http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7496765.stm

- This is following a similar pattern as the North Korean cat-and-mouse game. Maybe next will come the implosion of their effort and the dismantling of reactors?

Nah, I don't see it.

Either way, a bold move in the current climate.

In other news, the last US carrier in the gulf has departed for the Arabian sea. Possibly to get out of Iran's range for when Israel attacks?

...and McCain reacts by saying:

called for the United States to establish a missile defense shield in Europe to counter Iranian ambitions after that country test-fired nine missiles.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080709/pl_nm/iran_usa_mccain_dc


...and if there's any doubt by anyone, which i don't think there is, that McCain=Bush2, From Halo's article:

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the test justified Washington's plan to base a missile shield plan in Eastern Europe - which is strongly opposed by Russia.

I have two problems with these reactions. One, why should the US create a missile defense shield for Europe. If Europe wants one, let them build it. I know, it's an effort to stimulate the military industrial complex...but let them pay us to build it. Second, is there some secret reason why Iran would take it's sights off of Israel and target some random country in Europe? I'm much worried about terrorist borne than I am missile bourn WMDs.

Though I can't find any info on carriers leaving the gulf...it seems logical that our military knew about the tests and withdrew ships to avoid any kind of accident.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln has moved from the Persian Gulf into the Gulf of Oman so its warplanes can fly missions over Afghanistan, where attacks have been rising, the U.S. military said Tuesday.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/US/07/08/carrier.moves/art.abraham.lincoln.navy.jpg
The USS Abraham Lincoln has moved from the Persian Gulf into the Gulf of Oman.

The carrier was ordered to move so it could conduct potential airstrikes over Afghanistan by flying over Pakistani airspace.

If it had remained inside the Persian Gulf, that would not have been possible since U.S. planes do not fly through Iranian air corridors.

The carrier, which arrived Monday, is equipped with F/A-18s and an array of precision weapons.

"This puts it in a position where it has ability to strike far inland," a U.S. defense official said.

President Bush last week acknowledged that June was a difficult month for American and allied troops in Afghanistan, saying a higher death toll there was because troops are taking the fight to Taliban militants.

Forty-six U.S. and allied personnel lost their lives in Afghanistan last month, the highest monthly toll since the war started. The 28 American troop deaths also marked the highest U.S. monthly death toll in Afghanistan in the conflict.

In May and June, the American and allied death toll surpassed those in Iraq, where there are far more U.S.-led coalition troops.

In June, 46 foreign troops died in Afghanistan and 31 troops died in Iraq, according to official figures tallied by CNN. In May, 23 foreign troops died in Afghanistan and 21 in Iraq.

At a Rose Garden news conference last Wednesday, Bush responded to reporters' questions about the sobering casualty milestones in Afghanistan.

"It has been a tough month in Afghanistan, but it's also been a tough month for the Taliban," Bush said.

"You know, one reason why there have been more deaths is because our troops are taking the fight to a tough enemy, an enemy who doesn't like our presence there because they don't like the idea of America denying safe haven," Bush added.

I find it hilarious that the US and Israel test missiles and other weapons of war whenever we wish, yet Iran does so and it is the biggest threat in the world, and dominates the news for the day.

Frequently "tests" are flexing of muscle, regardless of who does it.

I find it hilarious that the US and Israel test missiles and other weapons of war whenever we wish, yet Iran does so and it is the biggest threat in the world, and dominates the news for the day.

Oh come on Jedd, this helps drive the war fervor. You need a lesson in fear mongering. I'm surprised being that with your Iranian heritage you lack a proficiency in scaring people and that needs some work. Perhaps you could go work on one of the many republican campaigns and gain some experience in fear mongering.

Oh come on Jedd, this helps drive the war fervor. You need a lesson in fear mongering. I'm surprised being that with your Iranian heritage you lack a proficiency in scaring people and that needs some work. Perhaps you could go work on one of the many republican campaigns and gain some experience in fear mongering.

Oh he's fully aware Rover, but since he's all about Iran and it's peaceful leaders he happily forgets it in his fervor to rail on America....again.

I find it hilarious that the US and Israel test missiles and other weapons of war whenever we wish, yet Iran does so and it is the biggest threat in the world, and dominates the news for the day.

Jedd come on man, you know what this is. It's Iran pushing the limit, even a child could see this. It would be like Korea sudden testing missles there would be a political uproar. Its got nothing to do with US/Isreal it's got to do with unstability due to comments by the leader of Iran, their lack of willingness to do certain things, and then this stunt.

It's funny how people raise a stink about this from Iran, when they're only doing it in response to Israel sending a similar message (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,372363,00.html) first.

I am actually with Jedd on this one, Like it not we are not that peaceful and we constantly work War exercises (as we should) but when a country does its own testing...look out. Let them launch missles......They won't attack anyone they just want to protect themselves..I deeply believe. (minus the Adanutjob)

I don't mind and can actually appreciate the timing in Iran's war games.

What I can do without is the usual rhetoric out of their boyscout generals. Actually believing they are a threat, yes you are a threat to our oil but you'll never live down making good on that threat.

One problem we have is understanding that it is not our oil, it is their oil and they can choose who they sell it too. Capitalisticly speaking that is the way things are.

If we attack them it is for a control of the oil, if anyone thinks otherwise they are fools.

Oh I meant them speaking of blocking the Straights, I took that to mean they'd not allow any oil from any country through?

I thought I read somewhere that we actually didn't get our oil from Iran? But yes, if they blocked the strait they'd have more to bear than just US ire the world would be up their ass.

Jedd, the Lincoln was supposed to relieve the carrier group that had been on station in the gulf for months.(Eisenhower maybe, cant remember) but once there the Pentagon decided extend the others tour and leave 2 CG's on station. sabre rattling anyone? the other group may have been released and sent home and i just missed it.

Saw a good piece on the news today from a pentagon correspondent that said some trusted source said this was not a big suprise and is pretty much SOP for Iran. Israel flexes thier M-peen, Cheny wakes up and waxes his morning war woody and Iran respondes with war games and missle testing to show the world how big thier M-peen is.

Look the point is we do this shit all the time, and Israel did it just the other day as a clear warning to Iran. This is about as big a deal as Iran's army day once a year, a couple of months ago they flew over 300 fighters during their parade, and they have run missile tests over 15 times in the last 5 years.

I am not naive to Think that Iran wasn't trying to make a point. Of course they were. The point they are trying to make is "attacking us is NOT worth it."

Perhaps if someone got that message instead of thinking it means "we will wipe you from the map", then it would be alot less of a big deal.

I agree to a point Jedd, but Iran wants it to be a big deal. The are making it as noticed as possible to 'make a big deal' out of it.

No I don't think it's them 'wanting' war. But they want us to take notice. They are making a 'big deal' out of the sabre rattling too. Not that I think it's a reason for people to say the situation is escalating, nor do I think oil prices should increase because of this.

