81 replies to this topic

[acidhead]

ExpandMyMind, 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 interviews with Larry King and Charlie Rose are very interesting. [check youtube]  I would welcome a debate.  Let the people decide.

Edited by acidhead, 13 February 2013 - 05:46 AM.

[and then]

acidhead, on 13 February 2013 - 05:46 AM, said:

His interviews with Larry King and Charlie Rose are very interesting. [check youtube]  I would welcome a debate. Let the people decide.

You mean in the same way the Iranian people were allowed to decide on his second term as president?  Or perhaps you found his imaginings that the whole UN assembly did not speak or move during his first speech there to be credible?  Well at least we can agree that he certainly is interesting.

[ExpandMyMind]

and then, on 13 February 2013 - 12:02 PM, said:

You mean in the same way the Iranian people were allowed to decide on his second term as president?  Or perhaps you found his imaginings that the whole UN assembly did not speak or move during his first speech there to be credible?  Well at least we can agree that he certainly is interesting.

Are you suggesting the election was fixed? Because that has been long debunked on this forum.

[Coffey]

acidhead, 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.

I'd love to see that.

I'd have the popcorn and everything ready.

[Yamato]

and then, on 12 February 2013 - 09:40 AM, said:

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.

The danger to us is that our politicians will listen to what the Zionist regime says and we wind up paying the price for yet another unnecessary war we can't win.  After 30 standing ovations to a mountain of lies, I can't see a clearer path to danger than that.   You'd rather focus on the danger to Israel instead, I understand that.   Another meandering trail of conjecture that Israel will get attacked by some unknown source if Iran gets the bomb.  The danger you're citing is already exhibited by Israel towards its neighbors on a regular basis.  Israel attacks its neighbors repeatedly, it only understands the use of force to solve its problems.   Syria has a Casus Belli to attack Israel now that Israel has attacked it again and again.   Every problem looks like a nail to Israel because Israel's got a hammer and precious little else.   If having nukes is the cause of that mindset then you should take a much more critical eye towards Israel's rogue nukes and much less attention to Iran's legitimate nuclear programs.

Once again we ignore the actions of Israel to focus an almost paranoid mindset towards what other nations (or non-state actors) could do based on nothing more than good imagination.   Along with Israel's violence, the double standard for concern towards Israel continues.

[and then]

ExpandMyMind, on 13 February 2013 - 09:29 PM, said:

Are you suggesting the election was fixed? Because that has been long debunked on this forum.

Millions of paper ballots sorted and counted in a couple of hours?  He was announced the winner LONG before the vote could have been legitimately counted.  But if you say so, okay.... I guess I just wonder why so many people were in the streets protesting for this very reason?  They LIVE there and voted there and THEY said the election was fixed.

[and then]

Yamato, on 13 February 2013 - 09:56 PM, said:

The danger to us is that our politicians will listen to what the Zionist regime says and we wind up paying the price for yet another unnecessary war we can't win.  After 30 standing ovations to a mountain of lies, I can't see a clearer path to danger than that.   You'd rather focus on the danger to Israel instead, I understand that.   Another meandering trail of conjecture that Israel will get attacked by some unknown source if Iran gets the bomb.  The danger you're citing is already exhibited by Israel towards its neighbors on a regular basis.  Israel attacks its neighbors repeatedly, it only understands the use of force to solve its problems.   Syria has a Casus Belli to attack Israel now that Israel has attacked it again and again.   Every problem looks like a nail to Israel because Israel's got a hammer and precious little else.   If having nukes is the cause of that mindset then you should take a much more critical eye towards Israel's rogue nukes and much less attention to Iran's legitimate nuclear programs.

Once again we ignore the actions of Israel to focus an almost paranoid mindset towards what other nations (or non-state actors) could do based on nothing more than good imagination.   Along with Israel's violence, the double standard for concern towards Israel continues.

Show me a single neighbor that has reached out to make peace with them Yam.  Explain why the media in Gaza and all the surrounding neighboring countries teach their children IN SCHOOL as well as at home to hate the Jews and seek their destruction.  This is not something that can be dismissed as understandable IF one is serious about trying to have a lasting peace.  Peace can never happen between peoples who teach their children such hate.  Israel attacked Syria to destroy weapons that were being readied for transfer to Hizballah.  If you dispute that claim then perhaps you can put forward an idea as to why Israel has waited 22 months to intervene militarily there? What changed?  Isn't it even possible that maybe they told the truth?  Or does that smoking ruin of trucks and trailers suggest something else to you?  Finding fault consistently with EVERYTHING that Israel does is a mindless sort of exercise and eventually it will lead to disaster in the region.  If Hizballah launched a single chemical tipped scud at Tel Aviv, southern Lebanon would burn in a way it never has burned before.  And, of course, everyone would again jump on the "it's Israel's fault" bandwagon, but the Lebanese would be just as dead and their homes just as decimated.  And it doesn't have to happen - it could be avoided if the world community was less biased against Israel.  But hey, whatever is going to happen will happen.

