Anyone else see this news article. They expanded the list of companies and individuals and added some items to the list of sancitoned items.

Only 1 country didnt vote on this resolution.

Indeed another failure of the UN... A blatant failure to uphold the NPT, and another sign that you have to be a friend of America(Israel, who happens to have Nuclear bombs, and is not only a religious state, but also has constant conflict in and around its borders.) to have even nuclear power.

Well that may be true, but it also helps if you're not a state sponsor of terrorism AND lead by a crazy hate spouting moron. The US only has the later.:devil

Well that may be true, but it also helps if you're not a state sponsor of terrorism AND lead by a crazy hate spouting moron. The US only has the later.:devil

Every country is a state sponsor of terrorism. To us, the people they back are terrorists, and to them the people we back are terrorists...

Makes sense to me.

Every country is a state sponsor of terrorism. To us, the people they back are terrorists, and to them the people we back are terrorists...Nah, Jedd would never justify terrorism.

so akipt, youre denying that your country has sponsored terrorists in the past? its only, you know, history.

bah you can't point fingees if your from a country thats as internationally nuetral and uninvolved as moldy bread.

bah you can't point fingees if your from a country thats as internationally nuetral and uninvolved as moldy bread.
You seem to be saying, "You can't point fingers at country's that have sponsored terrorists unless you're from a country that has sponsored terrorists." The problem, though, is less that we've done such things in the past than that we've somehow normalized this state of affairs. What once was deemed reprehensible is now rationalized by a broad swathe of society.

The problem, though, is less that we've done such things in the past than that we've somehow normalized this state of affairs. What once was deemed reprehensible is now rationalized by a broad swathe of society.

Sure would like to see the sources for that statement....

Sure would like to see the sources for that statement....

It all started in Afghanistan back when the good ol Soviet Union existed. It has been a tool ever since.

You can Google the Taliban, the Iran-Contra affair or a host of other worthy topics to find sources.

Sure would like to see the sources for that statement....

Well we've even had members of this board justify the usage of torture. I think thats more where he was going with his statement.

Oh, I forgot a big one.

The Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (formerly School of the Americas).

By that mode of thinking, the United States should not get involved anywhere, for any reason, because the people we support might decide to turn on us?

I thought Isolationism got us in trouble back on December 7th, 1941?

Every country is a state sponsor of terrorism.

Yeah, better be careful of those Swiss Terrorists. I hear they have a knife with an attachment that'll make you crave chocolate.

If you are talking about Israel, I've yet to hear of an Israeli suicide bomber, nor an Israeli car bomb.

Don't think the same can be said, the other way around....

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/terrorist

Noun 1. terrorist - a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities

If you are talking about Israel, I've yet to hear of an Israeli suicide bomber, nor an Israeli car bomb.


One word for you... Mossad

Then I am wrong about the car bombs, and cheerfully withdraw that part of my statement.

I know it's just a movie and sensationalized, but if you haven't seen it, watch Munich Sixee. It was very interesting to me, and I thought it was an excellent movie.

You seem to be saying, "You can't point fingers at country's that have sponsored terrorists unless you're from a country that has sponsored terrorists." The problem, though, is less that we've done such things in the past than that we've somehow normalized this state of affairs. What once was deemed reprehensible is now rationalized by a broad swathe of society.


i made the comment in complete jest....with no basis of actual thought, i was shooting for humor and missed

By that mode of thinking, the United States should not get involved anywhere, for any reason, because the people we support might decide to turn on us?

I thought Isolationism got us in trouble back on December 7th, 1941?



Yeah, better be careful of those Swiss Terrorists. I hear they have a knife with an attachment that'll make you crave chocolate.

If you are talking about Israel, I've yet to hear of an Israeli suicide bomber, nor an Israeli car bomb.

Don't think the same can be said, the other way around....

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/terrorist

Meet Baruch Goldstein who has a memorial site in Israel for his brave slaughter of Muslims at prayer kneeling with their backs to him. While wearing his IDF Uniform he killed them and was praised a hero in death.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baruch_Goldstein

Meet Rachel Corrie, who was an American in Gaza protesting the Israeli illegal house demolotions, she attempted to save the family she was staying with's house from demolition when she was run over by the Israeli Bulldozer and died defending the defenseless.

http://materia.grix.mine.nu/images/Rachel_Corrie.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Corrie

Israel punishes the Gaza citizens collectively which is against International law. Israel itself is considered among many countries as a terrorist state.

We are using the Sunni militias which were against us in Iraq originally against the Shia in Iraq. We back the MEK against Iran. The MEK takes part in car bombings in civilian areas, and has alot of Iranian civilian blood on their hands.


If you think that we do not use terrorists organizations then explain Al Queda? They were our guys in Afghanistan, and now they are against us. There is a lot of instances of US state sponsored terrorism, and the hypocrisy is stupid.

So, you purposefully left out the definition of a terrorist in the quoting of my post.....?

Praised a hero by other extremists, not the country of Israel.

Goldstein's actions were immediately condemned by the Israeli government, the mainstream Israeli parties and the Israeli populace in general. Spokespeople for all the organized denominations of Judaism denounced his act as immoral and as terrorism. The Kach movement, to which he belonged, was outlawed as a terrorist organization. The cabinet agreed to take away the weapons of some right-wing extremists and put them in administrative detention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Patriarchs_massacre
Certainly sounds like the actions of a "Terrorist State"...

In the pictures above, why does it show the bulldozer in front of a pile of sticks, claiming it is bulldozing a home? Do Palestinians live in piles of branches on the ground? Was the bulldozer driver claiming her life in the name of Judaism? Was he part of a cell of terrorist bulldozer drivers?

Insofar as Iraq is concerned, couldn't it be said that the Sunnis are participating in the process, while the Shia have yet to understand they have to stop what they are doing?

Links to MEK activities, espically counts of civilian casualties, would be helpful.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/mek.htm

The group has targeted Iranian government officials and government facilities in Iran and abroad; during the 1970s, it attacked Americans in Iran. While the group says it does not intentionally target civilians, it has often risked civilian casualties. It routinely aims its attacks at government buildings in crowded cities. MEK terrorism has declined since late 2001. Incidents linked to the group include:

The series of mortar attacks and hit-and-run raids during 2000 and 2001 against Iranian government buildings; one of these killed Iran’s chief of staff
The 2000 mortar attack on President Mohammad Khatami’s palace in Tehran
The February 2000 “Operation Great Bahman,” during which MEK launched 12 attacks against Iran
The 1999 assassination of the deputy chief of Iran’s armed forces general staff, Ali Sayyad Shirazi
The 1998 assassination of the director of Iran’s prison system, Asadollah Lajevardi
The 1992 near-simultaneous attacks on Iranian embassies and institutions in 13 countries Assistance to Saddam Hussein’s suppression of the 1991 Iraqi Shiite and Kurdish uprisings
The 1981 bombing of the offices of the Islamic Republic Party and of Premier Mohammad-Javad Bahonar, which killed some 70 high-ranking Iranian officials, including President Mohammad-Ali Rajaei and Bahonar Support for the 1979 takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran by Iranian revolutionaries
The 1970s killings of U.S. military personnel and civilians working on defense projects in Tehran


In the early 1970s, angered by U.S. support for the pro-Western shah, MEK members killed several U.S. soldiers and civilians working on defense projects in Iran. Some experts say the attack may have been the work of a Maoist splinter faction operating beyond the Rajavi leadership’s control. MEK members also supported the 1979 takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, in which 52 Americans were held hostage for 444 days


Looks like they were our enemies, and became our allies. Sounds a lot like the Sunnis.

So, you purposefully left out the definition of a terrorist in the quoting of my post.....?

Praised a hero by other extremists, not the country of Israel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Patriarchs_massacre
Certainly sounds like the actions of a "Terrorist State"...

Israel also created a memorial for him afterwards... Of course they condemned it in public, but once the cameras were off...

http://www.texemarrs.com/images/baruch_kappel_goldstein_grave.jpg



In the pictures above, why does it show the bulldozer in front of a pile of sticks, claiming it is bulldozing a home? Do Palestinians live in piles of branches on the ground? Was the bulldozer driver claiming her life in the name of Judaism? Was he part of a cell of terrorist bulldozer drivers?

Obviously they are standing with their backs to the house that is to be bulldozed. You are hopeless

Insofar as Iraq is concerned, couldn't it be said that the Sunnis are participating in the process, while the Shia have yet to understand they have to stop what they are doing?

What are the Shia doing? Fighting for their country? Bad Shia!!!

Links to MEK activities, espically counts of civilian casualties, would be helpful.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/mek.htm



Looks like they were our enemies, and became our allies. Sounds a lot like the Sunnis.

In an American controlled media you expect me to find mainstream media reports with links between America and the MEK? Iran constantly complained about the support of the US and Britain for the MEK.

Britain has them on the terrorist list, and still gave their leaders refuge in England.

The MEK kills Iranians, and the US has supported them against Iran.

The fact that the US would become "friends" with people who have civilian blood on their hands confirms my very point. Our use of terrorism is very similar to that of other country's

We will never forgive or forget

Cherifa Sirry


March 2, 2008


I don’t know where to start from. I am watching Palestinians in Gaza digging with their bare hands to find bodies under the rubble of a building which was completely demolished by Israeli shelling a few hours ago. The Palestinians just found a body… if this is what I can call it. The "body" consisted of a foot and a headless torso with half a leg hanging. Like every day, I am watching horrible images which no longer shock me as they use to.
Yesterday or the day before, I watched however a scene that will haunt me forever. It’s about the 5 month old baby Mohamed el Borai who was killed 2 days ago. It is not so much the picture of his dead body that disturbed me, it is the image of his father carrying this small body and standing in front of the open door of the mortuary refrigerator where he was supposed to separate from his child and leave it there. Mohamed’s father held his child for a while and in front him the refrigerator was already full of other bodies. He knew that he was to place Mohamed near one of those bodies and close the refrigerator door leaving Mohamed alone in the cold and in the dark without his parents for the first time. This father’s image broke my heart. I will never forget this image and I will never forget who is to be held responsible for it.
Earlier today I heard the testimony of a Palestinian women who had survived yesterday night’s Israeli onslaught. She was sitting alone silently with a 3 or 4 year-old on her lap. I won’t forget what she said either: "They (the Israelis) hit them with a missile. I could see them… then the ambulance took them away. I went to the hospital looking for them. I found my eldest son in surgery and his father and brother in the mortuary refrigerators."
http://www.uruknet.de/uruknet-images/gazani2n0988.jpg
I cannot close my ears and eyes and ignore what is happening in Gaza or in the West Bank. The least one can do as a human being is to listen to the Palestinians and convey their plight.
Tonight is the third night of consistent Israeli bombing. Ambulances are mostly unable to reach the injured because Israelis fire at them injuring and even killing the medics. For hours throughout the night the injured lay there torn in pieces, with amputated limbs or burnt bodies alone in the streets of Gaza or buried alive under the rubble of a shelled building. It is only at dawn when the cowardly Israelis withdraw that help is able to reach the wounded who often haven’t managed to survive the night. Israelis are out to inflict maximum pain and harm even though they know that they are essentially attacking a civilian population that includes many children, women and elderly who are mostly unarmed and not equipped to defend themselves. Tonight, Israeli air raids are continuing and again the injured are left to suffer alone and die. To add to Palestinian misery, ambulances and hospitals are running out of fuel because of the criminal siege imposed on Gaza. The whole world is able to come out and condemn the Resistance for using 10 dollar Qassam rockets that have hardly caused Israel or rather illegally occupied Palestine any harm, but this entire world community is silently watching Israeli Apaches, F-16’s, navy and tanks bombing with proper missiles made-in-the-USA a 99% civilian population that is living in UN refugee camps in occupied Palestine, a land that Israel is illegally occupying lest the world have forgotten.
As for the Arab regimes, what is happening today in Gaza is the crowning of their failure to cope successfully with Israel when Israel is weaker than it has ever been. If Arab leaders imagine by any chance that the Arab people do not understand exactly what is happening, they are mistaken. If Arab leaders think that the Arab people are content with their silent and weak stand, they are also mistaken. Collusion with Israel under any circumstances will never be tolerated as has already been demonstrated. Normalization with Israel will never be tolerated especially that Israel has never shown any respect for International Law, for UN resolutions or for the very basic rights of the Palestinian people to also live in peace and safety on their own land and in their own state. Before the Palestinians are given their legitimate rights according to the terms and expectations of the Arab people and not Annapolis, Arab leaders should neither expect sympathy nor support from us. What is happening in Gaza will not be forgotten or forgiven.
++++++++++
These are just a few of the courageous Palestinians who survived the night alone torn up in pieces on the streets of Gaza waiting for hours and hours until Israelis kindly allowed ambulances to pick them up. To them the whole Arab and Muslim world raises its hat.. and because of them, there will never be normalization with Israel until there is justice according to the will of the Arab people.


http://www.uruknet.de/?p=m41657&hd=&size=1&l=e

Israel also created a memorial for him afterwards... Of course they condemned it in public, but once the cameras were off...

