think that as long as he has Russia and Iran backing him he will never surrender or compromise.  If he leaves Syria he is impotent or dead so what incentive is there for him to do otherwise?

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...

#23    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,638 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:36 AM

View PostHelen of Annoy, on 07 January 2013 - 06:52 PM, said:

Promises elections with more than one candidate.
Elections, now with someone else but Me!
That’s like... anarchy :lol:

Seriously, I know I’m boring already, but did you guys know Assads were “elected” in elections with no other candidates?  
Isn’t that a bit... I don’t know... obvious?

Dictators love elections, as long as they are certain they'll win.
We have elections like that all the time; where the incumbent is the only name on the ballot.  It doesn't show up in national elections but it does in lower level government.   What would determine how democratic a ruler is whether or not he was elected, not necessarily the nature by which he was reelected.  

Maybe one could say that in a perfect democracy, there's always competition in an election....or maybe in a perfect democracy, our elected leaders are so great that nobody else could seriously challenge them?   Maybe it's somewhere in between?   Maybe there is no perfect democracy.   I think a dictator who frees the slaves is superior to an elected leader who enchains them.  This is all just theoretical of course.

"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#24    acidhead

acidhead

    Were Not Your Slaves!

  • Member
  • 10,536 posts
  • Joined:13 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Victoria, BC CANADA

Posted 08 January 2013 - 04:17 AM

View PostTsa-La-Gie Oyate, on 07 January 2013 - 02:22 AM, said:

Bashar Assad holds a grip on his country and its people, he assumes the role of hero or protector of the Syrian people. Watching the people approach him like that in fanatic zeal concerns me and with over 45,000 people killed in the civil war, I expect Bashar Assad to be indicted to the International Human rights tribunal in the Hague if approved. I only hope the violence comes to an end in Syria with the end of the tyrannical Assad regime, but I ask myself whenever Democracy actually arrives in Syria.

Just curious... Why is the MSM now quoting the UN as saying 60, 000 have been killed?  This began yesterday.

"there is no wrong or right - just popular opinion"

#25    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 13,799 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 08 January 2013 - 04:57 AM

View Postacidhead, on 08 January 2013 - 04:17 AM, said:

Just curious... Why is the MSM now quoting the UN as saying 60, 000 have been killed?  This began yesterday.
I heard some lame excuse from the UN about their methods of calculating being refined....  20% more casualties than the worst estimates seems a little fishy to me.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...

#26    the-Unexpected-Soul

the-Unexpected-Soul

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 714 posts
  • Joined:02 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:syria

Posted 08 January 2013 - 07:03 AM

View Postacidhead, on 07 January 2013 - 01:09 AM, said:

A few days ago the number of deaths so far in this conflict was approximately 46, 000 individuals.  Most members here have been using the number 50, 000.  But today most trusted western mainstream media has been using a 60, 000 number.  They quote the UN as coming out with that number.

i don't know about the UN, but the "syrian network for human rights" have published a record for the year 2012, and the number of dead people that documented are 36323
here in this file, it's mentioned the name,gender,date,city......., and pics or videos if available for each dead individual

www.syrianhr.org/reports/All_2012_Updated.pdf


Edit to add that a lot of people estimate the number of dead people since the start of the revolution (2 years) are over 100,000, but many of them don't get documented, so that's why i accept the official numbers because they are always less than expected, i don't get Surprised if the number jumped from 50,000 to 60,000

Edited by the-Unexpected-Soul, 08 January 2013 - 07:22 AM.

Posted Image

#27    Helen of Annoy

Helen of Annoy

    devil's aunt

  • Member
  • 21,926 posts
  • Joined:21 Jul 2008
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Croatia/Sucamore Beach

  • Where there's a will
    there's a way.

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:50 PM

View PostYamato, on 08 January 2013 - 12:36 AM, said:

We have elections like that all the time; where the incumbent is the only name on the ballot.  It doesn't show up in national elections but it does in lower level government.   What would determine how democratic a ruler is whether or not he was elected, not necessarily the nature by which he was reelected.  

Maybe one could say that in a perfect democracy, there's always competition in an election....or maybe in a perfect democracy, our elected leaders are so great that nobody else could seriously challenge them?   Maybe it's somewhere in between?   Maybe there is no perfect democracy.   I think a dictator who frees the slaves is superior to an elected leader who enchains them.  This is all just theoretical of course.

True, but I, as common nobody, expect they at least draw a stick person and make it opposition. If we’re playing democratic house, there must be more than one candidate, or the elections are waste of time and money.  
I’m aware you are basically right, elections are often just decorum, and rigged in many more or less obvious ways, but believe it or not, my country has rather fair elections lately. There are attempts to bring a box or two of dead people’s votes or hide box of actual votes, but still, we really are choosing. I’m still shocked with it, positively shocked :D The trouble is we are choosing between dumb and dumber, but I won’t go off topic, that’s my problem :D  

Theoretically, yes.
Unfortunately, Assad is not even theoretically benevolent dictator. He has shown what he is and how far will he go in his egomania.


The exact number of victims (mentioned in other posts) may be few mass graves higher or lower, but the fact remains Assad is killing his own nation. Nothing can excuse that.
People worried that he is defending them from some western conspiracy should note he is in process of decimating his nation. Isn’t that what conspiracies are usually about? If someone is destroying Syria for shady purposes, that’s Assad.
Governments should be expendable, not citizens.

Posted Image

Have I ever lost the plot while reading one of your posts?
The will to live maybe, but not the plot...  -  Junior Chubb

#28    praetorian-legio XIII

praetorian-legio XIII

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 601 posts
  • Joined:01 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pensacola Beach

  • Beer; Now there's a temporary solution.

Posted 08 January 2013 - 06:38 PM

View PostMr Right Wing, on 06 January 2013 - 09:47 PM, said:

In the not too distant past China was on the rise and got its wings clipped by the British in the opium wars -
1. Afganistan was used to grow opium and smugglers allowed to take it across the border into China.
2. Iran was used to grow opium and smugglers allowed to take it across the border into China.

Fast foward 100 years and china is on the rise again -
1. Afganistan gets occupied and guess what? Thats right growing opium has been made legal by us.
2. In addition Afganistan was found to hold vast mineral reserves a couple years before the war including lithium. For those that dont know China exports 97% of the world lithium which is most commonly used in laptop and mobile phone batteries.
3. Iraq gets picked off so it cant export its oil to China.
4. Libya gets picked off insuring its oil goes to the west.
5. Irans ally Syria is in the process of being picked off.
6. Iran is being threatened despite no evidence of a nuclear weapons program.

Why is this? Is it because China gets 40% of its oil from Iran? Is it to flood China with opium?

It was the British who started the opium trade in China importing it from India. At that time it was one of the biggest money makers in the British Empire. It was the Chinese resentment of the British Dope Dealers that started the conflict (opium war)
So as far as flooding China with opium, it wouldn't be the first time.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users