This is every bit as big of deal because Iran wants it to be a big deal as it is our administration making a big deal out of it.

But yes, if they blocked the strait they'd have more to bear than just US ire the world would be up their ass. About 40% of the world's oil comes from the Persian Gulf area, and about 98% of it has to pass within artillery range of Iran.

About 40% of the world's oil comes from the Persian Gulf area, and about 98% of it has to pass within artillery range of Iran.

And no amount of the worlds ire, will deter Iran from closing the straights in the case of an attack. They have nothing to lose if we attack them, and they know it.

They will police the straight and let whoever they wish through, and nothing we can do will stop them. Unless nukes are on the table.

And no amount of the worlds ire, will deter Iran from closing the straights in the case of an attack. They have nothing to lose if we attack them, and they know it.

They will police the straight and let whoever they wish through, and nothing we can do will stop them. Unless nukes are on the table.

And this is where you mouth the Iranian PM's words and don't think it through.

We lose oil, they lose everything....

And this is where you mouth the Iranian PM's words and don't think it through.

We lose oil, they lose everything....

You forget... they will make us lose oil after they lose everything

It's the other way around, once they lose everything they'll lose the ability to do much more than make fire in shallow pits.

It's a lose/lose for everyone, difference is the range of loss.

Hate to say it but I'm thinking Fandros is spot on. They would become the pariah of the world and China, India, Europe, hell ...everyone would declare war. The world would suffer, we discussed this in another thread, but Iran would cease to exist.

I think that's accurate, but missing the point.

We would have already guaranteed that fate for them. We've given them an excellent object lesson in just what a mess we can make of a country, right next door.

Iran's trying to play an asymmetric version of MAD, using an economic nuke.

I might not be conveying my point clearly enough San.

Iran can't and won't be the real aggressor here. They have far too much to lose if they fire the first volley.

It's a bluff, we should treat it as such and move on. Push the sanctions and work through the UN to continue to apply pressure.

Iran will not make the first move, the lose...and lose forever.

I might not be conveying my point clearly enough San.

Iran can't and won't be the real aggressor here. They have far too much to lose if they fire the first volley.

It's a bluff, we should treat it as such and move on. Push the sanctions and work through the UN to continue to apply pressure.

Iran will not make the first move, the lose...and lose forever.

I wasn't speaking of Iran making the first move. I meant that if attacked Iran will close the straight, as there is nothing left to lose when America declares war.

Looks like more missile tests this morning

The Iranian (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/Iran) news agency Fars said the launches, near the Persian Gulf, were a continuation of Wednesday's maneuvers and that the missiles hit their targets successfully.

Iran's Press TV said a "Hoot" torpedo was among those tested. "The maneuvers have also included IRGC scuba divers and marines who conducted practice assaults with speedboats on hypothetical enemy targets," the station added.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/10/missile.iran/index.html

inc more sanctions....wtg

Shit, if they get sanctions for wargames and missile tests, then we should be nuked.

Wait, when did we start talking about Iran making a first move? They aren't going to do that, of course. There's no reason to think they would, except for poor mistranslations of quotes and Fox News fearmongering.

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/10/in-an-iranian-image-a-missile-too-many/index.html

That's great, we've gone from childish photoshop jobs on the internet flameboards to childish photoshop jobs by likeminded bastions of sanity like the IRG and Fox News.

Nice find Sanchek...damn funny

San, with your daily Foxnews tirade, you're reading something into what I'm typing that I'm clearly not saying.

I'm putting a calm spin on this saying folks need to relax as it's nothing more than bluster and yes since Iran is already under sanctions and warnings they might see increasing ones from the UN.

Jedd, Iran and the US are not equal and are not going to be treated the same.

Fair or not it's Iran that's under the gun with the UN already no?

You fail to realize though Jedd if Iran doesn't let the oil flow, it won't be just us they're pissing off and no one will care who started what, who waved what, who's dick was bigger. All that will matter is that Iran is the blockage in the flow of said oil. And either they will be wiped off the face of the Earth, invaded by multiple countries, or the oil will come from elsewhere. And this I think is why the US is holding on to its' stores and refuges. Not to mention the race for alternative enegry will be on pretty hot. It might be a good thing if they invoke the world's ire ;)

San, with your daily Foxnews tirade, you're reading something into what I'm typing that I'm clearly not saying.

I'm not sure why you keep assuming I'm somehow aiming at you, every time you see "Fox News" in a post I've made. Really, there's no reason to be so defensive.

Spent a good deal of time last night researching Irans military capabilities so to lets seperate the political rhetoric from fact.

Iran will never attack us. while they are capable of responding to an attack far better than Iraq or the Taliban ever were they are simply technologically lacking. from a naval and airforce standpoint we would fucking PWN them.

The U.S. will not attack them either. we are quite capable of re-opening the strait of hormuz within 2 days time and more than capable of keeping it open. the one pawn we cannot remove from the board is our ground troops in Iraq and Afgahnistan. pretty sure we are not willing to leave them open to pot shots from a desperate and beaten Iranian leadership.

The only wild card remaining is the Isreali reluctance to stand on logic and depend on thier "gods chosen ones" status to make everything OK. that and the fact that the current administration has proven many times that "intellegence" of any kind matters little to thier decicions.

Spent a good deal of time last night researching Irans military capabilities so to lets seperate the political rhetoric from fact.

Iran will never attack us. while they are capable of responding to an attack far better than Iraq or the Taliban ever were they are simply technologically lacking. from a naval and airforce standpoint we would fucking PWN them.

The U.S. will not attack them either. we are quite capable of re-opening the strait of hormuz within 2 days time and more than capable of keeping it open. the one pawn we cannot remove from the board is our ground troops in Iraq and Afgahnistan. pretty sure we are not willing to leave them open to pot shots from a desperate and beaten Iranian leadership.

The only wild card remaining is the Isreali reluctance to stand on logic and depend on thier "gods chosen ones" status to make everything OK. that and the fact that the current administration has proven many times that "intellegence" of any kind matters little to thier decicions.

Iran can control the straights with Sunburn missiles, easily sinking any oil carrying vessels passing through, as well as sinking our vessels which are unlucky enough to be tasked with protecting them.

The entire straight of Hormuz and much of the Persian gulf is within Iran's artillery range, and is a death trap. The only way to secure the straight is boots in the ground along the Iranian coast and mountain regions.

We can take Iranian land with boots on the ground, but there is no way in hell we can keep said ground, and the Straight of hormuz will be closed again shortly after it is re opened. The hoot missile which Iran has on its midget subs, and 2 man submerging naval units will be a challenge in the shallow straights of hormuz.

Any ground combat will cause heavy casualties to our forces, and they have already hidden most of their mobile assets in order to weather our air campaign and to be ready and effective with assymetric warfare when we do step in to stop the shelling and missile launches.