Members of the Labor Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_Party_%28Israel%29) called for the shrine-like landscaped prayer area near the grave to be removed, and Israeli security officials have expressed concern that the grave will encourage extremists.[20] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baruch_Goldstein#_note-8)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baruch_Goldstein


Obviously they are standing with their backs to the house that is to be bulldozed. You are hopeless Then why in the picture taken after she was "run over", was there no house visible?



What are the Shia doing? Fighting for their country? Bad Shia!!! It is when the minority of the country doesn't want to go the direction the majority of the country does.



In an American controlled media you expect me to find mainstream media reports with links between America and the MEK? Iran constantly complained about the support of the US and Britain for the MEK.

Britain has them on the terrorist list, and still gave their leaders refuge in England.

The MEK kills Iranians, and the US has supported them against Iran.

The fact that the US would become "friends" with people who have civilian blood on their hands confirms my very point. Our use of terrorism is very similar to that of other country's If you can't find something, it's probably not there? You mean not even Achmadinnerjacket doesn't have any press releases on the U.S.-MEK links?

Regarding the corpses in the picture above; While the use of the picture for dramatic effect is noteworthy, why are all the corpses of young men? No children or women are put into morgues? What about the women and children listed in that harrowing account?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baruch_Goldstein

The shrine still stands, and no such removal was ever done. There are members in the Israeli government who publicly praise Baruch Goldstein.

Then why in the picture taken after she was "run over", was there no house visible?

Cause it is from the same angle???



It is when the minority of the country doesn't want to go the direction the majority of the country does.

Since when is it up to the Majority of the country to bow to the minority?



If you can't find something, it's probably not there? You mean not even Achmadinnerjacket doesn't have any press releases on the U.S.-MEK links?


On Cheney, Rumsfeld order, US outsourcing special ops, intelligence to Iraq terror group, intelligence officials say
Larisa Alexandrovna
Published: Thursday April 13, 2006
Print This (javascript:document.getElementById() | Email This (http://rawstory.com/email_story.php?sid=1840)The Pentagon is bypassing official US intelligence channels and turning to a dangerous and unruly cast of characters in order to create strife in Iran in preparation for any possible attack, former and current intelligence officials say.
One of the operational assets being used by the Defense Department is a right-wing terrorist organization known as Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK), which is being “run” in two southern regional areas of Iran. They are Baluchistan, a Sunni stronghold, and Khuzestan, a Shia region where a series of recent attacks has left many dead and hundreds injured in the last three months.
One former counterintelligence official, who wished to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of the information, describes the Pentagon as pushing MEK shortly after the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The drive to use the insurgent group was said to have been advanced by the Pentagon under the influence of the Vice President’s office and opposed by the State Department, National Security Council and then-National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice.
http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/2005/March/MEK/Images/photo.jpg“The MEK is run by a husband and wife team who were given bases in northern Baghdad by Saddam,” the intelligence official told RAW STORY (http://rawstory.com/). “The US army secured a key MEK facility 60 miles northwest of Baghdad shortly after the 2003 invasion, but they did not secure the MEK and let them basically be because [then Deputy Defense Secretary Paul] Wolfowitz was thinking ahead to Iran.”
Another former intelligence official added that the US military had detained as many as 3,500 members of MEK at Iraq’s Camp Ashraf since the start of the war, including the highest level ranking MEK leaders. Ashraf is about 60 miles west of the Iranian border.
This intelligence official, wishing to remain anonymous, confirmed the policy tensions and also described them as most departments on one side and the Pentegon on the other.
“We disarmed [the MEK] of major weapons but not small arms. [Secretary of Defense Donald] Rumsfeld was pushing to use them as a military special ops team, but policy infighting between their camp and Condi, but she was able to fight them off for a while,” said the intelligence official. According to still another intelligence source, the policy infighting ended last year when Donald Rumsfeld, under pressure from Vice President Cheney, came up with a plan to “convert” the MEK by having them simply quit their organization.
“These guys are nuts,” this intelligence source said. “Cambone and those guys made MEK members swear an oath to Democracy and resign from the MEK and then our guys incorporated them into their unit and trained them.”
Stephen Cambone is the Undersecretary of Defense Intelligence. His office did not return calls for comment.


http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/US_outsourcing_special_operations_intelligence_gat hering_0413.html


"The Iranian accusations are true," said Richard Sale, intelligence correspondent for United Press International, referring to charges that the US is using the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK) organization and other groups to carry out cross-border operations. "But it is being done on such a small scale - a series of pinpricks - it would seem to have no strategic value at all."
http://regimechangeiran.blogspot.com/2006/04/tehran-insider-tells-of-us-black-ops.html


BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- An Iranian opposition group based in Iraq, labeled a terrorist organization by the United States, gets protection from the U.S. military despite Iraqi pressure to leave the country.
The U.S. considers the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, or MEK, a source of valuable intelligence on Iran.

Iranian officials tied the MEK to an explosion in February at a girls school in Zahedan, Iran. (Full story (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/02/17/iran.bombing/index.html))
The U.S. State Department considers the MEK a terrorist organization -- meaning no American can deal with it; U.S. banks must freeze its assets; and any American giving support to its members is committing a crime.
The U.S. military, though, regularly escorts MEK supply runs between Baghdad and its base, Camp Ashraf.


http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/04/05/protected.terrorists/index.html



Regarding the corpses in the picture above; While the use of the picture for dramatic effect is noteworthy, why are all the corpses of young men? No children or women are put into morgues? What about the women and children listed in that harrowing account?

http://www.alarabiya.net/files/image/large_75780_46272.jpg

http://electronicintifada.net/artman2/uploads/1/gaza-killed-9aug483.jpg
http://www.worldproutassembly.org/images/strike_3.jpg
http://rafah.virtualactivism.net/newsphotos/06/june/22/children%20lameting%20the%20death%20of%20their%20b rother%20in%20Al%20Shiekh%20Radwan%20in%20Gaza,%20 the%20children%20were%20playing%20when%20they%20we re%20killed.jpg
http://rafah.virtualactivism.net/newsphotos/06/june/22/killing%20children%20in%20gaza.jpg
http://rafah.virtualactivism.net/newsphotos/06/june/15/palestinian%20child%20carried%20to%20a%20hopsital% 20in%20gaza%20after%20being%20injured%20in%20by%20 the%20bombing%20of%20Israeli%20helicapters.jpg
http://rafah.virtualactivism.net/newsphotos/06/june/15/palestinian%20child%20is%20seen%20inside%20the%20m orgue%20at%20Al%20Shifa%20hospital.jpg
http://rafah.virtualactivism.net/newsphotos/06/june/gazamassacre/WHAT%20SHE.jpg

Is that enough children to warrant an outcry?

What about this??


Gaza town stunned by shelling
By Matthew Price
BBC News, Beit Hanoun

Beit Hanoun house hit by Israeli tank fire
Homes were left standing, but inside there was great destruction

This street in Beit Hanoun is very, very quiet indeed. It's just a matter of hours since a number of Israeli shells fell on houses in this area, killing 18 people, including six children and two women.

We counted about eight impacts. The shells appear to have landed roughly in a straight line, starting in the fields at the end of the street and hitting houses on either side of it.

A pen for livestock was struck by one of the explosions and the animals are lying dead on the ground.

There are pools of bloodstained water outside one of the houses, which has had a hole blown through the roof and there are shrapnel marks everywhere from the explosion.


A woman just walked past me crying, being helped by some of her neighbours.

Most of the victims were from the same branch of the same family
Most people are shocked and uncomprehending about what happened in their street during the night.

A father of one child who was killed told me: "One missile I believe could have been a mistake, but the number of missiles that were fired, I can't believe that was a mistake."

A resident who works in one of Gaza's hospitals says: "I have not seen injuries like this for a long time."

"The shrapnel severed peoples hands and arms and they were left lying on the ground," Dr Ali said.

He had been sleeping in his bedroom when the shells struck the next door building. The windows of his bedroom had been blasted out and there was glass on the ground.

Dr Ali tells the same story as everyone I spoke to, that there had been no anti-Israeli attacks by Palestinian militants from this area, as the Israeli military claims, before the shells struck.

"I did not get woken up by anything during the night. There was no sign of rocket fire during the night," Dr Ali said.

It seems clear that rockets have been fired from near this area in the past, but there appears to have been nothing on that night.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42291000/jpg/_42291078_girl203.jpg

Slumped

Raed Ibrahim tells me that all the dead came from the same branch of the same family.

"I am angry. I hate the US, I hate George W Bush, I hate of course Israel. I also hate the Arab states which do nothing to help and the international community," said Raed.

But it was not anger in his eyes, it was more like an immense sadness that showed through.

That mood was shared by most of the people we saw, many of them slumped tearfully against walls in the street.

Normally when something like this happens members of armed groups turn up and chant slogans with their loudspeakers.

But this time we only saw one militant appear, and he quickly vanished again.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6128614.stm

The shrine still stands, and no such removal was ever done. There are members in the Israeli government who publicly praise Baruch Goldstein. There are probably some members of the U.S. Government that praise Robert E Lee. Does this mean they wish to secede from the Union?


Cause it is from the same angle??? I always thought that when something runs someone over it does it in a straight line. It's your assertation this terrorist bulldozer performed a U-turn after running her down?

Also, a news story that quotes an "former counterintelligence official, who wished to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of the information" is akin to a fairy tale. Good job on finding a story, I knew you could do it.

Since when is it up to the Majority of the country to bow to the minority? We do it here in the U.S. all the time, when it's considered "correct".


Is that enough children to warrant an outcry?

Those pictures are truly sad, Jedd. However, what is the context? Accidents that happened? Parents that were targets, and children that were accidentally killed?

Or is it your stance these children were deliberately killed?

There are probably some members of the U.S. Government that praise Robert E Lee. Does this mean they wish to secede from the Union?

That's not similar at all to members of a government revering a terrorist. Really really reaching here Sixee.


Also, a news story that quotes an "former counterintelligence official, who wished to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of the information" is akin to a fairy tale. Good job on finding a story, I knew you could do it.
And comments like this are probably why he didn't look that hard in the first place. Anything he could find you would poo poo, regardless of source because of your distaste for him as an individual.


Those pictures are truly sad, Jedd. However, what is the context? Accidents that happened? Parents that were targets, and children that were accidentally killed?
I agree here. War is bad. Collateral damage happens. I won't justify what's going on from either side.

It's just as easy to say "well if the Palestinians would stop bombing the Israelis then the Israelis would have no need to retaliate" as it is to say "the Israelis have no right to be there, they are an occupying population." Neither side is going to budge from their opinion about something as heated.

I'd say it's the same as the reason you don't discuss religion with people over casual conversation, but this IS all about religion.


