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.


- - - - -

Iran Rejects U.S.Talks


  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

#16    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,444 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 11 February 2013 - 11:56 PM

View Postand then, on 11 February 2013 - 11:48 PM, said:

Perhaps you'd care to repost ONE where I specifically said I think Iran is going to nuke Israel?  I might have alluded to it as a possibility at some point but it hardly has been a theme with me so prove that one Yam.  I have consistently said that the danger of an Iranian bomb is from proliferation and causing it's proxies to overstep, thus leading to regional war.
When I commonly see your username displayed all the way down the list of threads ending every discussion in this ME forum, the 'and then' show certainly has a theme to it, Zionist Israel.  We have both learned the hard way that inviting this kind of criticism of your content is frowned upon by the moderators here, so I'm not going to fall into that hole again when that's how I (we) got banned the last time.   But finding evidence contrary to what you just claimed is easy, if anyone else cares to look, they'll find plenty there as a cursory search of your content quickly revealed.

And nobody need look any further than right here. You just did it again and don't even know it.   What you just described is Iran nuking Israel but just going about it in a different way than some other slightly more conventional way you're presuming I just accept without speaking about.   If it's delivered by proxy instead of by rocket, that doesn't count?  

So now you think that Iran would build an atomic bomb and then give it away to someone else?   What evidence do you have to support this?   :huh:

Edited by Yamato, 12 February 2013 - 12:28 AM.

"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

#17    Professor Buzzkill

Professor Buzzkill

    Integrity is all we have

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:White Cloud

Posted 12 February 2013 - 12:13 AM

Yamato & and then. You are both in my top 10 favorite posters to this forum, surely you guys can be more civil?

As to Iran rejecting the US "talks" (i think threats might be a better word), i can appreciate where they are coming from. Iran is in the position where they have annouced that they will not be selling oil in US$ anymore. Can anyone name another country that sold oil in Euros/gold that wasn't invaded by the US?

Now can anyone think of a nuclear armed country that the US has invaded?

I think a nuke will enable them to sell their comodities in any currancy they want. What this means is that IF Iran ever does make a bomb, it will be the biggest threat to our way of life, as economic collapse will be inevitable. The USA have moved from Gold Standard to Oil standard by being the sole trading currency for said comodity. As soon as oil is removed from being the standard we measure the value of US$ to, the US$ will become worthless.


#18    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 13,640 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 12 February 2013 - 12:35 AM

View PostProfessor Buzzkill, on 12 February 2013 - 12:13 AM, said:

Yamato & and then. You are both in my top 10 favorite posters to this forum, surely you guys can be more civil?

As to Iran rejecting the US "talks" (i think threats might be a better word), i can appreciate where they are coming from. Iran is in the position where they have annouced that they will not be selling oil in US$ anymore. Can anyone name another country that sold oil in Euros/gold that wasn't invaded by the US?

Now can anyone think of a nuclear armed country that the US has invaded?

I think a nuke will enable them to sell their comodities in any currancy they want. What this means is that IF Iran ever does make a bomb, it will be the biggest threat to our way of life, as economic collapse will be inevitable. The USA have moved from Gold Standard to Oil standard by being the sole trading currency for said comodity. As soon as oil is removed from being the standard we measure the value of US$ to, the US$ will become worthless.
I think if you look at the tone of my posts you will see I have tried to be civil.    As to your points on Iran and a nuke I think you may well be accurate in your assessment but the reasons to justify them having a weapon will, IMO, pale when they actually have it.  You seem to assume that they simply want protection and I think they are after much more than just that.  Time will tell, but one thing sure is that once they have a bomb the region becomes inherently more unstable and that works  to no one's advantage.  An Iranian bomb will embolden Hizballah and Syria and probably even Hamas.  Israel is a formidable foe and if she gets pushed into a fight inadvertently as happened in 2006 in Lebanon, the results could be far different if they know Iran's leaders have a nuke to be sent their way via a ballistic missile - a certainty given time.  It's a no win in the long run but it is about to become a reality.  This has been my assertion long term - I have not regularly pushed the idea that Iran would ever try a first strike against Israel EXCEPT if a twelver actually got hold of launch capability.  That is yet future.