A couple thousand hezbollah with 1/100th Iran's arsenal stopped Israel dead in their tracks, and sent them packing. Israel, who also touts an amazing Air force, and a professional military on par with our own. Little statistic for you... On the day Israel retreated from Lebanon... Hezbollah fired more missiles then they had fired the entire campaign.

Do you honestly think, Iran will be as easy as your research has shown?

Easier.

Easier.

Thats what Sadaam thought... and we all saw what happened when he attacked a battered, leaderless, general less country named Iran. And you heard his dieing words right?

You should never underestimate your enemy!

Iran can control the straights with Sunburn missiles, easily sinking any oil carrying vessels passing through, as well as sinking our vessels which are unlucky enough to be tasked with protecting them.

The entire straight of Hormuz and much of the Persian gulf is within Iran's artillery range, and is a death trap. The only way to secure the straight is boots in the ground along the Iranian coast and mountain regions.

We can take Iranian land with boots on the ground, but there is no way in hell we can keep said ground, and the Straight of hormuz will be closed again shortly after it is re opened. The hoot missile which Iran has on its midget subs, and 2 man submerging naval units will be a challenge in the shallow straights of hormuz.

Any ground combat will cause heavy casualties to our forces, and they have already hidden most of their mobile assets in order to weather our air campaign and to be ready and effective with assymetric warfare when we do step in to stop the shelling and missile launches.

A couple thousand hezbollah with 1/100th Iran's arsenal stopped Israel dead in their tracks, and sent them packing. Israel, who also touts an amazing Air force, and a professional military on par with our own. Little statistic for you... On the day Israel retreated from Lebanon... Hezbollah fired more missiles then they had fired the entire campaign.

Do you honestly think, Iran will be as easy as your research has shown?

I think in a head to head fight using conventional forces we would seriously smack Iran down. Pretty much any country that goes head to head with us conventionally will most likely outright lose or severely bleed at the very least they will know they were in a serious fight.

That being said, I cannot believe that any Iranian commander would be foolish enough to take us on conventionally. This would quickly go into a guerrilla warfare situation and would become another war of attrition. Iranian Generals are far from stupid and the Iranian people are far from stupid.

For us to even consider attacking Iran while we are bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan along with our commitment to keep Korea, Japan and other places under our military security umbrella would be inviting disaster and let the doors open for Chinese moves in Asia.

It would be WWII all over again but this time it would be the Chinese securing resources.

Jedd my friend your obviously an intelligent guy but your letting your ethnicity cloud your better judgement here.

if combat ensued Irans navy would cease to be functional in 24 hours or less. thier air force would not be far behind. have you ever seen one of our carriers? an Arliegh Burke class destroyer with fore and aft VLS system?
do you have any idea of the capabilities of the Los Angeles class subs? know what an EA6B is?
As far as ground combat(wich we wouldnt do) the sad side effect of the recent wars is we now have a battlehardened ground force. their new tank the farqsumtin(sword in arabic) is a nice upgrade for them i would'nt paint it as the A1 killer yet.

I compliment the Iranian military on what they have. managed to develop and all, the Shahab-3 is an impressive piece of work. they have built a force that would be superior to most of the nations on the planet.
but theres a reason they are not on the U.N. security council permanant membership list. thats the big boys club.

To put in simpler terms Iran is like Appalacian state. a damn good division II team that can step up and knockout a so so D I team.
The U.S. are the New England Patriots of the world and the MOAB is our Brady to Moss.

To put in simpler terms Iran is like Appalacian state. a damn good division II team that can step up and knockout a so so D I team.
The U.S. are the New England Patriots of the world and the MOAB is our Brady to Moss.

Who happened to lose to the Giants (which happened to be a second tier NFL team most of the year last year).

I think this is just getting escalated by our overlords in power because they saw oil prices drop $9 over the prior two days to this current event. Our administrators saw their cash cow drop for a couple of consecutive days and figured they needed the price to go higher again. Voila, new escalation! Voila, new record for oil today, two days after a significant drop.

/agree

Jedd, you are letting your righteous indignation with the United States cloud your logic.

Iran, while better equiped than Iraq, is no match in a conventional fight against the U.S. Couple that with the dogpile attack that would be likely occur from other nations that heavily rely on stable oil prices (read China), and you have a situation that Iran would not only likely lose in, but would probably cease to exist as a country.

Jedd my friend your obviously an intelligent guy but your letting your ethnicity cloud your better judgement here.

if combat ensued Irans navy would cease to be functional in 24 hours or less. thier air force would not be far behind. have you ever seen one of our carriers? an Arliegh Burke class destroyer with fore and aft VLS system?
do you have any idea of the capabilities of the Los Angeles class subs? know what an EA6B is?
As far as ground combat(wich we wouldnt do) the sad side effect of the recent wars is we now have a battlehardened ground force. their new tank the farqsumtin(sword in arabic) is a nice upgrade for them i would'nt paint it as the A1 killer yet.

I compliment the Iranian military on what they have. managed to develop and all, the Shahab-3 is an impressive piece of work. they have built a force that would be superior to most of the nations on the planet.
but theres a reason they are not on the U.N. security council permanant membership list. thats the big boys club.

To put in simpler terms Iran is like Appalacian state. a damn good division II team that can step up and knockout a so so D I team.
The U.S. are the New England Patriots of the world and the MOAB is our Brady to Moss.

Iran's plans are not to engage us in conventional warfare though, and this is where you are arguing we would be superior, and I agree we would be.

Iran's entire Navy with the exception of the frigates and other large vessels they have had forever is centered around assymetric warfare. Sunburn missiles coming from mobile launchers hidden in the mountains, along with midget subs and 2 man submergable units armed with Hoot torpedo's would be devestating. It will take much more then 24 hours to identify and destroy every part of the Iranian Navy.

I agree with you on the air force. Iran banned the purchase of fighter jets from other nations as a result of what happened with their F14's and their needs for spare parts after becomming our enemy. It would take years of an unattacked Iran to get their own manufactured fighters anywhere near our outdated ones.

The power in the Iranian defense however lies with surprise, numbers, and tactics. We will lose a ship in the gulf or straight of hormuz if we go to war with Iran. At least one, and it will be a major blow to our morale. Can they defeat our navy? Probably not, but do not forget the millenium wargames in which an entire fleet of our ships were destroyed by speed boats and midget subs.

And lastly, regardless of Iran's lacking in the tank catagory, it was not tanks that Hezbollah used to route Israel.. It was tank killing RPG's. Cheap, effective, and able to destroy multi million dollar hardware.

/agree

Jedd, you are letting your righteous indignation with the United States cloud your logic.

Iran, while better equiped than Iraq, is no match in a conventional fight against the U.S. Couple that with the dogpile attack that would be likely occur from other nations that heavily rely on stable oil prices (read China), and you have a situation that Iran would not only likely lose in, but would probably cease to exist as a country.