Or is it your stance these children were deliberately killed?
I hope that is not his stance. I don't think that Israel is targeting children implicitly, but I DO think that they are going to far here over a rocket attack that hurt/killed one military target.

There are probably some members of the U.S. Government that praise Robert E Lee. Does this mean they wish to secede from the Union?

The wishes and thoughts are backed by action, which makes them very different then our situation or any other. Not only do people think that man was a hero, the country they control is killing innocent civilians of the same people in which Baruch killed... If you cannot see this, then sorry I bothered even discussing this with you.


I always thought that when something runs someone over it does it in a straight line. It's your assertation this terrorist bulldozer performed a U-turn after running her down?

Bulldozers have a reverse...

Also, a news story that quotes an "former counterintelligence official, who wished to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of the information" is akin to a fairy tale. Good job on finding a story, I knew you could do it.

Of course, they should divulge the name of their source so that he faces all sorts of problems including retribution by the most powerful country on earth... Bravo

We do it here in the U.S. all the time, when it's considered "correct".

Yet people like you are against the Minority, homosexuals being able to get married like everyone else. No, it is not done everywhere. The good of the few does not outweigh the good of the many.


Those pictures are truly sad, Jedd. However, what is the context? Accidents that happened? Parents that were targets, and children that were accidentally killed?

Israel is collectively punishing the people of Gaza by bombing them indiscriminately. The parents in most cases are also innocent civilians. 500 rockets land in Israel, and 2 people die... You act outraged and agree with a response, and then Israel goes in and kills 100's of civilians and 30-40 militants, and you sit here emotionless telling me their parents were targets and they were killed by accident?

Out of every 100 or so killed in Gaza at least half, sometimes more are innocent civilians. If that doesn't motivate you to speak out against Israel, then you are not human.

Or is it your stance these children were deliberately killed?

My stance is that these children are killed because Israel cannot find enough military targets to kill and takes out its frustration on the civilian populace. They do, its a fact!

The 2006 incursion into Lebanon proved it. They used cluster bombs on civilian sectors that had no militants anywhere nearby...

http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/IsraeliAssaultonLebanon.jpg

Most of the sites bombed were not even under the control or lacked the presence of Hezbollah.

Israel purposely kills innocent people as punishment, prove me wrong.

By that mode of thinking, the United States should not get involved anywhere, for any reason, because the people we support might decide to turn on us?

I'm very much aware of the need to defend our own interests globally. You asked for sources and you got them without any comment from me regarding the ethics behind them.

I thought Isolationism got us in trouble back on December 7th, 1941?

Anyone with half a brain could make a very good argument that if we got involved in the war sooner, Pearl Harbor would not have happened. They'd also have to concede that we might have lost just as many lives- perhaps even more. We'd certainly have a bunch of new battles crowding up our history books.

Isolationism won't work for us now because we're on our knees in front of the global marketplace blowing anyone who can supply us cheap goods and oil no matter what kind of country they are running.

The wishes and thoughts are backed by action, which makes them very different then our situation or any other. Not only do people think that man was a hero, the country they control is killing innocent civilians of the same people in which Baruch killed... If you cannot see this, then sorry I bothered even discussing this with you.

Innocent people die in conflict, Jedd. Just because 1 looney went off and killed people in a mosque, and some other idiots in the government there praise his actions, doesn't mean the whole of Israel supports his actions.

Bulldozers have a reverse... I didn't notice that it had backed up. I conceed that I was wrong on the perspective of the pictures. However, why would a terrorist bulldozer operator reverse his machine? Wouldn't he be fixated on reaching his goal, the home they were trying to protect?



Of course, they should divulge the name of their source so that he faces all sorts of problems including retribution by the most powerful country on earth... Bravo So you give the same creedence to the stories about Little Green Men, and UFO's when they cite a former government official who wishes to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of the information?



Yet people like you are against the Minority, homosexuals being able to get married like everyone else. No, it is not done everywhere. The good of the few does not outweigh the good of the many. No clue where you dredged that up from. Same sex couples can get Civil Unions, which I do support and has the same clout as a marriage. The institution of marriage should be abolished, in my opinion.





My stance is that these children are killed because Israel cannot find enough military targets to kill and takes out its frustration on the civilian populace. They do, its a fact!

Israel purposely kills innocent people as punishment, prove me wrong.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article3468859.ece

“This morning I carried two children, one a 10-year-old and the other a 13-year-old, after they were wounded by an Israeli missile,” said Hussein Oun, a Palestinian resident of Jabaliya. “They were among a group of seven children standing near a fighter when the shell hit. Two of the children were wounded. I don’t know what happened to the other five.”

Children standing near a fighter were hit.....ever wonder why that is? If I were a parent, I'd sure as hell make sure my children were nowhere near any fighters. I don't care if they are freedom fighters, terrorists, whatever! I think 1 of the posters on that site put it best.

Please note that if Hamas were fighting from the derelct wasteladns and empty fields there would be no civilian casualties but they do rain their rockets down on civilian areas inside isreal don't they.
Israel doesn't intentionally target civilians, if they did so the entire population of gaza would be dead, that is Serbia or Darfur where real genocide happens. Israel does target terrorists who have no uniform and are thought of as civilians. It is tragic that kids are killed but why does Hamas fight with kids nearby

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article3468859.ece

Children standing near a fighter were hit.....ever wonder why that is? If I were a parent, I'd sure as hell make sure my children were nowhere near any fighters. I don't care if they are freedom fighters, terrorists, whatever! I think 1 of the posters on that site put it best.

Please tell me where the fighters can stand in Gaza as to not be near civilians. I will provide you a map so you can show me where they can fight from where no civilians will be near them?
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/gaza_strip_may_2005.jpg

Israel carries out assassinations with missiles and attack helicopters, which is against international law, due to high risk for civilian casualties.

It is quite possible that some of the kids killed were somewhere near a fighter, however that is no excuse for the mass amounts of civilians killed, as the fighters are obviously in a densely populated prison state, packed in tight with civilians.

Perhaps that could stand in that big, blue area, that predominates the top left hand side of the map. No civilians out there....

Nice Map, BTW.

No clue where you dredged that up from. Same sex couples can get Civil Unions, which I do support and has the same clout as a marriage. The institution of marriage should be abolished, in my opinion.


Really depends upon the state. Most states do NOT allow this.

The states that allow civil unions/marriage(or domestic partnerships) is: Vermont, California, Oregon, New Hampshire, Vermont, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Washington, and Maine. DC allows domestic partnerships too.

As you see, that list is 20% of the states. That's far from what you implied in your comment.

Perhaps that could stand in that big, blue area, that predominates the top left hand side of the map. No civilians out there....

Nice Map, BTW.

Most all of the land is inhabited... keep making excuses for the murder of civilians though...

Israel carries out assassinations with missiles and attack helicopters, which is against international law, due to high risk for civilian casualties.


Don't the Palestinians do the same thing sans the helicopters?

Ack, Now we get to hear how they have the right to do it because the land was stolen from then, Et Al.

It's like that picture of the snake eating its own tail, it never ends. A perpetual cycle of violence.

Makes my suggestion I had a few years ago, seem worthwhile, evacuate everyone, and irradiate the land. Maybe in 250,000 years, people will have calmed down to be able to live together.....

Don't the Palestinians do the same thing sans the helicopters?

Not really... Palestinians fire unguided rockets into Israel which usually miss pretty much everything.

Ack, Now we get to hear how they have the right to do it because the land was stolen from then, Et Al.

It's like that picture of the snake eating its own tail, it never ends. A perpetual cycle of violence.

Makes my suggestion I had a few years ago, seem worthwhile, evacuate everyone, and irradiate the land. Maybe in 250,000 years, people will have calmed down to be able to live together.....

Put aside the argument over the land Israel occupies, and lets discuss the land the Palestinians occupy, which is cut off from the world and treated like a Prison...

They have enough reasons to be mad without discussing the land outside of where they live.

The point however is that Israel collectively punishes Palestinians for the acts of a few people who launch unguided rockets.

Imagine if the police started shooting every black person in compton because of gang violence... As the occupier they have responsibilities, and the UN has said time and time again, that Israel is in violation of hundreds of resolutions which are all vetoed by the US.

Hypocrisy

Not really... Palestinians fire unguided rockets into Israel which usually miss pretty much everything.

Does that really matter that they do it this way? I think it's even more irresponsible to launch missiles willy-nilly into populated lands than to send guided missiles after targets that happen to cause collateral damage.

To me the former is more irresponsible than the later. The fact that the missles the Palestinians are less accurate and less deadly are moot to me considering their obvious intentions with the missiles.

The point however is that Israel collectively punishes Palestinians for the acts of a few people who launch unguided rockets.
You attempt to remove any amount of responsibility for the actions of the Palestinians from the Palestinians themselves. If they would stand up as a people against the people launching missiles at Israel instead of putting all the blame on Israel, some resolution might be possible.

It's hard to expect Israel to broker peace when each time they attempt to do so, some fucknuts from Gaza launch missiles into Israeli cities. It's a never ending cycle.

Israel attempts to broker peace --> some peace accord is struck --> some asshat launches some missles at Israel --> Israel gets pissed off (well within reason) and attacks back

Now, I know at least I was taught this, and I would guess most of us on the board were taught this lesson as well: Don't throw the first punch, but if someone punches you first, make sure they regret it. IMO that's what Israel does after they are attacked as well. I know you don't like Israel/Israelis Jedd, but you at least have to admit that this whole situation isn't entirely their fault.

Does that really matter that they do it this way? I think it's even more irresponsible to launch missiles willy-nilly into populated lands than to send guided missiles after targets that happen to cause collateral damage.

To me the former is more irresponsible than the later. The fact that the missles the Palestinians are less accurate and less deadly are moot to me considering their obvious intentions with the missiles.

It doesn't make them right for launching the missiles, but it makes Israel wrong for the crushing response which puts more civilians at risk then militants.

http://i.usatoday.net/news/_photos/2008/02/28/gaza-topper.jpg

http://images.usatoday.com/news/_photos/2008/02/27/israelx-large.jpg

http://www.chabad.org/media/images/181/Avrj1810519.jpg

http://d.yimg.com/i/ng/ne/afp/20080303/16/1216698494-long-range-rockets-fired-gaza-iranian-israel-army.jpg?x=266&y=399&q=75&sig=iO1t.J3D3ZaYA16lHnovZw--

http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer2/20122005/803253/kassam_Sderot_5_a.jpg

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/07/09/world/09rockets.xlarge1.jpg

http://www.zionism-israel.com/vic/damage1.htm

Just big bottle-rockets, really....

It doesn't make them right for launching the missiles, but it makes Israel wrong for the crushing response which puts more civilians at risk then militants.

How is Israel more wrong when Hamas' sole purpose in most cases is civilian casualties, and the casualties caused by the Israelis is caused by collateral damage?

You are defending the side that is actually targeting civilians and denouncing the side attacking legitimate targets (albeit with civilian consequences). Where's the outrage for the Israeli civilians that are being targeted? Oh wait, I forgot, they are less relevant because they aren't Arabs.

http://i.usatoday.net/news/_photos/2008/02/28/gaza-topper.jpg

http://images.usatoday.com/news/_photos/2008/02/27/israelx-large.jpg

http://www.chabad.org/media/images/181/Avrj1810519.jpg

http://d.yimg.com/i/ng/ne/afp/20080303/16/1216698494-long-range-rockets-fired-gaza-iranian-israel-army.jpg?x=266&y=399&q=75&sig=iO1t.J3D3ZaYA16lHnovZw--

http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer2/20122005/803253/kassam_Sderot_5_a.jpg

http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer2/20122005/803253/kassam_Sderot_5_a.jpg

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/07/09/world/09rockets.xlarge1.jpg

http://www.zionism-israel.com/vic/damage1.htm

Just big bottle-rockets, really....

