Iran

[Metal Vendetta]

thanks for focussing on that rather than the fact i'm being called a freaking racist.

Ishin?

[Impactor returns 2.0]

Sorry Besters - you seemed to be doing a good job of defending your 'racist' status.

I guess what im thinking is that where as the USA threterns miltary action, I find the notion of Iran threaterning Israel with total nuke war more alarming.
How is Israel 'threaterning' Iran exactly, only on a religous basis.

Again I find that scary because I like to think at least you can to some extent reason with the USA, but you cant reason with religon, and when someone wants to kill you over religon your screwed, and when it wants to kill you using nukes. everyone is screwed.

On the subject of the USA using them against Japan, Japan would have never given up, an invasion of Japan would have extended the war for years and cost millions of lives, in numbers game 100k of lives was easier to stomach.
all crap I know but to be honest I think by that point the world was sick of war and ending it in one day seemed ok.

Its also worth pointing out that Iran is very vocal now that China has an 'oil' deal with them. add to this Chinas recent arrival to the space program, sorry ICBM program. and there you have it WW3

[Best First]

Sorry Besters - you seemed to be doing a good job of defending your 'racist' status.

alreet

MV - totally.

I guess what im thinking is that where as the USA threterns miltary action, I find the notion of Iran threaterning Israel with total nuke war more alarming.

But again why are they in that position? I mean this is a country who had biological weapons used against them because the US sold them to iraq.

The US (adminsitration) fears countries it cannot deal with on its own terms, regardless of whther they are initially a threat or not and sadly ends up doing a very good job of focussing or increaing the focus of hatred upon itself.

How is Israel 'threaterning' Iran exactly, only on a religous basis.

Well. by allying themselves with the country that provided bio weapons that were used against Iran for one.

Again I find that scary because I like to think at least you can to some extent reason with the USA,

can you?

"Communism is not a realistic threat to you"

"Iraq is not a realistic threat to you"

but you cant reason with religon, and when someone wants to kill you over religon your screwed,

a lot of US policy is religion driven sadly.

secondly while reliugion plays a large part in Iranian policy so does the fact the US have merrily funded their enemies for decades

and when it wants to kill you using nukes. everyone is screwed.

i'm not sure the difference between fanatical ideology (US) and fanatical religion (Iran) is that different when it comes to foreign policy. Suicide Bombers happily sacrifce their own lives, Bush happily sacrifices the lives of others, etc.

On the subject of the USA using them against Japan, Japan would have never given up, an invasion of Japan would have extended the war for years and cost millions of lives, in numbers game 100k of lives was easier to stomach.
all crap I know but to be honest I think by that point the world was sick of war and ending it in one day seemed ok.

sorry but thats a historical line - Japan would have surrendered and more to the point were more or less nuetered - the main reasons for the nuke were:

a) a decisive show of global power

and

b) ending the war before the communists got into

Not to mention the fact that even if those arguements apply to the first nuke - how do you justify the second?

It was, essentially, the worst act of terror ever.

Its also worth pointing out that Iran is very vocal now that China has an 'oil' deal with them. add to this Chinas recent arrival to the space program, sorry ICBM program. and there you have it WW3

like the end of football?

WW3 is in very few people's, or government's, interests - certainly not China's. Whilts Iran may be allies with China, they don't have particularly similar outlooks.

[Scraplet]

As for the invasion of lebanon this was done because the Lebanese goverment was funding arab militant groups who were making attacks out of Lebanese territory. After they felt their goal was complete, they withdrew from all Lebanese territory.

This isn't the full picture tho is it? If a government exersies reasonable miltary force to defend itself, no-one could criticise. When those actions result in the cold-blooded massacre of thousands of innocent people in refugee camps, as the invasion of Lebannon did, then there is a duty upon the world to critisise that country. That is not anti-semitism. And if Iran or any other country did it, they would receive more than just international condemnation, I'm sure.