No other country would assist the US in another war, with the exception of France, and even that would cause major protest in France. Iranians are a large minority in France as well.

Any leader in a european country that chooses to assist the US in another war, can say goodbye to their political career after their term is up.

No kidding. I think it's far too easy for us to lazily get our news from domestic sources and not realize just how badly discredited we really are overseas. Iran will have more allies than enemies if we make a move right now.

Our domestic media these days would make Baghdad Bob proud.

Of course, that said, I have no doubt that an attack on Iran would be preceded by some sort of false flag incident to nominally justify hostilities. I'm afraid this may be Iran's fatal miscalculation in the whole affair.

Gary Hart put it pretty well last year, I think:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-hart/unsolicited-advice-to-the_b_65984.html

I think Iran was/is trying to cause a false flag incident of their own... Just look at the incidents in the Straight a few months back... Looks like they wanted the US to fire on them and then use it as an excuse to show us as the bad guys.

We are dealing with a intelligent country. They may spout off nonsense but it all comes down to tactics and not words.

That wouldn't really be false flag.

I think it would backfire on Iran to provoke us. Even in this day and age, the powers that be have extreme control over what people see and hear. When's the last time you saw a story about civilian casualties or dead soldiers in the mainstream media?

They're going to play revisionist history again, and Iran will have fired the first shot no matter what actually happens.

I'm not saying any country would join us in attacking Iran based on "helping the U.S." as much as it coming down to dividing the spoils of war.

I say China, because of thier newly discovered thirst for oil.

I'm not saying any country would join us in attacking Iran based on "helping the U.S." as much as it coming down to dividing the spoils of war.

I say China, because of thier newly discovered thirst for oil.

China and Iran are almost allies... Iran is petitioning to join the SCO.

We lose oil, they lose everything.... You forget where Shia - the party of Ali - comes from. It came from a battle where the grandson of Mohammed marched with his 72 troops (where have we heard that number before? this is where it came from) out to fight Yazid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yazid) and Yazid's 4,000+ troops (some folks claim 10k). Of course they lost. Of course they were slaughtered. And they celebrate this every year (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_of_Ashura).

You cannot credibly threaten to kill someone who thinks that "glorious suicide" (aka martyrdom) is a religious virtue. During the Iran-Iraq war, they got women and children to march across minefields so that their soldiers wouldn't be inconvenienced. We - in the west - have only experienced the sort of combat that I expect out of the Iranians once - at Stalingrad.

http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2008/01/shia-10th-day-of-ashura-and-coming-wars.html?showComment=1200777180000

To take and keep the Straights of Hormuz open would require vast numbers of troops in Iran. My estimate is that we'll need about 10 million troops to do so. And at least 3/4 of them would be needed to suppress domestic riots. And we'll need that many because the troops currently in Iraq and Afghanistan will need to be evacuated like those pictures of the last days of Saigon.

Our economy is based on cheap oil. My expectation is that oil would hit $1k/barrel within minutes of a US attack on Iran. I expect that gasolene would quickly hit $100/gallon in the US as well. No one could afford to go to work. No one could afford to ship groceries to the stores. Farmers couldn't afford the fertilizers and pesticides which would make crop yields plunge by at least 2/3. No one could afford the cost of groceries that were shipped hundreds to thousands of miles to market. Businesses depending on people travelling by car to shop would close. Businesses that depend on products shipped by truck would close. People who worked for such businesses would quickly end up unemployed. I expect the food riots inside the US would result in a civil war. It would be LA riots in every single city and town across the US. The US would not survive a war with Iran mostly because it would have to become more evil than the Soviets in order to try to survive.

I'll agree with Smidget, we can not beat Iran fighting as we have since the 60's.

Fight with our full game and yes it's over and not a contest. However we've been letting the enemy pick the war and method of battle since then and it's been costing us and giving folks a false illusion of security.

ps, mini subs from Iran are not stealth and as such are lil more than ducks in a pond ;P

we can not beat Iran fighting as we have since the 60's.

Its really been since the '50s. We fight like we do because it lets the war go on much much longer and it feeds the beast that is the Military Industrial Complex. Why we Fight...Because it makes money for those we elect! That's why.

Think about who is profiting from the current war in Iraq.

Cheney and cronies from guess where - KBR/Halliburton

Eric Prince - Blackwater - Check on who his father is

Look at it all...Phil Gramm, writes banking rules and energy trading rules, look at what his wife does and guess what company he was on the board of.

the list is a huge one and don't let anyone tell you that no one crosses party lines...they just don't do it in front of us, they do it when the stock options, board of directors positions, consultants jobs, contract jobs come up.

We done been fleeced Mr Benny!

During the Iran-Iraq war, they got women and children to march across minefields so that their soldiers wouldn't be inconvenienced.

This is absolutely incorrect... Children and women volunteered to run through minefields in order for their badly fragmented military which lacked generals for tactics and proper orders to be successful. If it were not for the children who sacrificed so that the people who knew how to fight could fight... Iran would be the Islamic Republic of Iraq.

pimHRybIO_o

This is what it meant to them to fight for the lives of their family's and the defense of their country. Sad that our own children would rather run and hide if tanks came rolling.(however much we would rather they do that, still it is disrespectful to diminish what was not a disgusting act by people in power, but rather an honorable sacrifice by citizens)

There is no and never will e any justification for a nation to allow, volunteer or not, its children to fight a war.

There was no need to fight a defensive battle with children leading the way through minefields...Jedd I must vehemently disagree with you on this and ANY emotion other than pure disgust is shocking to me.

That video is horrific and to have a leader of any nation smile upon a child that will give fight the battle...that Mullah should have run through that minefield...I am absolutely disgusted that you find anything positive in this.

They place their children in combat and then scream to the world how their children are killed...absolutely fucking amazing, just fucking amazing.

'If it were not for the children who sacrificed '

- I think you've crossed somewhat of a line here Jedd.

That's pretty fucking disgusting in my eyes.

Oh yeah, they "volunteered" just like Russian peasants volunteered to run into German machine gun emplacements with only one bullet in their rifles. Hint: When trying to persuade people, don't include incitement of 10 year olds to eat high explosives for Allah.

bottom line is this... Sadaak would have murdered those children in their sleep like he did to the ones he gassed. Different culture, different priorities. Those children would have died either way, and if you doubt sadaam would have murdered them when he strolled into Tehran you are crazy.

Just cause martyrdom is not something you believe in, does not make it disgusting. Those children and their parents Believe that this life is a path to the next. A path to heaven if you will. That is why those children volunteered. For their family, honor, and for their god.

Would I ever want to see kids run through minefields? Hell no, however Iran exists today because they did. And every single one of their names are spoken as heroes, and their families taken care of forever.

I don't like it, but its not disgusting to me. It would be disgusting if they tore the children from their mothers arms and forced them to go die.

On another note, until you have lived in a country where you wake up to bombingd and gunfire, what you think is disgusting doesn't matter for shit.