I don't see what your point was with that post... In essence you proved my point. The damage from Qassam rockets is nowhere near as devestating as the response from Israel. Go back up and look at the pictures I posted, and tell me how it compares. Or maybe some new ones of how Israel does things...

http://www.dci-pal.org/english/publ/posters/pg006.jpg

http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/71504865.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF19390335F8FA9CA92A62AE584464976BA37 474FC6B9CADF7309

http://www.greenleft.org.au/images/database/lrg_264.jpg

http://rafah.virtualactivism.net/newsphotos/04/october/15/q16.jpg

http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2006/12/31/beithanoun.jpg

http://www.davidduke.com/writings/baby.jpg

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/07/17/wmid17.jpg

http://invision-images.com/archive/stories/life%20after%20war/INV-700-111/preview

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1925000/images/_1927656_jenin_ap_150.jpg

http://la.indymedia.org/uploads/2006/11/israeli_murders_1.jpgmid.jpg

http://print.indymedia.org/uploads/israeli_flag_2_barbed_wire__gun.gif

How is Israel more wrong when Hamas' sole purpose in most cases is civilian casualties, and the casualties caused by the Israelis is caused by collateral damage?

You are defending the side that is actually targeting civilians and denouncing the side attacking legitimate targets (albeit with civilian consequences). Where's the outrage for the Israeli civilians that are being targeted? Oh wait, I forgot, they are less relevant because they aren't Arabs.

What are you talking about? How is it possible for me to show remorse for the Israeli's when they respond the way they do... I do not defend Hamas, I defend the innocent people killed because of Israel's response. The innocent people who die on both sides are suffering needlessly.

Yeah, the flag was a nice touch. I'm sure Israelis had a hand in it's manufacture.

Taleren, I think you hit the nail on the head, he only cares when Arabs are hurt.

Yeah, the flag was a nice touch. I'm sure Israelis had a hand in it's manufacture.

Taleren, I think you hit the nail on the head, he only cares when Arabs are hurt.

I care when the defenseless are hurt and nobody cares...

Don't know why you think I have some love for Arabs...

I care when the defenseless are hurt and nobody cares...

You don't condemn Hamas when they escalate more violence with random missile attacks. The missiles from Israel, even as you say, are in response to attacks to their citizens. Israel has a responsibility to act in the defense of their citizens.

I have never once said I didn't care about innocent Palestinian lives. Every single innocent life lost is one too many. Unfortunately though, civilians DO die in warzones. Hamas is not willing, or able (one or the other) to go forward and resolve past differences. Israel has numerous times extended the olive branch so to speak to attempt to make at least some form of peace with the Palestinians. Each time, Israelis are attacked randomly by missiles from Palestinian areas or car bombings.

Tell me though Jedd, what do YOU think is the appropriate action for Israel to take when another group(that happens to be the majority party in power in the Palestinian parliament) launches missiles into civilian areas?

You don't condemn Hamas when they escalate more violence with random missile attacks. The missiles from Israel, even as you say, are in response to attacks to their citizens. Israel has a responsibility to act in the defense of their citizens.

I have never once said I didn't care about innocent Palestinian lives. Every single innocent life lost is one too many. Unfortunately though, civilians DO die in warzones. Hamas is not willing, or able (one or the other) to go forward and resolve past differences. Israel has numerous times extended the olive branch so to speak to attempt to make at least some form of peace with the Palestinians. Each time, Israelis are attacked randomly by missiles from Palestinian areas or car bombings.

Tell me though Jedd, what do YOU think is the appropriate action for Israel to take when another group(that happens to be the majority party in power in the Palestinian parliament) launches missiles into civilian areas?


Hamas threatens to break ceasefire after Israeli air strikes


By Tim Butcher, in Jerusalem
Last Updated: 2:02am BST 17/10/2006


Audio: Tim Butcher on the growing tension between Israel and Hamas (javascript: var newWin2 = window.open('/ETHtml/content/promotions/podcast/butcher_mid_161006.jhtml;jsessionidRDT1YF2DKQ0ILQF IQMGCFFWAVCBQUIV0','newWin2','height=350,width=260 ,noscrollbars'))
Israel and Hamas were on the brink of war last night as a senior member of the Islamic movement hinted that it would stop observing a 20-month-old ceasefire in retaliation for the latest Israeli assault on the Gaza Strip.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/16/wmid16.xml

Israel so far has shown that any cease fire or agreement made can be broken by them at any time. Israel has broken ceasefires at least 2 times causing Hamas to restart its rocket campaign.

I care about both the innocents that die in Israel (from heart attacks, and hitting there heads on the ground after fainting) and the Palestinians who die in Gaza (from rockets, missiles, tanks, bulldozers, and weapons fire)

The appropriate move for Israel would be to actually recognize them as the government and talk with them. Not talking with your enemies just because you don't want to legitimize them, doesn't change the fact that their people already did.

You don't condemn Hamas when they escalate more violence with random missile attacks. The missiles from Israel, even as you say, are in response to attacks to their citizens. Israel has a responsibility to act in the defense of their citizens.

I have never once said I didn't care about innocent Palestinian lives. Every single innocent life lost is one too many. Unfortunately though, civilians DO die in warzones. Hamas is not willing, or able (one or the other) to go forward and resolve past differences. Israel has numerous times extended the olive branch so to speak to attempt to make at least some form of peace with the Palestinians. Each time, Israelis are attacked randomly by missiles from Palestinian areas or car bombings.

the concept of israel continuously trying to make peace with the palestinians, never provoking anyone, is ridiculous, every time they fake a peace effort, they keep on confiscating palestinian land, expanding their illegal settlements, building the wall right through the palestinian land, and so forth. then they act super surprised when some palestinian group fires off some half-assed rockets, and launch a disproportionate attack, claiming their right to self defense, like they did when they invaded lebanon a few years ago, how in the hell you could call what israel does self defense is beyond me.

anyway, what do you want the palestinians to do? to go silently into the dark? my guess is that if they had a superpower supplying them with arms, as does another unnamed nation (in the immediate vicinity, actually!), they would be using more accurate weapons.

I care about both the innocents that die in Israel (from heart attacks, and hitting there heads on the ground after fainting) and the Palestinians who die in Gaza (from rockets, missiles, tanks, bulldozers, and weapons fire)


Thanks for invalidating what I thought was an intelligent debate with you with stupid immature comments like this. Poo poo'ing the danger of a rocket being launched willy-nilly into populated areas just shows your complete bias and inability to reason.

http://www.mideastweb.org/zeevi_hamas_cg.htm

The Hamas Plan - Peace Now, Genocide Later
Ze'evi reveals that the Hamas offered to allow Israel to stop attacking them for a period, during which they say, they will gather strength to continue the struggle to destroy Israel. Peace Now, Die Later. Sounds like a plan, no? If you think I am exaggerating, here is the quote:

The Hamas supporters did not hide their motives: At this time their organization is hurt and fighting with clenched teeth. It is interested in utilizing the armistice in order to rearm and rebuild its power, in the hopes that in another generation or two it would be able to attack more effectively.


Yeah, I'd want to negotiate with a mindset like that.....

anyway, what do you want the palestinians to do? to go silently into the dark? my guess is that if they had a superpower supplying them with arms, as does another unnamed nation (in the immediate vicinity, actually!), they would be using more accurate weapons.

I want both sides to honor agreements that they make, so that the world can move forward. I'd love to see both societies be able to prosper without having to look over their shoulder for an attack constantly.

Both sides are fucked up here. I've said that in numerous different ways in this thread and others on the subject of Israel. If you read through this thread in its entirety, you will see that there are times I've agreed and even defended comments that Jedd has made.

BOTH SIDES ARE FUCKED UP. PERIOD.

It makes no sense to vilify completely one side or the other. Both sides are doing things completely counterproductive to achieving any sort of equitable outcome. Have you not seen me post that I thought Israels retaliation to missile attacks go to far? I have said it, just read through the entire thread. That said though, that doesn't mean they don't have a right to retaliate when someone launches missiles randomly into populated areas.

I don't think Israel is always in the right. I don't think the Palestinians are either. Neither side can have tangible security until they stop targeting the other side.

Thanks for invalidating what I thought was an intelligent debate with you with stupid immature comments like this. Poo poo'ing the danger of a rocket being launched willy-nilly into populated areas just shows your complete bias and inability to reason.

It was a quite intelligent response based on fact... More Israeli's suffer from heart attacks and feinting then they do from actual impact from a Qassam rocket.

Yeah, I'd want to negotiate with a mindset like that.....

I certainly see your point here, but you also have to consider that in order to change the current mind set to hope to go forward, the status quo has to change.

If we fear making peace deals because of threats like this, then war will never end in this region. While that's certainly a possibility, it's definitely not a desirable outcome.

It was a quite intelligent response based on fact... More Israeli's suffer from heart attacks and feinting then they do from actual impact from a Qassam rocket.

And it completely ignores the inherent danger of missiles randomly targeting areas with civilians.

I want both sides to honor agreements that they make, so that the world can move forward. I'd love to see both societies be able to prosper without having to look over their shoulder for an attack constantly.

Both sides are fucked up here. I've said that in numerous different ways in this thread and others on the subject of Israel. If you read through this thread in its entirety, you will see that there are times I've agreed and even defended comments that Jedd has made.

BOTH SIDES ARE FUCKED UP. PERIOD.

It makes no sense to vilify completely one side or the other. Both sides are doing things completely counterproductive to achieving any sort of equitable outcome. Have you not seen me post that I thought Israels retaliation to missile attacks go to far? I have said it, just read through the entire thread. That said though, that doesn't mean they don't have a right to retaliate when someone launches missiles randomly into populated areas.

I don't think Israel is always in the right. I don't think the Palestinians are either. Neither side can have tangible security until they stop targeting the other side.

Ah... Both sides are indeed fucked up... The difference between Israel and the Palestinians is that Israel is backed by the US, and the International community is not allowed to say what they are allowed to do or not do. Whatever the Palestinians do however is held under a microscope and used as reason for Israel to react.

As Wiggo said, The Palestinians do not have precision guided weaponry that they could use against Israel, therefore they rely on what cheap crap they have. What's hilarious is that with the cheap unguided crap they fire, they cause negligible damage, while Israel with such advanced weaponry pumps out hundreds of civilian casualties every time they decide to attack.

Israel not only is keeping Gaza as a prison, they also have Nuclear weapons and have not signed the NPT... Do you deny that Israeli's feel that Jews are the superior race? They believe they are god's chosen and that nothing they do is questionable by anyone because God has chosen them and they must do whatever possible to survive. How Ironic that the victims of the holocaust mimic the actions of their oppressors.

I want both sides to honor agreements that they make, so that the world can move forward. I'd love to see both societies be able to prosper without having to look over their shoulder for an attack constantly.

Both sides are fucked up here. I've said that in numerous different ways in this thread and others on the subject of Israel. If you read through this thread in its entirety, you will see that there are times I've agreed and even defended comments that Jedd has made.

BOTH SIDES ARE FUCKED UP. PERIOD.

It makes no sense to vilify completely one side or the other. Both sides are doing things completely counterproductive to achieving any sort of equitable outcome. Have you not seen me post that I thought Israels retaliation to missile attacks go to far? I have said it, just read through the entire thread. That said though, that doesn't mean they don't have a right to retaliate when someone launches missiles randomly into populated areas.

I don't think Israel is always in the right. I don't think the Palestinians are either. Neither side can have tangible security until they stop targeting the other side.

yes, i agree with you completely, which is why it annoys me to no end when people justify israels action as self defense, and blame it all on the palestinians, which is what i interpreted your post as. sorry if i misinterpreted it.

What's even worse is that like America, Iran has picked a side in this conflict, and instead of taking it for what it is, Iran is demonized as backing terrorists and such stupid excuses are used to make a case against them having Nuclear power.

The US backs one of the sides in this conflict, and not only has Nuclear power, we have Nuclear weapons and could destroy the whole world if we wanted to...