There is some legal opinon that Ariel Sharon, who was the defence minister at the time, should be indicted for war crimes for that (and other) incidents.

All the parties concerned have blood on their hands, and until they all recognise that, rather than painting the opposition as the problem, it will never move on.

And Britain, the USA, France and many other countries have blood on their hands for screwing up these regions in the first place. Its priceless that we spend so much time and effort on Iran and Iraq when we invented them and all their problems anyway. What goes around comes around, and now its biting us on the arse.

[Best First]

if only that were widely acknowledged.

[Impactor returns 2.0]

On the subject of Hiroshima/nagasaki, they dropped the 2nd because the Japanese general is quoted as saying it was a fluke, so they did the 2nd bomb to prove it wasnt, I guess the threat of commie inavsion is a good point.
The USA were gearing up for a huge land assult and im sure more lives would have been lost - still I think the USA of today is very different to the one of 1945.

As much as I understand what your saying as in both sides are bad from a point of view and how they enforce thier actions, I still find the idea that Iran threaterns to nuke another country more alarming then anything in recent times. I also feel they are only saying this now because they have China to protect them.
If any nation has a go at Iran now, this threaterns Chinas much needed new oil reserve and... well we know what happens when u need oil.

[Best First]

On the subject of Hiroshima/nagasaki, they dropped the 2nd because the Japanese general is quoted as saying it was a fluke, so they did the 2nd bomb to prove it wasnt, I guess the threat of commie inavsion is a good point.
The USA were gearing up for a huge land assult and im sure more lives would have been lost - still I think the USA of today is very different to the one of 1945.

The arguement that you kill thosuands of civilaisn in orderto reduce medical losses is sickening, not to mention thats another balls excuse - they did it to end the war quickly to stop Russia getting involved. end of.

I still find the idea that Iran threaterns to nuke another country more alarming then anything in recent times.

India/Pakistan?

I also feel they are only saying this now because they have China to protect them.

which suggests its bluster rather than a genuine threat.

If any nation has a go at Iran now, this threaterns Chinas much needed new oil reserve and... well we know what happens when u need oil.

which brings us back to the point of all being as bad as wach other, doesn't it?

[Impactor returns 2.0]

On the subject of Hiroshima/nagasaki, they dropped the 2nd because the Japanese general is quoted as saying it was a fluke, so they did the 2nd bomb to prove it wasnt, I guess the threat of commie inavsion is a good point.
The USA were gearing up for a huge land assult and im sure more lives would have been lost - still I think the USA of today is very different to the one of 1945.

The arguement that you kill thosuands of civilaisn in orderto reduce medical losses is sickening, not to mention thats another balls excuse - they did it to end the war quickly to stop Russia getting involved. end of.

But thats what happened - full scale invasion risking millions of lives against a nuke that kills 100k. sick it might be but thats war.

As for being as bad as each other, Iran says it wants to nuke another country is worse then the USA invading Iraq for loads of reasons that arnt worth covering.
Nothing will change my mind on that.

[wideload]

It doenst matter what most english people think,

by your own logic; Racist! Racist!

you took that of context and you know it

How can you lecture me on race and ethnicity and then make such absurdly simple statements? Tension exists at all kinds of levels, often between minorities, your summary is nonsense

my point is merely that there is a indentifiable ethnic group of "english" people. Unless you acknowledge that these groups exist as a socioeconomic factor, you cant deal with the problems such as racism associated with them.

However the point that ALL nations are founded on ethnicity remains refuted, not to mention you seem to be ignoring the historical factors that feed into such senses of difference which in turn inefr its nowhere near as simpleas 'countries are based along ethnic lines'.

ethnic lines are based on identity.

I know all of this.

I love the way you are lecturing me about the Jews in an entirely irrelevant manner as part of your quest to paint me as ignorant because i don’t agree with you.

you suggested that israel was based on racism not national identity. i was showing you otherwise.