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

#19    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,444 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 February 2013 - 01:36 AM

View Postand then, on 12 February 2013 - 12:35 AM, said:

I think if you look at the tone of my posts you will see I have tried to be civil. As to your points on Iran and a nuke I think you may well be accurate in your assessment but the reasons to justify them having a weapon will, IMO, pale when they actually have it.  You seem to assume that they simply want protection and I think they are after much more than just that.  Time will tell, but one thing sure is that once they have a bomb the region becomes inherently more unstable and that works  to no one's advantage.  An Iranian bomb will embolden Hizballah and Syria and probably even Hamas.  Israel is a formidable foe and if she gets pushed into a fight inadvertently as happened in 2006 in Lebanon, the results could be far different if they know Iran's leaders have a nuke to be sent their way via a ballistic missile - a certainty given time.  It's a no win in the long run but it is about to become a reality.  This has been my assertion long term - I have not regularly pushed the idea that Iran would ever try a first strike against Israel EXCEPT if a twelver actually got hold of launch capability.  That is yet future.
Unless there was evidence that Iran would attack Israel after getting a nuke (THE assertion served ad nauseum by the Israeli regime for years now) then I don't know how anyone could justify Israel attacking Iran, over mere conjecture and political posturing.  

I think we've both not only tried to be civil, I think we've been civil.   Attacking positions is a part of debate; it's where it becomes personal that's uncivil and I don't see that happening here.   Criticizing the content of our respective archives should be fair game.  Frankly, I'd love to be challenged in that way, without being insulted personally of course.

"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    acidhead

acidhead

    Were Not Your Slaves!

  • Member
  • 10,511 posts
  • Joined:13 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Victoria, BC CANADA

Posted 12 February 2013 - 08:21 AM

How many times has the Prez of Iran asked for a one-on-one debate with the Prez of the USA?  The answer is too many times to count.  Personally I would pay for the pay-per-view to witness Obama vs. Ahmadinejad LIVE.  I would love to hear how Obama would try to counter Ahmadinejad's arguments.

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

#21    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 12 February 2013 - 08:49 AM

He talks to NK why would he need to talk to us. NK is more then willing to share its nuclear tech with them while we only want to sanction them. For good or bad thats the world we live in.


#22    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 13,640 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:40 AM

View PostYamato, on 12 February 2013 - 01:36 AM, said:

Unless there was evidence that Iran would attack Israel after getting a nuke (THE assertion served ad nauseum by the Israeli regime for years now) then I don't know how anyone could justify Israel attacking Iran, over mere conjecture and political posturing.  

I think we've both not only tried to be civil, I think we've been civil.   Attacking positions is a part of debate; it's where it becomes personal that's uncivil and I don't see that happening here.   Criticizing the content of our respective archives should be fair game.  Frankly, I'd love to be challenged in that way, without being insulted personally of course.
What Israel has postured over and what I have said are two different things.  While it isn't impossible that a Twelver regime zealot might try a suicidal launch of a nuke against Israel in the future, I don't think that is the danger of an Iranian weapon.  For the umpteenth time: The danger is that Iran's proxies will be emboldened to act rashly and cause the region to stumble into war by pushing Israel too far in some attack -JUST LIKE Lebanon 2006.  Israel isn't going to nuke anyone in response to an attack that is less than an existential onslaught.  They have fought 3 wars since they became a nuclear weapons state.  But if a country like Syria began dropping salvo after salvo of chemical tipped scuds on their cities, well, all bets would be off then.  Iran is drama at this point - SYRIA is danger.

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

#23    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Commander in the Secret Space Fleet

  • Member
  • 24,475 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 12 February 2013 - 11:19 AM

View Postacidhead, on 12 February 2013 - 08:21 AM, said:

How many times has the Prez of Iran asked for a one-on-one debate with the Prez of the USA? The answer is too many times to count. Personally I would pay for the pay-per-view to witness Obama vs. Ahmadinejad LIVE. I would love to hear how Obama would try to counter Ahmadinejad's arguments.
You expect any rational arguments from him? (Ahmadasapancake, that is.)

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#24    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 12 February 2013 - 11:42 AM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 12 February 2013 - 11:19 AM, said:

You expect any rational arguments from him? (Ahmadasapancake, that is.)

Actually, he is one of the most rational, charismatic politicians I've heard speak. This doesn't dissuade me from disagreeing with his negative, conspiratorial, and at times outright anti-Semitic points of view, but, as far as debate goes, he can stand his ground.

You ever read transcripts from his UN speeches? He makes a lot of sense.


#25    Mr Right Wing

Mr Right Wing

    Poltergeist

  • Banned
  • 2,924 posts
  • Joined:16 Nov 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 February 2013 - 11:58 AM

View Postjoc, on 11 February 2013 - 12:44 PM, said:

Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei rejects U.S. offer of talks

Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei rejected Thursday a U.S. offer to negotiate one-on-one on Tehran’s disputed nuclear program so long as Washington continues to impose sanctions on Iran.

“You (Americans) want to negotiate when you are pointing the gun at Iran. The Iranian nation will not be intimidated by such actions,” Khamenei told air force commanders, according to excerpts of his speech posted on his website.

“Some rejoice at the offer of negotiations ... (but) negotiations will not solve anything,” he said.