Think people would tell the Palastinians to not fire there rockets from the roof of my house since my kid and family is living below the last 10 times you did that the house was destroyed. Or they are just creating martyers of there own people for the purpose of a few.
Im sure those that fire the rockets do not live in the house they are launching from, and more than likely would mark anyone who told them go to the next block as some sort of isreal sympathiser and harm the family.

Think people would tell the Palastinians to not fire there rockets from the roof of my house since my kid and family is living below the last 10 times you did that the house was destroyed. Or they are just creating martyers of there own people for the purpose of a few.
Im sure those that fire the rockets do not live in the house they are launching from, and more than likely would mark anyone who told them go to the next block as some sort of isreal sympathiser and harm the family.

I know for a fact Hezbollah tells civilians to vacate a building before using it, I have no Idea about Hamas.

and as a result Lebonan civilian buildings were hit by isreal.

and as a result Lebonan civilian buildings were hit by isreal.

No one cries over a civilian building with no civilians in it being hit by Israel... It is the Civilians that were nowhere near the fighting, or who's buildings were not being used and were killed which we complain about.

or Shit like this. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jul/27/syria.israel4)

I know for a fact Hezbollah tells civilians to vacate a building before using it, I have no Idea about Hamas.


This does not surprise me at all.

Just another hate-spewing, pro-Iranian, anti-US, irrelevant, ineffectual, impotent wannabe revolutionary. I have tried to support Jedd's positions at times, but he has simply gone over-board for me, and I see nothing any more of importance in his postings, as they are simply a rehash of his "America bad...Iran good" rantings, with an occasional fresh ribbon and decorations.

Debate requires the acknowledgment of the argument having two sides; Jedd consistently demonstrates he is incapable of this and so continues to present his biases as being the only possible right way of seeing the world.
It is curious, though, that he knows for a fact what Hezbollah's procedures are.

/waves bye-bye to jedd

It will make browsing these forums easier to just pass by his posts in the future.

This does not surprise me at all.

Just another hate-spewing, pro-Iranian, anti-US, irrelevant, ineffectual, impotent wannabe revolutionary. I have tried to support Jedd's positions at times, but he has simply gone over-board for me, and I see nothing any more of importance in his postings, as they are simply a rehash of his "America bad...Iran good" rantings, with an occasional fresh ribbon and decorations.

Debate requires the acknowledgment of the argument having two sides; Jedd consistently demonstrates he is incapable of this and so continues to present his biases as being the only possible right way of seeing the world.
It is curious, though, that he knows for a fact what Hezbollah's procedures are.

/waves bye-bye to jedd

It will make browsing these forums easier to just pass by his posts in the future.

I don't care if you believe me or not, but I know lebanese citizens that have told me that Hezbollah as a rule informs civilians to leave an area that they are using. Take that for what it is... Some guy on the internet telling you something, and nothing more. Unfortunately I post based on what I know and not on what you know.

Oh and this...

Just another hate-spewing, pro-Iranian, anti-US, irrelevant, ineffectual, impotent wannabe revolutionary. I have tried to support Jedd's positions at times, but he has simply gone over-board for me, and I see nothing any more of importance in his postings, as they are simply a rehash of his "America bad...Iran good" rantings, with an occasional fresh ribbon and decorations.

You are such nonsense it is ridiculous... I'd love to see how I am hate-spewing, Anti-US, irrelevant, ineffectual, impotent, and a wannabe revolutionary. Newsflash, just cause I do not agree with your ass backwards opinions 80% of the time, doesn't make me:

1. Wrong
2. Anti-US
3. Full of Hate
4. Irrelevant
5. Ineffectual
6. Impotent
7. or even a wannabe anything

You present a typical holier then thou attitude... Just because I disagree with you and post evidence to the contrary of your beliefs does not make me any less relevant then you.

I also find it hilarious how everyone who posts a different opinion then mine acts like I am 100% wrong and some idiot anti American terrorist, yet I am accused of not seeing that there are 2 sides to every debate?

I will bet on you responding... but just in case you don't... Bye bye!

No one cries over a civilian building with no civilians in it being hit by Israel... It is the Civilians that were nowhere near the fighting, or who's buildings were not being used and were killed which we complain about.


But Isreal uses High Tech US precision guided munitions how can they miss ? Its not like there shooting bottle rockets.

But Isreal uses High Tech US precision guided munitions how can they miss ? Its not like there shooting bottle rockets.

Because like I said, they target more then just military targets whenever they get frustrated and run out of targets.

I also find it hilarious how everyone who posts a different opinion then mine acts like I am 100% wrong and some idiot anti American terrorist, yet I am accused of not seeing that there are 2 sides to every debate?

I do? I actually try to debate with you instead of resorting to personal attacks, and at times defend you when others attack your person and not your ideas.

I don't agree with you a good portion of the time, but I feel I've kept most childishness out of such discussions.

I do? I actually try to debate with you instead of resorting to personal attacks, and at times defend you when others attack your person and not your ideas.

I don't agree with you a good portion of the time, but I feel I've kept most childishness out of such discussions.

I apologize, I meant mostly Sixee, Akipt, Fandros, and Ibudin. Should not have generalized.

Because like I said, they target more then just military targets whenever they get frustrated and run out of targets.

So now you have psychic powers, and can see into the motives of the evil (OMG!!!) Zionists?

So, what do you call it when those unguided anti-personnel rockets are fired from Gaza, and hit, whatever? Goodwill gifts?

Because like I said, they target more then just military targets whenever they get frustrated and run out of targets.

I vehemently disagree.

Remember, 123mm Katyusha rockets (Fired by Hezbollah on a continual basis) have no guidance ability and for that matter have an accuracy of about 2 miles, I would say that's pretty random.

I also know lebanese civilians who will absolutely tell you hezbollah has never suggested they leave an area of operation, and I know IDF people who have seen and taken part in operations where the civilians were warned hours and even days ahead of an imminent attack.

but rover, its a fact that IDF does target civilians, and, more prominently, their homes, as a means of collective punishment.

So now you have psychic powers, and can see into the motives of the evil (OMG!!!) Zionists?

So, what do you call it when those unguided anti-personnel rockets are fired from Gaza, and hit, whatever? Goodwill gifts?

They are just that, rockets fired that thankfully don't kill many civilians... I am sorry for having less sympathy for the .5% chance that a civilian will die at the hands of Hamas, but the thousands of Civilians killed by Israel over the last 10 years just piss me off a bit more... I wonder why.

I vehemently disagree.

Remember, 123mm Katyusha rockets (Fired by Hezbollah on a continual basis) have no guidance ability and for that matter have an accuracy of about 2 miles, I would say that's pretty random.

I also know lebanese civilians who will absolutely tell you hezbollah has never suggested they leave an area of operation, and I know IDF people who have seen and taken part in operations where the civilians were warned hours and even days ahead of an imminent attack.

In the Hezbollah Israel conflict you have to take that as a war between Lebanon and Israel. Hezbollah is fighting for the Lebanese land that Israel occupies. Israel also violates UN resolutions by violating Lebanese airspace on a regular basis. Hezbollah responds by launching rockets. If Israel didn't kill civilians like they were each worth 50 points, then I would care.

but rover, its a fact that IDF does target civilians, and, more prominently, their homes, as a means of collective punishment.


I know that the IDF is by no means innocent....the whole thing just stinks over there...

this is pretty sad..

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/02/24/mideast/mideast.php

"The army has made the appropriate preparations in accordance with the Palestinian reports," an Israeli Army spokeswoman said.

According to Israel's Channel Two television, the army has increased its artillery units along the border.

Sad indeed...

http://www.sacbee.com/836/story/735861.html

Later Monday, militants fired 11 rockets at southern Israel, the military said. One seriously wounded a 10-year-old boy in the battered town of Sderot, just across the Gaza border.

Doctors said shrapnel cut through the boy's shoulder, but surgeons were able to save his arm. Earlier this month, an 8-year-old boy in Sderot lost a leg in a rocket attack.


Good thing they "rarely" hit their targets.....

Yeah. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/02/AR2008030200217.html)

The violence Sunday was considerably less intense than on Saturday, when 60 Palestinians were killed -- about half of them civilians. At least seven Palestinians were killed Sunday as Israel continued its raids in northern Gaza.

Four Israeli soldiers were slightly injured Sunday, bringing the five-day military casualty total to two killed and 11 wounded. During the same period, 240 rocket and mortar strikes have resulted in the death of one Israeli civilian and injuries to more than a dozen, the military said.

Props to the slightly injured!

Wait Jedd i thought you said you were sad at the loss of innocent life, but now your saying that you are sad at the loss of innocent life as long as it not Israeli innocent life, or a select list of organizations? You are sending some mixed messages here man.

Wait Jedd i thought you said you were sad at the loss of innocent life, but now your saying that you are sad at the loss of innocent life as long as it not Israeli innocent life, or a select list of organizations? You are sending some mixed messages here man.

I care very much about innocent people being killed for something that is out of their hands, however when you have one side killing a whole lot more of them then the other, it is hard to speak about them without getting mad.

I also know lebanese civilians who will absolutely tell you hezbollah has never suggested they leave an area of operation, and I know IDF people who have seen and taken part in operations where the civilians were warned hours and even days ahead of an imminent attack.

That's gotta suck for OpSec......

Not related to Israel, but to the original topic of the thread...

Fallon 'may lose job over Iran war'
Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:54:40
http://www.presstv.com/photo/20080307/davari20080307200717545.jpg Admiral William Fallon
Adm. William Fallon, the head of the US Central Command, may lose his job for opposing President Bush's plans to wage war against Iran.

According to a new Esquire article by Thomas Barnett; Admiral Fallon may be prematurely 'relieved of his command' as soon as this summer to be replaced with a more 'pliable' commander.

"If that were to happen, it may well mean that the president and vice-president intend to take military action against Iran before the end of this year and don't want a commander standing in their way," says the article which will be published on March 12.

Admiral Fallon, who has been named as 'one of the best strategic thinkers in uniform today' by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, opposed the troops surge in Iraq and has consistently battled with President George W. Bush to avert confrontation with Iran.

The Navy admiral has vowed that an attack on Iran would 'not happen on his watch', calling the White House warmongering echelons 'not helpful'.

Washington and its allies are at loggerheads with the Islamic Republic over the country's nuclear standoff with the West.

The Bush administration accuses Iran of pursuing nuclear weaponry, while Tehran maintains its uranium enrichment will only provide fuel for the country's under-construction nuclear power plants.

President Bush insists the military option against Iran remains on the table, while his top military experts, including Admiral Fallon, urge the White House to choose a diplomatic approach towards Tehran.

In a Thursday White House press briefing, spokeswoman Dana Perino was asked about the Esquire piece and refused to confirm whether Fallon's position is secure until the end of his tenure.

http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=46317&sectionid=3510203

Admiral Fallon, who has been named as 'one of the best strategic thinkers in uniform today' by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, opposed the troops surge in Iraq and has consistently battled with President George W. Bush to avert confrontation with IranFor that alone, he's being retired. I now call into question SecDef Gate's ability to adequately appraise people as strategic thinkers if he can't even get this one right.

Or maybe he realized sooner than anyone else how the surge would fail to produce a stable government. I am surprised that he actually made it to head of central command, though -- everyone else not on board the Bush bandwagon is already spending more time with their families. He must have known early on that not toeing the Cheney line is a career ender.

I noticed that too Thor, a lot of people in the Bush camp as well know their careers in politics are over.

Saw a nice documentary on the failure Rummy and the original plans of occupation in Iraq... Check out "No end in sight"

I saw it on Netflix :)

It was such a mess you wouldn't believe.

As if no surge was going to create a stable government. And oh forbid the president actually dictate his administration's policies.

Only, this president hides behind his generals when talking the very policy he/Cheney created. "See? My generals are telling me to do these things!" But the generals tell him what he's already selected them to hear.

