Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Celumnaz

Israelis urge U.S. to stop Iran's nuke goals

226 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Babs

Governments are going to have to learn to grow up and behave like responsible adults instead of playing their little childish games based on sinister schemes designed to score useless and short-term political points at the expense of the people. The cards that are dealt are so bad that they are hardly playable; playing them ignorantly will only lead to more chaos, conflicts and wars as it has done so far, and I'm not sure how much more of this the world can actually afford given the limited resources it has, the environmental and economic problems we face today, the sophistication of mass murder weapons and the fact that wars and conflicts are no longer local but tend to negatively affect everyone one way or other. Change in governments' behaviour and the need for them to grow up is rapidly becoming a necessity rather than a choice.

That is of course due to weaknesses in international laws and organizations which in turn have led to the jungle laws ruling the world. Humanity still has one foot well planted in the dark ages, and modern and civilized gestures can no longer hide this sad aspect very well either.

I agree with that. Everything you just said. And you know, it looks like we are going to be doing a lot of killing. Much of the killing will be innocent people because the terrorists dig into civilian population_ to stay alive and kill as long as they can. Cowards! (Hey, if that's all ya got!) Yes, I think there will be a big wipe-out of many peoples. It will be the only way to rid the world of terrorism.

Bush just said that Syria and Iran harbor and support terrorists. These states sponser terrorism. It looks like you better flee. How can you stay and talk as you do? You should be against what your country is doing if you are at all serious in what you say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sanchera1978

Wow its kinda of scary we have citzens who think the way you do babs. No regard for human life just becuase your afraid....tsk tsk tsk..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Babs

On the contrary it you who is afraid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sanchera1978

I'm not the one wanting to kill innocent people Babs. I pinky swear I am not afraid of the terrorist. I understand your POV but i dont agree with it. lets say hypothetically speaking there are several terrorist cells spread out through a few american cities. The government is unable to pinpoint their exact location so they decide to accept the casualites and bomb entire cities in an attempt to kill the terrorist. Would you be ok with that? Would you still be OK if it was one of the cites was where you live. Would you follow your own advice and evacuate the city with your entire family and never return?

Edited by sanchera1978

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Celumnaz

I would. I'd give permission to kill me if some coward terrorist scum is trying to use me as a shield. If they let the terrorist go just to save me, he'd end up killing Many more people. It would save lives for me to forfeit mine if that were the case. Blow up my house if that's what it takes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sanchera1978

Thats very noble of you but that wasnt the hypothetical situation.. Were talking about bombing entire cities just to get a few terrorist. not just one terrorist using someone as a shield. I think most of us would be willing to sacrifice our lives to save many more. Would you think it would be ok for them to bomb an entire city to get a cell of terrorist consisting of only 5-10 terrorist. Are the lives of millions worth it to eliminate a threat from only 10?

Edited by sanchera1978

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Baku

I dont know if anyone actually noticed but this article seems more to threaten Iran then Israel. And you guys (page 1) are already jumping to conclusions of a offensive Iran. If you read correcly Iran is in a defensive position.

And I agree with sanchera, bombing cities for a couple terrorists is not the correct way, why not sending some navy seals or spec ops (or something like that)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Erikl

If you read correcly Iran is in a defensive position.

Saying Iran is in the defensive here is playing the devil's advocate.

It's like saying that Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy or Imperial Japan were on the defensive if one of the allies planned to attack them.

Iran has been conducting warfare against Israel for a long time by proxy terrorist organizations and their funding, and establishing itself as a nuclear power to threat Israel is just one step further into achieving their not hidden goal of Israel's destruction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Baku

It's like saying that Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy or Imperial Japan were on the defensive

And comparing Iran with the Devil, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy or Imperial Japan is the exact same thing you accused me of, playing the devil's advocate. Read article on the site, only the first page got posted here the full story is on the site.