Do you really think that kid has any fucking clue what is about to happen to him? Even if he did survive the emotional trauma, which is a bad descriptor, of what he is about to witness is beyond anything imaginable.

Jedd dude, this is crossing the line beyond anything that is considered sane.

Sad that our own children would rather run and hide if tanks came rolling.

Thats sad? Dude, once again.

I must say, attacking Iran is not something I agree with, it's plainly wrong. But I gotta tell you Jedd, you just defined the line between the average American and their morals to the average Iranian and theirs.

Jedd you do realize that these people are being lead by religious zealots who are concerned with only keeping themselves in power even at the expense of the lives of their children.

On another note, until you have lived in a country where you wake up to bombingd and gunfire, what you think is disgusting doesn't matter for shit.

Really, I can point out a few people on this board who have experienced just that. Dude, you gotta draw the line with kids at least, bottom line man...its got no place in anything.

'Would I ever want to see kids run through minefields? Hell no, however Iran exists today because they did.'

- Ok, that must be the most retarded sentence ever written on this forum.

EVER.

Article in todays NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/world/middleeast/13dissident.html)

Iran had just had a revolution... Sadaam decided to attack a fragmented and divided Iran who had already begun executing Generals loyal to the Shah. When Iraq attacked, the Ayatollah didn't even think he would have half his military or country fighting for him, yet they did. It united the Iranians, but they were badly lacking in military hardware and tactics.

The children VOLUNTEERED when it did not look good that the country would survive an attack. I don't think you understand... What is the objective in a war? To win, especially when your country is on the line.

There is no way in hell that it had become law for children to run into minefields and die, as they didn't even believe the people would fight together at the time. These children had learned all their lives that their country and people must be defended at all times, and when conflict arose, and there was no other way to win, they stepped up with their lives for their country.

Like I said, It is not disgusting that children were allowed to fight a war that they would have been a casualty of if lost. Their actions led to the defeat of Iraq, because the soldiers and military equipment were not destroyed by those mines, they were able to fight and defeat Sadaam.

I wonder if Rover can answer this for me... Why is it disgusting for the children to die defending their country when the alternative was being gassed in their towns?

I think dropping a nuke on another country to win a war is more disgusting then letting your children who volunteer to defend their country fight and die for it, when the alternative is death anyways.

'The children VOLUNTEERED'

- That's what's wrong with your entire perspective, you believe that.

It is fact... The government was in shambles, and they already were nervous people would rebel and fight against them, they did not dare make it mandatory... They just called for volunteers, and they were overwhelmed by the response.

Iran had just had a revolution... Sadaam decided to attack a fragmented and divided Iran who had already begun executing Generals loyal to the Shah. When Iraq attacked, the Ayatollah didn't even think he would have half his military or country fighting for him, yet they did. It united the Iranians, but they were badly lacking in military hardware and tactics.

The children VOLUNTEERED when it did not look good that the country would survive an attack. I don't think you understand... What is the objective in a war? To win, especially when your country is on the line.

There is no way in hell that it had become law for children to run into minefields and die, as they didn't even believe the people would fight together at the time. These children had learned all their lives that their country and people must be defended at all times, and when conflict arose, and there was no other way to win, they stepped up with their lives for their country.

Like I said, It is not disgusting that children were allowed to fight a war that they would have been a casualty of if lost. Their actions led to the defeat of Iraq, because the soldiers and military equipment were not destroyed by those mines, they were able to fight and defeat Sadaam.

I wonder if Rover can answer this for me... Why is it disgusting for the children to die defending their country when the alternative was being gassed in their towns?

I think dropping a nuke on another country to win a war is more disgusting then letting your children who volunteer to defend their country fight and die for it, when the alternative is death anyways.


No Jedd, children don't think in terms of defending the motherland, they think in terms of "that guy is gonna break my tonka toy"

Children "volunteer" because they want to make mommy and daddy happy or because they think they're going to get an ice cream cone or something if they do it.

I wonder if Rover can answer this for me... Why is it disgusting for the children to die defending their country when the alternative was being gassed in their towns?


Both are equally disgusting and the leaders of both are worthy of intense retribution.

Here is some info about the Iran/Iraq war and children...

Meanwhile there was open discussion about Iran's use of "human waves", and teenage volunteers. The Western press was rife with stories about "plastic keys" and young children being sent over minefields. The apparent effect of such reporting was to internationally discredit the genuine public support for the war effort in Iran.

The West was against Iran from the start.

http://www.iraniraqwar.com/about.html

I have heard this story before. It is apparently raised in ‘Persepolis’, the popular book by Iranian expatriate Marjane Satrapi. Perhaps elsewhere in Iranian American literature. When I was in Iran, my group visited the Tehran Peace Museum and met with members of the Society for Chemical Weapons Victims Support there, and with disabled veterans from the Iran Iraq war. They said that indeed, young teenagers did get on the bus and go to the front to help with the war effort. The war, after all, was fought on their own soil, in defense of their homeland. Two of the men present, one, Dr. Khateri himself, said that they had gone to the front at the age of 14. They said that they mostly stayed in the camps and assisted with the work that needed to be done there to support the active soldiers. They were, however caught in poison gas attacks because those attacks were perpetrated against the base camp.

They said that the stories about the children being sent into minefields to clear the mines were myths. I must say, that the way the story was presented, like the man at my presentation, I had envisioned these children being sent out to clear the mines by detonating them. It was a relief to hear that they were not true.

But where do the stories come from? Are they the fruit of idle conjuration by angry, frustrated Iranian expatriots who left during or following the revolution? Are they derived from the presence at the front of young men like our contacts at the Peace Museum.

http://papillonweb.net/wordpress/?p=73

No Jedd, children don't think in terms of defending the motherland, they think in terms of "that guy is gonna break my tonka toy"

Children "volunteer" because they want to make mommy and daddy happy or because they think they're going to get an ice cream cone or something if they do it.




Both are equally disgusting and the leaders of both are worthy of intense retribution.

American children think like that Rover... Not Iranian Children. They are taught that defending their country is their number one responsibility in their life, and their second is to follow the words of God.

Like I said, Different Culture, different people... Doesn't make it right or wrong either way.

Now you people just stop picking on poor jedd or you might start sounding like Bylimet, errr, me.

And just to add my contribution, these last couple pages have simply reinforced my opinion of jedd; he is little more than an Iranian hiding under the safety of an American citizenship, but he shows no grasp of the history, traditions, or sense of belonging with regard to America but instead has all of those for Iran.

It matters less to me that the acts being debated occurred as they cannot be changed now, as it matters that he so proudly defends the acts. This is why jedd cannot be engaged in reasonable conversation (IMO) and also why we will not win in a war against Iran. The mindset of these people is so distant from our own that we fail to understand them on a consistent basis.