Hiding behind his generals? Wait... are you daring to allege the president has responsibility for the Iraq war?!

Holy shit! Call the presses, this needs more attention.

Anyone who has ever studied any Iota of military history will tell you occupational armies are doomed to failure.
The Roman model of occupation worked passebly well, the Mongol method even more so.

Anyone who has ever studied any Iota of military history will tell you occupational armies are doomed to failure.
The Roman model of occupation worked passebly well, the Mongol method even more so.

Especially when Orha is only given 60 days to prepare, and when they finally move into Baghdad they have to make looted buildings with no chairs or tables their offices, and work without computers...

http://www.kutv.com/news/world/story.aspx?content_id=6a05ec14-c7ad-4601-92e5-dc42a1e7d1b6

China, along with Russia, has been steadfast in their attempts to block any further sanctions against Iran. Now with them turning over new evidence to the UN in regards to Iran's nuclear program are we looking at new light being shed upon Iran and their house of cards being endangered?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/02/wiran102.xml

Even more revealing link.

Sure looks like Iran was indeed dirty from the start and now should suffer increasingly stricter sanctions. Shocking and must be pretty bad for one of Iran's closest allies to throw'em to the wolves.

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSN3141976120080331

Russia is also leaning on Iran to join talks, this was before China came clean with the damning info in regards to Iran's nuclear program

Iran should just drop out of the NPT so that they won't be in violation of anything and no one could complain, and can just launch wars against them if they want them to stop it.

The NPT is a joke anyways, Israel sits there with over 200 nukes and is involved in some of the worst human rights violations in the world, and no one says a damn thing, but Iran is making headlines for Nuclear Power, and possible nuclear weapons.

The NPT my friends is slowly losing relevance, and authority.

Regarding Russia and China however... Iran is in the process of joining the SCO, this is probably a simple instance of them helping to make sure the US cannot go to war with Iran.

If they do not back the sanctions, We would then use the excuse that war is the only way, however with Russia and China backing the sanctions, the US cannot jump to war as sanctions will have to have time to run their course.

Invade!

So you don't answer the allegations that Iran was attempting to purchase information in regards to nuclear weapons and China turned the info over to the UN?

Instead you say blah blah blah Israel is guilty blah blah blah.


It appears Israel, the US and UK all had good reasons to be worried about Iran's intentions all along.

Have to wonder if they'll be allowed to join the SCO now that even China is worried. More than likely China is worried the nuts running Iran would drag them into a war.

I predict something something blah blah blah the US blah blah blah on this thread soon.

Nah L2 invasion isn't the answer, very strict and very real sanctions might however be appropriate now that a lil light is thrown on the subject.

Atm no sanctions hold because China/Russia are circumventing, omg again, UN sanctions.

So you don't answer the allegations that Iran was attempting to purchase information in regards to nuclear weapons and China turned the info over to the UN?

Instead you say blah blah blah Israel is guilty blah blah blah.


It appears Israel, the US and UK all had good reasons to be worried about Iran's intentions all along.

Have to wonder if they'll be allowed to join the SCO now that even China is worried. More than likely China is worried the nuts running Iran would drag them into a war.

I predict something something blah blah blah the US blah blah blah on this thread soon.

There have been allegations for months and years, I will respond with "OMG" when they are proven

And for the record, Israel doesn't have the right to be worried about anything... They are the reason for the arms race in the Middle east, and the biggest destabilizing force in the region.

The fact that Iran hasn't overtly spoken of wanting nuclear weapons is actually what I am surprised about... With the US breathing down their necks, and Israel with their fingers on the trigger, It seems the only way Iran would actually be safe is if they had nuclear weapons.

Nah L2 invasion isn't the answer, very strict and very real sanctions might however be appropriate now that a lil light is thrown on the subject.

Atm no sanctions hold because China/Russia are circumventing, omg again, UN sanctions.

Iran has been under sanctions and embargo's for 30 years... They don't seem to be working.

Jedd, there has been an "arms" race in the middle east long before we split the atom.

Nuclear weapons are just the lastest round of destruction between Islam and notIslam.

Oh and in regards to Iran attempting to buy information to make nukes... I never denied they may have wanted them in the past... I think everyone knows that.

Jedd, there has been an "arms" race in the middle east long before we split the atom.

Nuclear weapons are just the lastest round of destruction between Islam and notIslam.

You couldn't be more wrong in, my opinion, of your reasoning behind the Drive to become Nuclear.

Israel is the greatest threat to many in the region, and is a nuclear armed country with no oversight. The fact that due to the US the UN turns a blind eye to Israel on their treatment of the Palestinians, is even more reason why a country like Iran would find themselves with no option other then to go Nuclear. Israel is a big deal over there, and it has nothing to do with Islam... Just ask the 35,000 Jews living in Iran.

The argument still stands however that Oil will not last forever, and Nuclear energy is indeed something that a country like Iran has legitimate reason to use.

There have been allegations for months and years, I will respond with "OMG" when they are proven

And for the record, Israel doesn't have the right to be worried about anything... They are the reason for the arms race in the Middle east, and the biggest destabilizing force in the region.

The fact that Iran hasn't overtly spoken of wanting nuclear weapons is actually what I am surprised about... With the US breathing down their necks, and Israel with their fingers on the trigger, It seems the only way Iran would actually be safe is if they had nuclear weapons.

Chicken and the egg debate tool 101. Israel could argue they weren't safe over there till they had the nuke due to every nation over there either going to war or taking the cowardly tact of hiring mercs, Hezbollah, to do their dirty work for them.

Chicken and the egg debate tool 101. Israel could argue they weren't safe over there till they had the nuke due to every nation over there either going to war or taking the cowardly tact of hiring mercs, Hezbollah, to do their dirty work for them.

Hezbollah was created because of Israel and their aggression in Lebanon
Hamas was created out of anger and violence as a defense against Israel by the Palestinians.

Iran has done nothing to Israel directly, and indirectly only gives aid to those who are fighting for defense/freedom.

The chicken and the egg debate tool you say? Iran would be the Chicken, and Israel and the US the Eggs... Check your history on who started shit with who.

]Iran has been under sanctions [/B]and embargo's for 30 years... They don't seem to be working.

How can anyone expect them to work when our Vice President was leading the charge to skirt the sanctions and suck up that Iranian oil money?

Still waiting for an investigation to see what role Cheney had in Iran's nuclear program being developed, via Halliburton's contrtacts over there.

Israel is the greatest threat to many in the region, and is a nuclear armed country with no oversight.Israel lacks the imperial ambition to cause real problems for Iran. Iran is involved with Israel, I think, because it's politically expedient for those with ambition to point at Israel as a boogeyman in need of smiting. Real help for Palestinians takes forms other than giving them incentive and equipment that facilitates blowing themselves up.

/nods Thor, I was thinking along the same lines but I knew Jedd would refute it with more "well Isreal and or the US" dogma.

Was there ever a country called Palestine and didn't most Arabs treat the Palestinians as garbage pre Israel. Read that somewhere but it's been so long I can't remember the source ;(

/Was there ever a country called Palestine and didn't most Arabs treat the Palestinians as garbage pre Israel.


Yeah, but it was the kind Arabs treating them like garbage, as opposed to the Infedels treating them like garbage....

Israel lacks the imperial ambition to cause real problems for Iran. Iran is involved with Israel, I think, because it's politically expedient for those with ambition to point at Israel as a boogeyman in need of smiting. Real help for Palestinians takes forms other than giving them incentive and equipment that facilitates blowing themselves up.

Israel and the United States combined are enough of a threat that you would be nuts not to go nuclear if you were Iran.

The US has yet to prove it does not have Imperial ambitions. Israel is still a threat, as right now Israel is threatening Iran over something Iran is allowed to have. How can anyone say that Israel is not the aggressor?

Hmmm I don't know Jedd, maybe the Pres of Iran constantly saying Israel is going to be wiped off the map is being miscontrued as being agressive.

Hmmm I don't know Jedd, maybe the Pres of Iran constantly saying Israel is going to be wiped off the map is being miscontrued as being agressive.

How many times must it be posted that it was a mistranslation... I am Iranian and I am telling you it was mistranslated, as have many various sites. He did not even use the farsi word for map.

His exact words were... "The Zionist Regime will be wiped from the pages of time"

This in no way has anything to do with genocide against the Jews, or destruction of Israel... For such a thing can even happen through the will of the people who live there. Not going to happen, but anything is possible.

Besides, Iranians have been saying Death to America and Death to Israel for years, Id like to see us get attacked for what our citizens say... that would be the day /sarcasm off

I don't see how saying "The Zionist Regime will be wiped from the pages of time" is NOT meant to suggest that they will be starting a genocidic war against the nation of Israel.

Now, I will give you that the bit about being wiped from the map is inaccurate, but the phrase "wiped from the pages of time" is, to me, a very aggressive statement.

I don't see how saying "The Zionist Regime will be wiped from the pages of time" is NOT meant to suggest that they will be starting a genocidic war against the nation of Israel.

Now, I will give you that the bit about being wiped from the map is inaccurate, but the phrase "wiped from the pages of time" is, to me, a very aggressive statement.

The "Zionist Regime" implies the government. The United States has been trying to over throw the "Islamic Regime" for how long? Are we partaking in Genocide?

Besides... Why would Iranians want to kill all the Jews in Israel... Iran is the home to the second largest population of Jews in the Middle East.... 35,000.

Overthrow and "wipe from the pages of time" are interpreted as two very different things Jedd, you know that.

And yes, I know that "Zionist Regime" refers to the govt, but since the govt is made up of jewish believers, and the nation of Israel is a nation of Jews, one can surmise that to get rid of one, you must also get rid of the other; given the general attitude of Arabs towards Jews.

The destruction of Israel has been a priority of Arab nations since Israel declared its independence in 1948. You have to admit that there is historical precedence for violence towards Israel from Arab nations. Based on those events, it's understandable that his words would be interpreted as a sign of aggression.

Overthrow and "wipe from the pages of time" are interpreted as two very different things Jedd, you know that.

And yes, I know that "Zionist Regime" refers to the govt, but since the govt is made up of jewish believers, and the nation of Israel is a nation of Jews, one can surmise that to get rid of one, you must also get rid of the other; given the general attitude of Arabs towards Jews.

The destruction of Israel has been a priority of Arab nations since Israel declared its independence in 1948. You have to admit that there is historical precedence for violence towards Israel from Arab nations. Based on those events, it's understandable that his words would be interpreted as a sign of aggression.

Iranians speak very dramatically, I can assure you it means the same as overthrowing the government. That is why it is so important not to accept the mistranslation of wiping them off the map.

Wiping them off the map implies that Israel would cease to exist and all Israeli's would either leave or die...

Wiping the regime from the pages of time, is a dramatic way of saying that the Government will not last, or will be defeated.

Iran is not an Arab nation, and at a time enjoyed a friendly alliance with Israel.

Iranians speak very dramatically, I can assure you it means the same as overthrowing the government. That is why it is so important not to accept the mistranslation of wiping them off the map.

Wiping them off the map implies that Israel would cease to exist and all Israeli's would either leave or die...

Wiping the regime from the pages of time, is a dramatic way of saying that the Government will not last, or will be defeated.

Iran is not an Arab nation, and at a time enjoyed a friendly alliance with Israel.

Well, then here we come to the crux of the issue don't we? I certainly wouldn't expect the common joe in Israel (whats yiddish for joe? :) ) to infer that the latest speech actually means that their govt will lose its power instead of thinking that this person is going to do their best to wipe me from history.

Of course, we see this same sort of blustering from North Korea as well, but for some reason, I find the sabre ratteling from Iran to be more concerning than the latest Anti-US rant out of Pyongyang.

I cede the point about Iran not being an Arab nation, I vaguely remembered them supporting the Arab Leagues actions against Israel however, and lumped them in with the Arabs.