Why shoudl countries that see Israel as a threat to their security help to legitimise it? Cuts both ways and equally useles to any peace process.

aknowledgement would be the first step towards peace. Israel has the upper hand in the palestinian conflict right now. Why should they surrender it to a group that seeks only to destroy them (made evident by there refusal to acknowledge, one step below full out war).


[

again this is ridiculous conjecture on your part. I would never be so simple as to suggest that such situations are about ‘good’ and ‘evil’. How does the fact something belonged to you ages ago infer that by wanting it back you are evil? Your conjecture is absurd.

Based on the ‘logic’ you seem to be employing I assume you are in favour of shooting Palestinian kids. Racist! Racist!

This is ridiculous.

fine not good and evil. One side worthy of condemnation the other worthy of support. You havent stated why kids get shot, you've just stated that they did and it was good reasoning to attack israel.

Now please apply it to the Israel and Palestine conflict fairly.

You’re accusations of anti-Semitism are disgusting and your reasoning is ridiculous.

I dont believe that you are an antisemite. I do believe you have been caught up in a train of thought that has its roots based in antisemetism. I would be happy if this conversation helps you take a bigger look at the conflict and the possible interpretations when you state things like Israel stole land, kills children intentianlly, etc..

If you had stated you opinion differently instead of instantly starting things off with accusing Israel of genocide

wideload wrote:

I think what Iran is pushing for goes a bit beyond what western leaders are going for. Its genocide.

yeah, Israel would never stoop that low.

Oh look , a big wall, hmm air of Ghetto, eh? Ah well irony's dead anyway. And snipers shooting kids. What? Oh! terrotsit kids, never mind then eh?

and thiefing

I might have had a different interpretation of your argument.

[Best First]

you took that of context and you know it

like i say, irony is dead.

you cant deal with the problems such as racism associated with them.

you have no idea what you are talking about

ethnic lines are based on identity.

Oh, good, we are at the irrelavnat Ultimate Weapon stage of the discussion/

you suggested that israel was based on racism

i never said any such thing - more of your absurd conjecture

i was showing you otherwise.

you demonstrated one thing - that you are hystreical in the face of crictism of Israel.

You havent stated why kids get shot, you've just stated that they did and it was good reasoning to attack israel.

So... there is a good reason to kill children? Its not something that is a likley source of critisism?

i would be happy bigger look at the conflict and the possible interpretations when you state things like Israel stole land, kills children intentianlly, etc..

shame, all this conversation has made me do is think you are a hystrical. Racist! racist!

"Some of israles actions are bad"

"You said all of Israels actions are bad! You clearly hate the Jews"

If you had stated you opinion differently instead of instantly starting things off with accusing Israel of genocide

again, this did not occur.

I might have had a different interpretation of your argument.

what, if you were sane? Your appraoch to a mature discussion is to immediatley insuinate someone is racist and then expect them to be open to your opinions?

You have repeatedly insinuated i am racist for adisgreeing with you. You have repeatedly quoted me out of context and re-engineered any crictisms so they are blanket comments.

**** off. Utter bell.

So yes, Israel is perfect, its creation was perfectly concieved, it has never committed an atrocity, it will never do any wrong, all criticism of it stems from racism, any suggestion the whole project was ill concieved cannot possibly have a rational basis, only the arabs and the muslims are a problem.

go away you fundmatalist moron.

[Best First]

On the subject of Hiroshima/nagasaki, they dropped the 2nd because the Japanese general is quoted as saying it was a fluke, so they did the 2nd bomb to prove it wasnt, I guess the threat of commie inavsion is a good point.
The USA were gearing up for a huge land assult and im sure more lives would have been lost - still I think the USA of today is very different to the one of 1945.

The arguement that you kill thosuands of civilaisn in orderto reduce medical losses is sickening, not to mention thats another balls excuse - they did it to end the war quickly to stop Russia getting involved. end of.

But thats what happened - full scale invasion risking millions of lives against a nuke that kills 100k. sick it might be but thats war.

...but that's not why they did it. see?