Edited by Baku

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Babs

I'm not the one wanting to kill innocent people Babs. I pinky swear I am not afraid of the terrorist. I understand your POV but i dont agree with it. lets say hypothetically speaking there are several terrorist cells spread out through a few american cities. The government is unable to pinpoint their exact location so they decide to accept the casualites and bomb entire cities in an attempt to kill the terrorist. Would you be ok with that? Would you still be OK if it was one of the cites was where you live. Would you follow your own advice and evacuate the city with your entire family and never return?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem like the kind of person that wouldn't lift a finger for anyone outside your family. I think you are afraid of the draft because you might have to go to war... or your brother or husband or father might. You don't want to make any sacrifices for your country, so according to you, it's "don't rock the boat!'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr_Strangelove

Thats very noble of you but that wasnt the hypothetical situation.. Were talking about bombing entire cities just to get a few terrorist. not just one terrorist using someone as a shield. I think most of us would be willing to sacrifice our lives to save many more. Would you think it would be ok for them to bomb an entire city to get a cell of terrorist consisting of only 5-10 terrorist. Are the lives of millions worth it to eliminate a threat from only 10?

What if the threat from only 10 terrorists is a threat to millions? Is it ethical for a handful of terrorists to slaughter a million innocent citizens with a nuclear weapon? What if the city these terrorists are hiding in is in the same nation that provided them this nuclear weapon?

Ethical questions have always been at the heart of nuclear weapons and 'Doomsday' policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
__Kratos__

The problem has always been the verification. As long as any nation is suspicious another might have nuclear weapons then they won't disarm. The United States and Soviet Union have spent billions trying to perfect viable verification systems with relatively little success.

Ok... was reading up earlier on something and came across Chemical Weapons Convention. Why can't they form some sort of agreement like the Chemical Weapons Convention to get rid of nukes?

Chemical Weapons Convention

Only that deals with Chemical Weapons and not Nukes... but still the same idea of destroying them in percents per a nation over time. :tu:

ok... more reading to share. :lol:

In 2002, the United States and Russia agreed in the SORT treaty to reduce their deployed stockpiles to not more than 2,200 warheads each. In 2003, the US rejected Russian proposals to further reduce both nation's nuclear stockpiles to 1,500 each. The US has adopted a plan to modernise and update its allowed weapons as well as investigate the possibility of manufacturing "micronuclear weapons" for use on the battlefield and against bunkers.

Source

Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reductions (SORT)

The treaty is criticized for various reasons:

There are no verification provisions.

The reductions are not required to be permanent; warheads may be placed in storage and later redeployed.

The reductions are required to be completed only by the time the treaty expires, namely December 31, 2012.

Edited by __Kratos__

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Erikl

And comparing Iran with the Devil, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy or Imperial Japan is the exact same thing you accused me of, playing the devil's advocate. Read article on the site, only the first page got posted here the full story is on the site.

I'm not equating Iran, only it's regime.

Iran overall is a country with a tradition of respecting human rights and religious freedom, and it has been occupied for the last 26 years by ruthless warmongers who want to create global revolution by means of war and destruction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr_Strangelove

Its good that you brought that up Kratos; the problem always remains a matter of verification. Simple trust between nations will probably not be sufficient. I've been able to seee some of the proposed verification methods over the years and they always get eclipsed by the developing weapons technology.

Chemical weapons is actually one of the examples often used. The sad fact is that a lot of chemical weapons still exist in one arsenal or another. What might have had the greatest effect on chemical weapon stockpiles is the weapons preferences of different nations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Erikl

Its good that you brought that up Kratos; the problem always remains a matter of verification. Simple trust between nations will probably not be sufficient. I've been able to seee some of the proposed verification methods over the years and they always get eclipsed by the developing weapons technology.

Chemical weapons is actually one of the examples often used. The sad fact is that a lot of chemical weapons still exist in one arsenal or another. What might have had the greatest effect on chemical weapon stockpiles is the weapons preferences of different nations.