Rightly so Giena, they did throw in their hats with the Arab nations actions against the Israelis and as such can be considered the same in regards to their pure hatred for Israel.

Well, then here we come to the crux of the issue don't we? I certainly wouldn't expect the common joe in Israel (whats yiddish for joe? :) ) to infer that the latest speech actually means that their govt will lose its power instead of thinking that this person is going to do their best to wipe me from history.

Of course, we see this same sort of blustering from North Korea as well, but for some reason, I find the sabre ratteling from Iran to be more concerning than the latest Anti-US rant out of Pyongyang.

I cede the point about Iran not being an Arab nation, I vaguely remembered them supporting the Arab Leagues actions against Israel however, and lumped them in with the Arabs.

And here once again is where miscommunication leads to conflict.

I admit that Iran should take a much softer stance on their relations with Israel. They are harsh and seem to say much of what they say out of anger, which is not the way to handle relations with another country.

At the same time however I can see how it would be hard to do so with Israels actions towards the Palestinians and their overall attitude toward non Jews. The Extremists in Israel are plenty and they have a voice both in and out of government.

The responsibility for Israel's government is to know that Iran is not a threat, regardless of what the people who do not understand what they are saying think. The notion that Iran would launch a pre emptive nuclear strike to destroy Israel is so far fetched and ignores the humanity of Iranians, who would actually enjoy to live rather then to be killed in a retaliation, and who would be just as hurt by a genocidal attack on innocents as Americans generally are. That is the point though... Iranians must be painted as animals and inhumane. Or the people wouldn't buy it.

Iran along with the majority of the world, does not recognize Israel. Should they? I think so. It is the same idiocy that I blame the United States for. This notion that if we say they are not legitimate that it is true. Iran does the same thing with Israel and it is very childish.

The US has yet to prove it does not have Imperial ambitions.

One cannot prove something that is non existent.

Emphasis is mine.

/boggle

But haven't you posted before that Peaceful, benign Iran only wants nuclear power for generating electricity?
Looking for info on how to make nukes is a long way from wanting to just power your lights and houses imho. Iran gets nukes, they'll want to use them or threaten with them. And when the first city goes up in a nuclear fireball by terrorists, then we can make an educated guess where they came from...:D
I may not like Israel all that much, but they don't take half the abuse most other nations do. If i lived in a neighborhood where everyone mostly wanted to kill me, i'd make darn sure that my weapons were bigger than theirs..lol

Emphasis is mine.

/boggle

Except that the US has launched wars over false accusations and has extended its influence well beyond her borders... which is a clear indicator of imperialistic ambitions. There is actually evidence to the claim, therefore you in no way have a claim of hypocrisy.

But haven't you posted before that Peaceful, benign Iran only wants nuclear power for generating electricity?
Looking for info on how to make nukes is a long way from wanting to just power your lights and houses imho. Iran gets nukes, they'll want to use them or threaten with them. And when the first city goes up in a nuclear fireball by terrorists, then we can make an educated guess where they came from...:D
I may not like Israel all that much, but they don't take half the abuse most other nations do. If i lived in a neighborhood where everyone mostly wanted to kill me, i'd make darn sure that my weapons were bigger than theirs..lol

I cannot claim to know what Iran wants, I can only post what I know... And that is that they have not shown evidence that they are pursuing it now.

All this hullabaloo is over whether or not they had planned on it at one time in the past. If they did, fine... It has nothing to do with now.

The part I bolded in your post is a rather bold assumption indeed. You assume that Iran will without a shadow of a doubt threaten to use, or use nuclear weapons if they possess them. This is an assumption with no foundation. Iran is not an imperialistic country, they are not aggressors, and have not launched wars or invasions since ancient times.

The only real major conflict they faced was an 8 year war against Iraq, which Iraq initiated. That we happened to have a hand in against them.

I find it also hilarious that Iran is more of a threat to you in handing Nuclear weapons to terrorists, when Pakistan is sitting right next door with the biggest extremist problem in their own backyard and a stockpile of nukes.

Out of all of the nations in the middle east, Iran is the one most commited to fighting Terrorist groups. They constantly fought the Taliban, and still to this day fight against Al queda. They were victims of terrorism long before 9/11 and still to this day have an occasional car bombing or other terrorist style attack in their country.

Iran may perhaps be one of the most responsible countries to have nuclear weapons in the middle east. Even more so then Israel. When was the last time they were inspected? where is their signature on the NPT?

Israel is in the position of being in constant fear of attack because of the situation in which they came to exist. They were given land that was inhabited. They pushed out the local inhabitants, made a country, and told those people they weren't allowed in cause they are not Jewish. Hence why a non Jew cannot own land in Israel... THAT is a FACT

There is a lot we can discuss about Israel and their treatment of the original inhabitants of the land they now occupy. Bottom line is, they have to learn that every bomb dropped gives birth to 10 new people who want them gone.

There is actually evidence to the claim, therefore you in no way have a claim of hypocrisy.

It's all a matter of perspective.

One man's Imperalist Nation, is another man's homeland.....

Perhaps the reason Iran is looked upon with such scrutiny by the U.S. is due to that little "misunderstanding" that took place in 1979 that kept 52 of its citizens from coming home for 444 days.

Or was that just a "university prank gone awry"?

Should the inquiries into nuclear weapons be treated as them looking into "goodwill gifts"?

It's all a matter of perspective.

One man's Imperalist Nation, is another man's homeland.....

Perhaps the reason Iran is looked upon with such scrutiny by the U.S. is due to that little "misunderstanding" that took place in 1979 that kept 52 of its citizens from coming home for 444 days.

Or was that just a "university prank gone awry"?

Should the inquiries into nuclear weapons be treated as them looking into "goodwill gifts"?

I can't believe we are getting into this again... Sure the citizens here can be as pissed off about that as they want to be...

However the issue goes back much farther for the Iranians with respect to the US. That little overthrow of their democratically elected leader Mossadeq, along with a regime change to install the shah who was pro US.

Every single person the Shah's secret police made disappear is on us... I wonder if that misunderstanding led to the citizens of Iran being a bit pissed off at the US and holding 52 of our citizens for 444 days, before finally releasing them unharmed.

I'd love to see how we would have reacted if Iran killed George Bush, and put a leader friendly to Iran in power... Let me give you a hint. There would be no prisoners, only a huge sheet of glass where Iran used to be.

There would be no prisoners, only a huge sheet of glass where Iran used to be.

Maybe that's where this is all headed, one way or another.....

Maybe that's where this is all headed, one way or another.....

Sadly... it might be

I can't believe we are getting into this again... Sure the citizens here can be as pissed off about that as they want to be...

However the issue goes back much farther for the Iranians with respect to the US. That little overthrow of their democratically elected leader Mossadeq, along with a regime change to install the shah who was pro US.

Every single person the Shah's secret police made disappear is on us... I wonder if that misunderstanding led to the citizens of Iran being a bit pissed( a bit pissed?? they were rampaging and stormed the embassy) off at the US and holding HOSTAGE 52 of our citizens for 444 days, before finally releasing them unharmed.

I'd love to see how we would have reacted if Iran killed George Bush, and put a leader friendly to Iran in power... Let me give you a hint. There would be no prisoners, only a huge sheet of glass where Iran used to be.


Unharmed.....lol eat that propaganda as much as you like but when those folks got off the plane they were pale and emaciated. Suffering daily rants and threats with bags over their heads. Don't spew what you weren't alive to see and live through okay?

I added a crucial word you left off in your statement. They weren't peacefully HELD they were held hostage after a violent takeover of our embassy.

We were in the wrong to take a direct hand in the placement of a US friendly leader in Iran and then fail to support those that wanted our help in keeping their nation out of radical hands.

Ahhh and you blame the US for that backwater and violent Pres of Iran's refusal to recognize Israel. LoL guess Iran doesn't have to accept any responsibility for their actions. It's all OUR fault and none of Iran's fault at all. We control the strings to make Iran dance...../cackle

Unharmed.....lol eat that propaganda as much as you like but when those folks got off the plane they were pale and emaciated. Suffering daily rants and threats with bags over their heads. Don't spew what you weren't alive to see and live through okay?

The United States tortures enemy combatants... So it must be ok.

I added a crucial word you left off in your statement. They weren't peacefully HELD they were held hostage after a violent takeover of our embassy.

I never said peacefully held... I said they were released unharmed. They were alive, fed, and able to walk. Which is more then the Iranians would be allowed had they overthrown our government and installed a puppet government in its place.

We were in the wrong to take a direct hand in the placement of a US friendly leader in Iran and then fail to support those that wanted our help in keeping their nation out of radical hands.

MOSSADEQ WAS NOT A RADICAL! He was a democratically elected leader, who was overthrown by the United states in order to install a US friendly KING.

Ahhh and you blame the US for that backwater and violent Pres of Iran's refusal to recognize Israel. LoL guess Iran doesn't have to accept any responsibility for their actions. It's all OUR fault and none of Iran's fault at all. We control the strings to make Iran dance...../cackle

"Backwater violent pres" Iran and the US have a lot in common...

Did you read that I blamed Iran for their childish way of dealing with their recognition of Israel, or did you gloss that over to hurry and post?

Everything that has happened in Iran has been a direct result of our intervention in the country. From Mossadeq being assassinated to the Shah being put in power. From the hostage situation to the Islamic revolution. From the relation with Israel to the Iran/Iraq 8 year war. From the support of Hezbollah to the drive for Nuclear power.

Every single action that is controversial in regards to Iran is a direct result of the United States interference in the country. They have a lot to be blamed for, but it is sheer ignorance to pretend that we had nothing to do with it.

Just like every other situation that the US has put itself in which has blown up in our faces... From creating Al qaeda to arming the Taliban. The majority of the time it comes right back to us creating the very problems we try to fix.

I didn't gloss over anything bub, you directly said it was the US's fault for Iran's failure to recognize Israel.

I've also gone on record saying torture was wrong, placing Israel as a country was wrong (was alot of countries involved in that move btw) and that we were wrong for trying to right a backwater country through changing their leadership.

However it's today and I refuse to believe that Iran is going after Israel solely due to US backing.

I instead believe this is merely another example of a sect inside the Islamic relgion using any excuse to purge the world of heretics more than anything else.

Ahhh and btw China is showing proof that Iran not only looked to aquire nuke weapon tech but are instead still seeking it.

That's a problem isn't it, Iran shouldn't be allowed to have access to nuclear weapons as long as it openly funds terrorist orginizations. That's my beef and nothing you can say will ever say that Jedd.

I didn't gloss over anything bub, you directly said it was the US's fault for Iran's failure to recognize Israel.

I said Iran was acting childishly and it was basically wrong for them to not recognize Iran... I compared it to the way the US won't speak to leaders of countries they are not friendly with, and called both the US and Iran wrong and stupid for this.

I've also gone on record saying torture was wrong, placing Israel as a country was wrong (was alot of countries involved in that move btw) and that we were wrong for trying to right a backwater country through changing their leadership.

We were not trying to right a backwater country... we were trying to stop them from nationalizing their oil, which is what Mossadeq was doing. Once again Greed and Oil led to some of our biggest mistakes.

However it's today and I refuse to believe that Iran is going after Israel solely due to US backing.

Iran isn't "going after Israel". Iran thinks of Israel as an unfriendly country, who violates the rights of the Palestinians, and who constantly violate International law. Israel is their Enemy. An Enemy that they can live with, yet just like the United States has its "Axis of Evil", Iran has their own. Israel is on that list.

I instead believe this is merely another example of a sect inside the Islamic relgion using any excuse to purge the world of heretics more than anything else.

Until you can explain to me why Jews are allowed to live in Iran unharmed and why they are free to practice their religion and travel to and from Israel you have no basis for your claim.

Ahhh and btw China is showing proof that Iran not only looked to aquire nuke weapon tech but are instead still seeking it.