Unfortunately, attempting to understand them is a waste of time, because they could care less; it is not our understanding they want but full capitulation and following of their religious doctrine, and anything less makes us an enemy. jedd is no different in his approach to debates, as he is always right and his cause righteous.

The issue of Iran will be the gateway to the coming Holy War, whether it be in the next few years or decades. Sadly, most terrorist acts are being tied to fanatical followers of Islam, and the entire religion and it's followers will be targetted eventually. And it will be in large part due to our failure to ever understand the way these folks enfold their religion into their daily lives, and the ease with which their religious devotion can be twisted and abused by their Imams.

But, I digress, and this is fodder for another thread.

I never supported the actions of men who allow children to fight and die in a war, I only understand why they did, and to me it is not disgusting that Iranian 14 year olds fought and died for their county. I am more disgusted that ours shoot up schools and plot murdering their teachers.

When you guys pull your heads out your asses and realize that unlike our safe, comfortable, uncaring asses. Some people live in lands where they can become conquered, enslaved, and murdered by the millions.

You don't get why their country and religion is important enough for their children to join in the defense of it? Thats your problem. They live life for a different reason then you do. Keep up the shit talking, and after all your accusations and tears, I will still be just as American as you.

'and to me it is not disgusting that Iranian 14 year olds fought and died for their county'

- The line is a dot to you.

1

I never supported the actions of men who allow children to fight and die in a war, I only understand why they did, and to me it is not disgusting that Iranian 14 year olds fought and died for their county. I am more disgusted that ours shoot up schools and plot murdering their teachers.

When you guys pull your heads out your asses and realize that unlike our safe, comfortable, uncaring asses. Some people live in lands where they can become conquered, enslaved, and murdered by the millions.

You don't get why their country and religion is important enough for their children to join in the defense of it? Thats your problem. They live life for a different reason then you do. Keep up the shit talking, and after all your accusations and tears, I will still be just as American as you.


You're a lost sheep and losing what lil audience you had bub. Those kids were far too young to understand the implications of their "decision".

The rest of the world is educated enough to see this bullshit as a lie. Perhaps substitute the word civilized for educated.

As for using the term "enslaved by the millions" I do believe Iran's past is quite checkered in it's past. Has it not been an aggressor itself?

Oh they understood, fight and die to defend my land and family, or stay home and wait for sadaam to kill me. They werent sheltered American children. I am sick of people thinking others should think and act like us, when those very people have lived cushy lives in the safest place in the world.

By the way, in America 14 year olds: have sex, get pregnant, commit murder, and drink alcohol. Sorry but they don't think about tonka toys and ice cream. Its unbelievable that anyone would fault a country for allowing its young adults to fight to defend their country. The war was fought on their own damn soil. How does that not make sense to your "never gotta worry about war on our soil asses?"

Iran has not been an agressor, and the Persian empire founded human rights... Bub

'Iran has not been an agressor, and the Persian empire founded human rights... '

- Haven't I warned you before about using loose historical events as the only evidence to your retarded modern opinions? Don't start the Persian Empire shit, or I'll tear you another new one.

Burying someone waste deep and throwing cement blocks at their head is a human right?

'Iran has not been an agressor, and the Persian empire founded human rights... '

- Haven't I warned you before about using loose historical events as the only evidence to your retarded modern opinions? Don't start the Persian Empire shit, or I'll tear you another new one.

The Cyrus cylinder is the first known record of Human rights in civilization, that is why a replica of it is on display in the UN tower in New York.

Show whatever you want, the Persians were the first known to outlaw slavery.

Burying someone waste deep and throwing cement blocks at their head is a human right?

Hanging someone because he is black is better?

'The Cyrus cylinder is the first known record of Human rights in civilization, that is why a replica of it is on display in the UN tower in New York.

Show whatever you want, the Persians were the first known to outlaw slavery.'

- See, that is exactly what I mean. That is so out of historical context that it's cringe-worthy to see you write it.

The so-called 'Cyrus Cylinder' was a piece of imperial propoganda, a tradition adopted from ancient Babylonian customs to allow Cyrus the local support he needed to conduct his campaigns without too much worry from his rear.
It may well be the first recorded piece of anti-slavery measure, but most historians are agreed that such measures had existed as ceremonial tradition in Mesopotamia for centuries - even millenium - before the Persians.
So not only did some form of popular concession exist before the Persians, but all evidence points to it being nothing more than talk.

I've seen the real Cylinder many times, and there is no illusion by those who tend it that it was the 'first piece of human rights'.

Stop crapping bullshit.

If halo says so it must be true amirite?

My point stands and my history still remains unchallenged.


Edit-

And another tidbit... After the revolution and during the "barbaric" Iranians war with Iraq, jews were protected within Iran, and that. Protection lasts till this day.

Oh, it's going to be challenged Jedd. Tho with your revisionist abilities Halo will have to bring the big guns(facts) to bear ;P

Oh, it's going to be challenged Jedd. Tho with your revisionist abilities Halo will have to bring the big guns(facts) to bear ;P

LOL facts???

The cylinder is a fact as it is a piece of history. Everything else is just opinion.

Stop with the derail, post somethig worth a shit in regards to what we were discussing and get off halo's balls.

'My point stands and my history still remains unchallenged.'

- I, as well as most of modern historiography, just challenged word for word what you said.

Your point stands but it is about as trustworthy as your mumma in a brothel.

LoL on Halo's balls? Imagine that lil piece of pure Jeddness is headed for sandboxville.

You know as lil history here as you do of the world at large. Now I've granted you that you'll revise anything you see fit to fit inside your Iranian paradigm Jedd so leave off.

Fact is I've spent far more years in fun intelligent debate with Halo than you've ever see us agree on something ;P

Jeddness is headed for sandboxville.




/sigh

If I only could......I would love to send jedd to the real sandbox, the one bordering Iraq with Ahmanutjob running the show. Maybe he could get a good job at one of their universities, teaching his dogma.

You guys are silly

This thread is well on its way to winning a Superbowl of Idiocy.

I'm still trying to figure out how a Zoroastrian religious artifact that codified pre-existing sentiment somehow legitimizes rabid Islamic Qur'an-thumpers (the spiritual ancestors of whom violently conquered said Zoroastrian civilization), inciting children to participate in wars. That was an Evel Knievel logical jump, bravo.

This thread is well on its way to winning a Superbowl of Idiocy.

I'm still trying to figure out how a Zoroastrian religious artifact that codified pre-existing sentiment somehow legitimizes rabid Islamic Qur'an-thumpers (the spiritual ancestors of whom violently conquered said Zoroastrian civilization), inciting children to participate in wars. That was an Evel Knievel logical jump, bravo.


It was in response to Fandros making a post regarding a Bloody Iranian History. Has nothing to do with the current conversation.

Well...they can attach remote control wings on their kids and launch them at the Israeli jets.

Well...they can attach remote control wings on their kids and launch them at the Israeli jets.