LINK

Thanks again Obama...for more egg on America's face!

Mr Right-Wings translations -

US: You're evil, you stone women, you hang homosexuals, you would kill Jews and you're trying to get a nuclear weapon so you must be stopped.
Translation: We made a loss when Irans revolution kicked out our oil companies. They will give us back those oil rights or else!

Iran: Behold our supersonic torpedos, our submarines, our missle capabilities, our gun boats, our stealth fighters and our nuclear power program.
Translation: We must plant the seeds of doubt in US minds long enough for us to get a nuclear detterant. Otherwise they're going to invade and take our oil fields.

Britain: We must help America against these wicked evil people
Translation: Woof, woof yes master Obama. We'll obey if you let us have a slice of the cake.

Edited by Mr Right Wing, 12 February 2013 - 12:04 PM.


#26    Mr Right Wing

Mr Right Wing

    Poltergeist

  • Banned
  • 2,924 posts
  • Joined:16 Nov 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 February 2013 - 12:04 PM

View PostExpandMyMind, on 12 February 2013 - 11:42 AM, said:

Actually, he is one of the most rational, charismatic politicians I've heard speak. This doesn't dissuade me from disagreeing with his negative, conspiratorial, and at times outright anti-Semitic points of view, but, as far as debate goes, he can stand his ground.

You ever read transcripts from his UN speeches? He makes a lot of sense.

His speeches are on Youtube and very entertaining.

I've seen him get up at the UN and rip the US to peices over aggression towards Iran. The US representatives walk out. Then he tells everyone why he thinks the US did 9/11 then complains about their imperialism and foreign policy. All the Nato representatives and US allies then walk out. Ahamadinejad continues ripping the US to peices for another 15 minutes over things like Palatine and Israel. At the end the all the representatives left give him a standing ovation.

Its funny.


#27    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 13,640 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 12 February 2013 - 12:12 PM

View PostMr Right Wing, on 12 February 2013 - 12:04 PM, said:

His speeches are on Youtube and very entertaining.

I've seen him get up at the UN and rip the US to peices over aggression towards Iran. The US representatives walk out. Then he tells everyone why he thinks the US did 9/11 then complains about their imperialism and foreign policy. All the Nato representatives and US allies then walk out. Ahamadinejad continues ripping the US to peices for another 15 minutes over things like Palatine and Israel. At the end the all the representatives left give him a standing ovation.

Its funny.
Yeah, he's a real laugh riot alright.  It will be interesting to see who the ayatollah nutjob replaces him with in June.  That standing "O" at the end is a prime indication of how truly bizarre the US support of the UN is.  We host and to a very large extent pay the costs of an organization that wants the US destroyed.  Amazingly stupid.

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

#28    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 12 February 2013 - 12:12 PM

View PostMr Right Wing, on 12 February 2013 - 12:04 PM, said:

His speeches are on Youtube and very entertaining.

I've seen him get up at the UN and rip the US to peices over aggression towards Iran. The US representatives walk out. Then he tells everyone why he thinks the US did 9/11 then complains about their imperialism and foreign policy. All the Nato representatives and US allies then walk out. Ahamadinejad continues ripping the US to peices for another 15 minutes over things like Palatine and Israel. At the end the all the representatives left give him a standing ovation.

Its funny.

He makes a lot of valid points about U.S. (and Western) imperialism and hegemony, which is why he gets so many standing ovations. Though for his points on 9/11, I would like to direct him to the conspiracy section of this site.


#29    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 12 February 2013 - 12:15 PM

View Postand then, on 12 February 2013 - 12:12 PM, said:

Yeah, he's a real laugh riot alright.  It will be interesting to see who the ayatollah nutjob replaces him with in June.  That standing "O" at the end is a prime indication of how truly bizarre the US support of the UN is.  We host and to a very large extent pay the costs of an organization that wants the US destroyed.  Amazingly stupid.

An organisation that has allowed you to (through your VETO) destroy many countries, in many different ways (which is why they want you 'destroyed'). The U.S. and the other four have gained so much more from the UN than they could ever contribute. Which, when it comes down to it, is why they created the organisation.

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 12 February 2013 - 12:16 PM.


#30    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 13,640 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 12 February 2013 - 12:19 PM

View PostExpandMyMind, on 12 February 2013 - 12:15 PM, said:

An organisation that has allowed you to (through your VETO) destroy many countries, in many different ways (which is why they want you 'destroyed'). The U.S. and the other four have gained so much more from the UN than they could ever contribute. Which, when it comes down to it, is why they created the organisation.
Yes, America the evil.  You folks on the extreme left are almost comical in your devotion to the "anything but the US" view of the world.

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




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users