Chemical weapons could in effect be as deadly as small sized nuke.

Actually, playing devil's advocate here, terrorists are better off developing deadly chemical that would stick to the ground rather than pursuing small yeilding nuke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Baku

I'm not equating Iran, only it's regime.

Iran overall is a country with a tradition of respecting human rights and religious freedom, and it has been occupied for the last 26 years by ruthless warmongers who want to create global revolution by means of war and destruction.

Im not saying Israel's population is threatening but the goverment is, its always the goverments who have problems with each other, not the civilians. Nobody is or should ever bring the population into the politics and goverment grounds.

For example most of the nazi German civilians didnt know what their leader was doing or was planning to do more. They didnt know he was a sick murderer.

But this is way of subject, lets stick to the topic :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Erikl

Im not saying Israel's population is threatening but the goverment is, its always the goverments who have problems with each other, not the civilians.

Yet Israel's actions are nowhere near that of the past dark regimes (even though many misinformed seem to think so).

Iran is run by religious fanatics.

For example most of the nazi German civilians didnt know what their leader was doing or was planning to do more. They didnt know he was a sick murderer.

The Germans voted the Nazis when they knew very well what are their ideology. Hitler published it when he was in prison.

They supported his ideology, down to the racism it advanced.

And forgive me if I'm skeptic, but the local German knew very well that his Jewish neighbours weren't going to a long vacation when the Gestapo came and took them away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr_Strangelove

Erik is very correct about the average German's knowledge of the Holocaust. There was simply too much going on around them for them not to know. I've read numerous accounts of the average German being quite aware that Jews were being murdered. I think the only thing most Germans didn't know was the sheer extent of the Holocaust.

I also suspect that this is the same of most modern nations. Crimes against humanity on this sort of scale and intensity are difficult to hide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sanchera1978

You are incorrect in your assumptions Babs. I would lift a finger to help those in need if I believed in the cause. But since I dont believe the war the US is fighting to be a legitimate war I wouldnt go fight even if they instituted the draft. I would have fought to defeat the germans since they were truly a real threat to humanity.. But being that Iraq has never attacked the USA or any other country besides its neighbors I dont feel I should risk my life to satisfy the greed of a few. I wouldnt have any problem fighting and dying for this country if anouther country attacked us here in the US. The country is pretty much split 50/50 on whether we should even be fighting this crazy war so it's not like there are only a few who think the same way I do..

Edited by sanchera1978

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Babs

I think Hitler was said to be a very chrismatic man and he mesmerized his nation. Before the germans knew the extent of this mad man's rage, they were in knee-deep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Erikl

I think Hitler was said to be a very chrismatic man and he mesmerized his nation. Before the germans knew the extent of this mad man's rage, they were in knee-deep.

The Germans voted him knowing very well what his ideology was.

They also so his thugs (the SA) beating his political enemies daily on the streets.

That said, the Germans also supported the communists to almost the same extent.

I think what you could say for certain is that the Nazis got voted out of hatred to the Weimer Republic and feeling of humiliation, rather than anything else (since both the Nazis and the Communists had one thing in common - they were against the Republic and it's democracy, and promised to destroy it and create a Reich\SSR).

Ofcourse after they were voted into power, most of the Germans showed that the Nazi anti-Semitism and racism didn't bother them much, and many actually supported it - as shown in the Nuremberg laws of 1935 and Kristalnacht of 1938.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zephyr

Bush just said that Syria and Iran harbor and support terrorists. These states sponser terrorism. It looks like you better flee. How can you stay and talk as you do? You should be against what your country is doing if you are at all serious in what you say.

Let me know when the hurricane season is over, Babs. I might as well flee to Texas if I'm to flee anywhere; that's the last place on earth the present warmongering team in Washington would want to nuke. I rather enjoy my stay here and talk as I do, thank you! It will take more than the usual nonsense coming out of Bush, and ignorant politicians in general to make me leave home though.