You are obviously going too far with that discussion... I explained my point of view, and you disagree... Time to move on.

Well they could.

Of course... When your old enough to get married and have children, you should be old enough to fight for your country. Right?

The ability to procreate is most definately a poor measurement of ones ability to make a reasonable decision. Most people, and this includes those nations considered to be civilized, consider the age of "reason" to be 17-18 years old, now that being said most kids even at 17-18 have an attitude of immortality they lack the ability to comprehend their own death, let alone their own mutilation in a war. It's just the way a young person thinks and that goes for kids of almost any culture.

Kids do things like run through minefields because someone told them they should do it and most likely promised them something spectacular if they did it. I find it quite likely that they were also not told what it was they were doing.

It's not an Iranian vs American kid thing, it's just a kid thing...kids are basically the same the world over, in Lebanon they are very much the same as kids here.

Jedd, kids don't understand the real implications of a war, they just simply don't.

One thing I have learned in life is that people the world over are all pretty much the same, they want the same things in Iran tht they want in Iraq or Israel or Malaysia or Japan or North Korea or the USA, it's an inescapable fact.

Bottom line is those kids were forced into running across those minefields whether by threat or promise of great things, they were persuaded by someone who had as little regard for their lives as the people they were fighting against.

They ran through the minefields because they were taught that it is ones duty to defend their country... Simple

Kids do not think the same. Cultures, and situations in life shape their thinking. Bottom line is that a 14+ year old is old enough to know the implications of not fighting when the enemy threatens your country. I cannot believe how hard it is for you to fathom this.

If tanks were rolling through Downtown LA... I guarantee you those 14 year old gangsters would be firing all they got at em... And you wouldn't find it disgusting, You would find it American.

Have you ever been in a war Jedd? Have you ever seen the look on a childs face whether they are 5,8, 11 or 14 when they come under fire? Have you ever held a kid who was shaking so bad and so nervous due to gunfire that they were uncontrollably vomiting so violently they couldn't breathe?

I have Jedd. I am not the most eloquent or the most intelligent on this board but I do know that a 14 year old child whether from Iran or Hollywood has the same basic thoughts and the same basic ability to make a reasoned decision of which is almost none.

Kind of an "If I knew then what I know now" thing.

Have you ever been in a war Jedd? Have you ever seen the look on a childs face whether they are 5,8, 11 or 14 when they come under fire? Have you ever held a kid who was shaking so bad and so nervous due to gunfire that they were uncontrollably vomiting so violently they couldn't breathe?

I have Jedd. I am not the most eloquent or the most intelligent on this board but I do know that a 14 year old child whether from Iran or Hollywood has the same basic thoughts and the same basic ability to make a reasoned decision of which is almost none.

Kind of an "If I knew then what I know now" thing.

Rover, I do not believe that all kids are ready to fight and die for their country. I simply argue that a large amount of them were ready in Iran, and they did.

And were coerced/brainwashed..../nods

I simply asked a question about whether Iran's own history was checkered with an aggressive past. You went all revisionist, dodged the question and brought out something Halo is going to smite you with.

All in all good fun.

Ahhh and was soo awaiting the "the sky is falling hte US R the evil and Iran R innocent" post for the week.

Further sanctions from the UN are inc however and welcomed as a better way to deal with Iran.

And were coerced/brainwashed..../nods

You don't need to brainwash someone to get them to fight to defend their country from destruction, and their families from enslavement. You just instill in them a sense of pride in their country, and show them who threatens their country and their family, and they will fight.

What is sad is that you guys claim that people everywhere are the same, yet you forget their parents allowed them to fight, and were proud of their martyred children no matter how sad they were to lose them.

You think their parents brainwashed them? Hmm!??

Jesus, you guys. Seriously?

I simply asked a question about whether Iran's own history was checkered with an aggressive past. You went all revisionist, dodged the question and brought out something Halo is going to smite you with.

All in all good fun.

Halo is full of hot air... He posts his opinion which goes against many historians opinions and claims to win a historical debate. I will take that smiting anytime lol

And jedd continues his quest to make everyone's opinion of him valid.

Hmmm, should I give credibility to one who has spent years studying history, and who now may spend his life as a teacher of same to students wanting to desperately be elsewhere......or, should I believe our resident Iranian cheerleader living in California who spends his time seeking internet "factoids" to toss out in the hope of generating some attention for himself as an expert on Iran?

It seems clear to me that regardless of what Iran's and Israel's and America's aims may be, jedd will have the inside scoop due to his vast sources of inside information, and so any other source of news is worthless.

Recalling Frasier's question from a "Cheers" episode, "What color is the sky in your world?", I think jedd may have offered some entertainment as a foil for such comedic writing genius, but otherwise is still pretty much a waste of space.

Sandbox time yet?

And jedd continues his quest to make everyone's opinion of him valid.

Hmmm, should I give credibility to one who has spent years studying history, and who now may spend his life as a teacher of same to students wanting to desperately be elsewhere......or, should I believe our resident Iranian cheerleader living in California who spends his time seeking internet "factoids" to toss out in the hope of generating some attention for himself as an expert on Iran?

It seems clear to me that regardless of what Iran's and Israel's and America's aims may be, jedd will have the inside scoop due to his vast sources of inside information, and so any other source of news is worthless.

Recalling Frasier's question from a "Cheers" episode, "What color is the sky in your world?", I think jedd may have offered some entertainment as a foil for such comedic writing genius, but otherwise is still pretty much a waste of space.

Sandbox time yet?

How about you shut the fuck up and instead research it yourself and see what multitudes of Historians have said. Rather then waste your time believing some jackass in England, or myself.

Omg rofl, I'm so up for Rover's idea.

Strap wings on them!!!

Havent been keeping up with the thread, but can I surmise the following with a fair amount of accuracy?

Jedd: The US Sucks, they will lose if we go to war.
Everyone Else: Shut up about Iran for once and find a new topic to speak of?

Giena, your Kung Fu is strong...

Jedd, I thought you might have a point, espically about the whole children "volunteering" part.


I remember being a kid and not realizing my mortality until I hit about 17 or so. When you are young, you think you are invincible.

The children, if the story is true, were not fully aware of thier actions at the age of 14. Children at that age have no concept of what death truly is, and to infer such, shows how little you understand children. What would truly be irreprehensible would be to use that lack of knowledge to allow these children to "volunteer".

Regardless, I think it's pretty evident that all Jedd continues to be is a cheerleader for Iran, while reveling in his American Citizenship.

Wow, just wow....

This thread has effectively backed Jedd into a corner...either he has to admit that Iran is evil or defend it's practices to the point of ridiculousness. It all goes back to what BY said...we, as Americans..or westerners for that matter, cannot understand the way that these people integrate their religion/ nationalistic fervor into their daily lives. The level of integration goes beyond our understanding. What we see as brain washing they view as education ...education about the religion which is their life. We view it as terribly wrong, and they view it as a patriotic, religiously devoted act.