[NiteMarcher]

[Yamato]

and then, on 13 February 2013 - 10:22 PM, said:

Show me a single neighbor that has reached out to make peace with them Yam.  Explain why the media in Gaza and all the surrounding neighboring countries teach their children IN SCHOOL as well as at home to hate the Jews and seek their destruction.  This is not something that can be dismissed as understandable IF one is serious about trying to have a lasting peace.  Peace can never happen between peoples who teach their children such hate.  Israel attacked Syria to destroy weapons that were being readied for transfer to Hizballah.  If you dispute that claim then perhaps you can put forward an idea as to why Israel has waited 22 months to intervene militarily there? What changed?  Isn't it even possible that maybe they told the truth?  Or does that smoking ruin of trucks and trailers suggest something else to you?  Finding fault consistently with EVERYTHING that Israel does is a mindless sort of exercise and eventually it will lead to disaster in the region.  If Hizballah launched a single chemical tipped scud at Tel Aviv, southern Lebanon would burn in a way it never has burned before.  And, of course, everyone would again jump on the "it's Israel's fault" bandwagon, but the Lebanese would be just as dead and their homes just as decimated.  And it doesn't have to happen - it could be avoided if the world community was less biased against Israel.  But hey, whatever is going to happen will happen.

I'm not sure why any neighbor of Israel's would reach out for peace after being attacked repeatedly, or having their human rights violated for generations.    That's like being a bell maid for a murderer who's in my home and won't leave.  The obligation for making peace falls on Israel and it has an enormous apology to give as a part of its perpetual guilt it's kept up for all these years   If Israel is concerned about its own security it wouldn't be insisting that its citizen-criminals live on the other side of the walls it builds.   If the settlements are necessary for its security then by action and conscience it has denied the possibility of the existence of the state of Palestine and it should be called out for the policy of extermination it's practicing.   Israel is a hypocritical and terrorist state and it should be treated for what it is, not endlessly coddled to the exclusion of its victims.    If sanctioning Iran is truly legitimate just for developing a program it has the right to develop, we'd also be sanctioning Israel for many decades already.  Instead we're arming and subsidizing and providing endless political cover for it in a flagrant and costly double standard.   A chicken coming home to roost is Russia calling us out for our hypocrisy on the world stage when it plays the same game in Syria.   The US has the power to change the dynamics of the region, to end the cycle of violence, but if we continue our current path we can expect the same lousy results.

As to Israel's most recent attack on Syria and the purposes for it, that's just the most recent attack and the purposes for it.   Israel started intervening militarily years ago.

[NiteMarcher]

[and then]

Yamato, on 13 February 2013 - 10:58 PM, said:

I'm not sure why any neighbor of Israel's would reach out for peace after being attacked repeatedly, or having their human rights violated for generations. That's like being a bell maid for a murderer who's in my home and won't leave.  The obligation for making peace falls on Israel and it has an enormous apology to give as a part of its perpetual guilt it's kept up for all these years   If Israel is concerned about its own security it wouldn't be insisting that its citizen-criminals live on the other side of the walls it builds.   If the settlements are necessary for its security then by action and conscience it has denied the possibility of the existence of the state of Palestine and it should be called out for the policy of extermination it's practicing.   Israel is a hypocritical and terrorist state and it should be treated for what it is, not endlessly coddled to the exclusion of its victims. If sanctioning Iran is truly legitimate just for developing a program it has the right to develop, we'd also be sanctioning Israel for many decades already.  Instead we're arming and subsidizing and providing endless political cover for it in a flagrant and costly double standard.   A chicken coming home to roost is Russia calling us out for our hypocrisy on the world stage when it plays the same game in Syria.   The US has the power to change the dynamics of the region, to end the cycle of violence, but if we continue our current path we can expect the same lousy results.

As to Israel's most recent attack on Syria and the purposes for it, that's just the most recent attack and the purposes for it.   Israel started intervening militarily years ago.

They haven't done anything short of intel gathering and the occasional "hit" within Syria since 1973.  But if Assad tries to spread the wealth of chemical weapons to those terr, er,  aggrieved innocents in Hizballah, then Damascus is going to become a heap of smoking ruins and the world can get over itself in the aftermath of what they have brought to pass.  And I don't really care what Russia does in Syria - except that I think it's hypocritical to support them while they help Assad continue his murderous rage against unarmed civilians.  No matter which group comes out on top in Syria, they will have the west in their sights next.

[and then]

NiteMarcher, on 13 February 2013 - 10:49 PM, said:

?  Something to add?  BTW, welcome to UM

[Mr Right Wing]

and 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.

I like Ahmadinejad even if he is the enemy.

He's got charisma

[Zaphod222]

pallidin, on 12 February 2013 - 06:48 PM, said:

Radical Islam is.

Sadly, it isn´t. Radical islam is growing by leaps and bounds, ironically aided by misguided Western policy.

[Zaphod222]

Mr Right Wing, on 14 February 2013 - 01:33 AM, said:

I like Ahmadinejad even if he is the enemy.

He's got charisma

Would you love like this if you were a Bahai? An apostate? A homosexual?
Do tell us how you´d enjoy that charisma while dangling from a construction crane.