Yep; I'm against a lot of things the Iranian government is doing; I'm also against a lot of things a lot of other governments such as yours are doing. I think these governments are encouraging each other to do bad things, with you and I paying the price for their idiocy.

Many governments use terrorism as a tool to conduct often short-sighted policies, that's not something new. For terrorism to stop, everybody would have to stop resorting to it and that includes Western governments as well as Eastern ones. One bad guy pointing the finger at another bad guy isn't going to get us anywhere; it hasn't so far. :sleepy:

The Germans voted the Nazis when they knew very well what are their ideology. Hitler published it when he was in prison.

They supported his ideology, down to the racism it advanced.

And forgive me if I'm skeptic, but the local German knew very well that his Jewish neighbours weren't going to a long vacation when the Gestapo came and took them away.

That's where you prove the baselessness of your own comparisons between the Iranian society today and the German one before and during WW2. On one hand you claime Iran is not a democracy and how nice you think the Iranian people are compared to their government, on the other hand you don't hesitate to compare Iran to the German situation and the support the Nazis had in that country. This comparison is totally invalid and misinforming about Iran and its realities today. :angry:

Yet Israel's actions are nowhere near that of the past dark regimes

How near 'the past dark regimes' would you place the action of building walls between people? :hmm:

Why can't they form some sort of agreement like the Chemical Weapons Convention to get rid of nukes?

Because those countries that have nukes don't want to get rid of them, it's as primitive as that! :yes:

What if the city these terrorists are hiding in is in the same nation that provided them this nuclear weapon?

What if the city these terrorists are hiding in is in the same nation that is the target? That's what they have done so far, and in some cases the terrorists are actually from the target country itself. Look at the London bombers, they were bad kids from down the block. It's naive and rather caricatural to want to fight terrorism with nukes used against some 'far away' Middle Eastern city for example. :geek:

Ethical questions have always been at the heart of nuclear weapons

Ethics of nukes according to Zephyr:

Backward and primitive behaviour to keep them; outright barbarism to use them! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Erikl

That's where you prove the baselessness of your own comparisons between the Iranian society today and the German one before and during WW2. On one hand you claime Iran is not a democracy and how nice you think the Iranian people are compared to their government, on the other hand you don't hesitate to compare Iran to the German situation and the support the Nazis had in that country. This comparison is totally invalid and misinforming about Iran and its realities today.

I've never equated Iranian society with German society.

How can you twist one's word so throughtly, when I have said over and over how deeply I respect the Iranian people, how I consider and know all about it's tradition of religious and ethnic tolerance, and how I emphesized the only guilty player in modern Iran is the religious regime established there 26 years ago?

This just shows you all what selective reading (and quoting) is all about :(.

How near 'the past dark regimes' would you place the action of building walls between people?

Would you consider the EU to be one of those dark regimes?

How about the US and Mexican governments?

Every country has the right to defend it's people by creating the most basic defense in the world - border.

If the Palestinians were not conducting terror warfare against Israeli Jews, then no borders were needed.

And indeed, for the most part of the conflict, there was no border.

I think the last 5 years proved how such a border is essential to prevent from a clash between two people which are in conflict for 80 years.

Whoever is against the border Israel is currently building is against the end of bloodshed in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Being that Iran is against Israel's existance of any sort, one wouldn't be surprised that it'll be against that border as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stellar

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem like the kind of person that wouldn't lift a finger for anyone outside your family. I think you are afraid of the draft because you might have to go to war... or your brother or husband or father might. You don't want to make any sacrifices for your country, so according to you, it's "don't rock the boat!'

Why dont you enlist then, babs? Why dont you enlist and go help out others in Iraq?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Babs

You're the same Stellar as I think sanchera is. What's your excuse for not approving of the war on terror or Iraq??? B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.