Jedd has the unenviable position of trying to be part of one culture without disparaging the other. A position I don't think is possible...as he has demonstrated. Because the two cultures are so diametrically opposed, you have disparage one...he has chosen to disparage American culture which, by any rational measure, is light years ahead of Iran's in regards to human rights...though far from perfect.

Jedd, by western standards, having 14 year olds fight in wars is unacceptable, disgusting, deplorable..use whatever adjective you want. You're never going to convince any westerner to look at this any differently. We will always see a 14 year olds willing participation as a form of enslavement and brainwashing....because, by our western standards, it is just that.

Western standards?

It is because of western support for sadaam that those kids even needed to fight... Pfft standards my ass. we are just as fucked up if not worse then everybody else and then some of us dare to call other people disgusting for letting their children defend their lives and land. You know what's disgusting? That anyone actually thinks western standards are worth a shit. Everyday new info is released about so called western standards, like the green light for south Korea to kill prisoners by the hundred thousands.

There is no moral superiority to speak from anymore, and what there was, has always been an illusion. So keep crying about the evil scary baby killers, while you continue to be the uncaring majority who wish to kill their children once more and blame it on them.

Western standards?

It is because of western support for sadaam that those kids even needed to fight... Pfft standards my ass. we are just as fucked up if not worse then everybody else and then some of us dare to call other people disgusting for letting their children defend their lives and land. You know what's disgusting? That anyone actually thinks western standards are worth a shit. Everyday new info is released about so called western standards, like the green light for south Korea to kill prisoners by the hundred thousands.

There is no moral superiority to speak from anymore, and what there was, has always been an illusion. So keep crying about the evil scary baby killers, while you continue to be the uncaring majority who wish to kill their children once more and blame it on them.

You are really intent on increasing your persona of village idiot, I guess. You took a reasonable post by Ailwon, examining and offering his observation of the debate thus far, which in no way offered any attack on you, and turned it into exactly that so that you could tell him to fuck off like the rest of us.

Developmentally, you are stuck around age three; control is a major issue for you in all aspects of your life, I would bet. You will redefine text as well as intent to fit your position, or allow you to attack the poster. You will take the smallest of opportunities to go off on your pro-Iran tangents, with no regard to the topic that was originally being discussed. And like Bush, (another victim of poor toilet-training I would guess) you have the basic position of someone is either with you or against you; and, you cannot even read a complete post by those you feel are against you, taking the first "trigger" word you find and running off your "fuck you" replies.

You are a sad, sad, little baby.

You are really intent on increasing your persona of village idiot, I guess. You took a reasonable post by Ailwon, examining and offering his observation of the debate thus far, which in no way offered any attack on you, and turned it into exactly that so that you could tell him to fuck off like the rest of us.

Developmentally, you are stuck around age three; control is a major issue for you in all aspects of your life, I would bet. You will redefine text as well as intent to fit your position, or allow you to attack the poster. You will take the smallest of opportunities to go off on your pro-Iran tangents, with no regard to the topic that was originally being discussed. And like Bush, (another victim of poor toilet-training I would guess) you have the basic position of someone is either with you or against you; and, you cannot even read a complete post by those you feel are against you, taking the first "trigger" word you find and running off your "fuck you" replies.

You are a sad, sad, little baby.

You spend more time attacking me then my arguments, and you try to point to me as being the little baby?

You spend more time attacking me then my arguments, and you try to point to me as being the little baby?


Is that the best you can do?

You cannot even muster a half-ass bluster of why you felt Ailwon's post was unworthy of your consideration, which is what I initially pointed out. You did exactly what I said you do. You missed again, lil guy.

Is that the best you can do?

You cannot even muster a half-ass bluster of why you felt Ailwon's post was unworthy of your consideration, which is what I initially pointed out. You did exactly what I said you do. You missed again, lil guy.

Ailwon's post was fine and dandy, but the last paragraph got a reaction out of me. I will make sure to get an OK from you on my responses before I post them in the future Byl

Ailwon's post was fine and dandy, but the last paragraph got a reaction out of me. I will make sure to get an OK from you on my responses before I post them in the future Byl


/sigh

If only your word was good, we could trust that you would not be posting any more pro-Iran diatribes here, since I obviously would not be too free with giving the OK.

/sigh

If only your word was good, we could trust that you would not be posting any more pro-Iran diatribes here, since I obviously would not be too free with giving the OK.

I think you were right actually, I reread his posts, and I shouldn't have reacted the way I did... Just on edge over this situation, cause just like you guys I see my position as right and its frustrating that it meets so much resistance.

Sorry Ailwon for my reaction.

Jedd, the Iranian Revisionists best friend.

And a reading comprehension nightmare.....

Jedd, the unfortunate poster who is tasked with debating issues from the least popular position and whom must endure endless personal attacks in response to opinions, and debate.

No problem Jedd, I completely understand. The last paragraph could be taken as a value statement if you missed the "by western standards" part. I'm reminded of the old saying "you can't understand another person's experience until you've walked a mile in their shoes". I can understand your point about applying our standards to people whose lives do not resemble ours (westerners) to a tremendous degree.

I stand by my statement that, in general, western "standards" of human rights are way ahead of those in countries like Iraq. That's not a "we are better than them thing", it's more about our values of individual freedom, rights for women, voting for leaders, etc. Your point was valid about how frequently our administrations in the US (and others as well) violate those standards for political and financial gain...we are seeing that right now. The fact that individuals and administrations have violated those "standards" doesn't make the standards wrong...it makes the violators criminals. In war we see those standards violated frequently...off hand I can't think of one war that didn't have examples of the violations of those standards..or maybe a better word would be ideals since achieving them has eluded man, well, forever.

Jedd, the unfortunate poster who is tasked with debating issues from the least popular position and whom must endure endless personal attacks in response to opinions, and debate.

There's a way to change all that....

Hmmm, who assigned that task to jedd? Fire the booger, immediately.

Sanchek pays me 1 dollar a post... He said I would spice up the forums!!!!!







J/k :(

I would think he pays you for each 'wall of text' you copy and paste....

There's a way to change all that....

Why should he have to change? Osi doesnt change which granted he is less than popular opinion wise he sticks to his guns.

Anyone else find irony in Sixee commenting on walls of text, sir i remember a young Sixee coming here and posting similar walls.

Too add, 50% of replies to Jedds post are attacks on him and then 50% on content. After reading Ail's AMAZING post, i have taken a new outlook. People should possibly reread that before proceeding in this thread.

Anyone else find irony in Sixee commenting on walls of text, sir i remember a young Sixee coming here and posting similar walls.

Yeah, but I wasn't getting paid to do it.

I want my money, dammit! ;)

As to Jedd not changing his stance a la Osi, If Osi was throwing himself a 'pity party', I'd level the same comment at him.

he shot pity with his NRA membership branded assault rifle