That's a problem isn't it, Iran shouldn't be allowed to have access to nuclear weapons as long as it openly funds terrorist orginizations. That's my beef and nothing you can say will ever say that Jedd.

Believe what you want... We will agree to disagree about which groups are terrorist groups, and the hypocrisy of the biggest supporter of terrorist groups telling another what they can and cannot do.

We will agree to disagree about which groups are terrorist groups, and the hypocrisy of the biggest supporter of terrorist groups telling another what they can and cannot do.

You mean Saudi Arabia is trying to tell someone what to do?

An ally , China, of your country, Iran, has come foward worried about Iran seeking to possess nukes.

OMG I know you are blindly willing to follow Iran, it's okay I understand you have to show loyalty, but jeeeze bub surely it's a bad idea of some of those loons blowing up kids get their hands on a real big firecracker.

You mean Saudi Arabia is trying to tell someone what to do?

The United States... We are one of the biggest state sponsors of terrorism... Just our support for Saudi Arabia alone is the biggest hypocrisy and idiotic move by a country who claims others sponsor terrorism. Not to mention the countless groups we support when their goal has the same end result as our own.

Oh and don't forget... We use torture on prisoners, just like every other terrorist state we accuse of being horrible.

An ally , China, of your country, Iran, has come foward worried about Iran seeking to possess nukes.

OMG I know you are blindly willing to follow Iran, it's okay I understand you have to show loyalty, but jeeeze bub surely it's a bad idea of some of those loons blowing up kids get their hands on a real big firecracker.

China handed over information that Iran HAD information which could be used to shape uranium into warheads... that Iran aqquired them from Khan. This proves nothing about the current use of Iran's nuclear program. When did Iran acquire those documents? Years ago? We already know they were wanting to build nuclear weapons up to 2003.

Iran has to give up every spent fuel rod, which is picked up bu Russia. They cannot in any way, shape, or form make Nuclear weapons.

Do I know for a fact what their goals are? No. Though I personally support them either way. If they are going to make weapons, then they should just come out and say it.

I will not jump like some horrible atrocity is being committed like you Fandros... I support Iran's right to Nuclear Weapons to defend against a possible US or Israeli attack.

Oh and fandros... This kind of message...

UN 3rd Time Sancitons... 04-03-2008 02:45 PM Fandros I understand, to question in your home country is to risk stoning. Keep up the front /wink.....Fandros

Is called a personal attack... Glad to see you still haven't learned how to debate.

You mean a personal attack such as the one where you threatened me and said you fuck my women? lmao

I was merely trying to support your seeming facade of loyalty to Iran. I don't want to see anyone stoned for disagreeing.

You mean a personal attack such as the one where you threatened me and said you fuck my women? lmao

I was merely trying to support your seeming facade of loyalty to Iran. I don't want to see anyone stoned for disagreeing.

Grow up

Ouch here he goes again...

Go home than you spineless internet git. I might have to react within certain reason on the public boards but here I have my own rules.

1) Don't listen to filth such as yourself when I could be sliding down a razor bannister into a vat of rubbing alcohol. *painful yet, but ever so much more rewarding than to listen to your feckless bullshit.

2) Open a can of shut the fuck up and get outta my PM box.

Have a good day child.

Is there a way to ignore all posts from a certain poster?
__________________
There is 1 way to commit war, blast them till they relent

Very grown up

You're the one that sent me a damn PM insulting me. I just responded and then asked you to never pm me again.

Nice try jackass.

You're the one that sent me a damn PM insulting me. I just responded and then asked you to never pm me again.

Nice try jackass.

Now you lie also?


Fandros...
I understand, to question in your home country is to risk stoning. Keep up the front /wink.....Fandros

My response...
And to question in America, is to deal with people like you insulting me to no end.

Fandros...
Go home than you spineless internet git. I might have to react within certain reason on the public boards but here I have my own rules.

1) Don't listen to filth such as yourself when I could be sliding down a razor bannister into a vat of rubbing alcohol. *painful yet, but ever so much more rewarding than to listen to your feckless bullshit.

2) Open a can of shut the fuck up and get outta my PM box.

Have a good day child.
__________________
There is 1 way to commit war, blast them till they relent

Ouch here he goes again...



Very grown up


yes Mr Entrapment...

Go to your pm box, on the left will be a key saying buddy/ignore list.

Click it, then put my name...Fandros in the ignore list and hit submit.

There ya go, goodbye

Ahhh good idea, ignore function will return me to the glorious days of yesteryear ala no Jedd.

Please to continue on, I don't have to respond to a traitorous member now that he's on ignore.

yes Mr Entrapment...

Go to your pm box, on the left will be a key saying buddy/ignore list.

Click it, then put my name...Fandros in the ignore list and hit submit.

There ya go, goodbye

Thats what I am going to do... Because you are obviously in no condition to debate, and I could do without being cussed at and insulted by a 45+ year old who has no life and spends his time insulting someone on a message board.

I could do without being cussed at and insulted by a 45+ year old who has no life and spends his time insulting someone on a message board.

ROFLMAO!!!!

Let me point out that I was not involved in the last 35-40 posts, for those that like to bitch that I have something against jedd and whatever else. In the thread on the Pyongyang reactor, i asked the simple question of why jedd continues to post the same posts over and over and over, and now I come home from work and see the exact same thing happening in another thread. For someone who is so quick to toss the above quote at someone, I would offer a mirror.

Responding to the misquote regarding Ahmanutjob and wiping Israel...jedd's argument was 'I am Iranian, so I know'. It must be nice to be able to flip back and forth between being an Iranian when that suits, and being American when wanting what this country offers.

But I still await an answer to my original question, which is just as valid now in this thread: Why are you so willing to expend so much energy saying the same thing over and over and over? Your posts are consistently bashing the country that provided you the opportunities to become who and what you are, but praising and endorsing the country where your parents could not safely live in and thrive as they had the chance to here.

Everyone gets your point, so why do you spend so much time and energy saying it over and over and over? What exactly is it you are trying to convince yourself of, or what decision are you attempting to reinforce? Or is there really so little else in your life worth devoting that same energy toward, that you are left to waste it on internet forums? You said you own a business; how much more successful could that business be if you put that energy into it instead of on these ridiculous "debates" that are simply rehashes of everything you have already said, over and over and over.

I cannot begin to stress how old it gets having to respond to you when you cannot even comprehend the simplest things. /sigh... But here it goes...

ROFLMAO!!!!

Let me point out that I was not involved in the last 35-40 posts, for those that like to bitch that I have something against jedd and whatever else. In the thread on the Pyongyang reactor, i asked the simple question of why jedd continues to post the same posts over and over and over, and now I come home from work and see the exact same thing happening in another thread. For someone who is so quick to toss the above quote at someone, I would offer a mirror.

I am a 25 Year old man. I own a business and I post from my office because I like to discuss and debate topics in which I am passionate about. There is a huge difference between me and Fandros.

Where as I offer debate and post my opinion. Fandros offers insults because he does not agree with me.

The fact is, he is a 45+ year old man that spends more time insulting me rather then actually discussing the issues we are debating.

You once again have taken something and applied it to me, when it has nothing whatsoever to do with me.

Responding to the misquote regarding Ahmanutjob and wiping Israel...jedd's argument was 'I am Iranian, so I know'. It must be nice to be able to flip back and forth between being an Iranian when that suits, and being American when wanting what this country offers.

Listen, I know the language, and you don't. So yes I know more about what Ahmadenijad said then you.

Think about it!

But I still await an answer to my original question, which is just as valid now in this thread: Why are you so willing to expend so much energy saying the same thing over and over and over? Your posts are consistently bashing the country that provided you the opportunities to become who and what you are, but praising and endorsing the country where your parents could not safely live in and thrive as they had the chance to here.

Wow... My posts are bashing the country that provided me opportunities?

My posts are my beliefs in relation to the issues we are discussing. If you don't like them, move to a place where people can't have opinions that differ from your own and the governments.

Everyone gets your point, so why do you spend so much time and energy saying it over and over and over? What exactly is it you are trying to convince yourself of, or what decision are you attempting to reinforce? Or is there really so little else in your life worth devoting that same energy toward, that you are left to waste it on internet forums? You said you own a business; how much more successful could that business be if you put that energy into it instead of on these ridiculous "debates" that are simply rehashes of everything you have already said, over and over and over.

I am debating issues on a message board. These debates have no effect on my life, and the time I spend on my business is more then enough, and quite frankly is none of your business.

You need to get off my balls.


-Edit-

The reason I repeat the same things over sometimes, is because people use the same arguments, thus I use the same rebuttal. It is not my fault that You or Fandros, do not have anything else in your arsenal.

I am debating issues on a message board.

You need to get off my balls.


-Edit-

The reason I repeat the same things over sometimes, is because people use the same arguments, thus I use the same rebuttal. It is not my fault that You or Fandros, do not have anything else in your arsenal.

First off, you are not debating issues so much as you are simply restating your position that the 'U.S. is bad, Iran is good', and screw anyone who disagrees. Yes, you do post links and do initiate threads on varied topics. I am not talking about those. I am addressing a specific trait of you expending a lot of energy saying the same things over and over.

Now, if you can explain why you get so upset at me asking that that you expended all that effort to cut and paste responses to snippets of my post (which also showed you were not seeing my words as much as what you wanted to be seeing), that would possibly be a move in the direction of understanding why you do this. Your edit that it is necessary to rebut others is a justification, not a reason. You do not have to rebut others, it is a choice.

And as far as debating whether you even have balls to get off of, I will not go there; you obviously have balls, since you used them to neg rep my post. :rolleyes:

First off, you are not debating issues so much as you are simply restating your position that the 'U.S. is bad, Iran is good', and screw anyone who disagrees. Yes, you do post links and do initiate threads on varied topics. I am not talking about those. I am addressing a specific trait of you expending a lot of energy saying the same things over and over.

I am debating issues and maintaining a stance which I have due to my beliefs. Whether or not you think I am right or wrong, the bottom line is this is how I feel and when I post my beliefs it is in response to another posters beliefs.

Why are you not asking fandros why he keeps reiterating his beliefs over and over again? Because it is a forum, and it is ridiculous to ask people why they keep posting the same beliefs.

The only reason I post the same thing over and over, is because the same argument is used by many people here over and over, and I use the same response to refute them. Not my fault.

Now, if you can explain why you get so upset at me asking that that you expended all that effort to cut and paste responses to snippets of my post (which also showed you were not seeing my words as much as what you wanted to be seeing), that would possibly be a move in the direction of understanding why you do this. Your edit that it is necessary to rebut others is a justification, not a reason. You do not have to rebut others, it is a choice.

I expended very little effort, as I simply add brackets with QUOTE after each paragraph and then address that quote in my response.

It is necessary in a debate to rebut. I would consider us debating rather then discussing. Wouldn't you?

One man's Imperalist Nation, is another man's homeland.....


As a sort of aside to the shouting match ... it is generally only empires and migrants that refer to their homeland. Because other states don't need to distinguish between where they're from and where they are, or provided any justification as to why.

Our establishment of the Department of Homeland Security was in my mind the lighting of the Time's Square Christmas Tree in our national season of empire; The assumptive ideas about our right and obligation to willfully use military force, covert or otherwise, to assert our will over other sovereign states has become so ingrained we actually get angry when someone suggests we shouldn't, and yet the exact converse is true if you reverse the actors. It was an issue I didn't really think about until my early twenties, but I've grown up in the post-conquest period -- I'd been reading Black Hawk Down and did some further research on the events of 93.

China dismisses spy report on Iran
Fri, 04 Apr 2008 09:21:45

China's Foreign Ministry has denied a report claiming the country has passed information on Iranian nuclear program to the IAEA.

“The report is made of nothing and fabricated and born out of clandestine motives,” Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu said on Thursday when asked by a journalist to respond to a report saying China has given some information on Iranian nuclear plan to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

She said, “We strongly deny the report.”

China has always supported a peaceful solution to Iran's nuclear issue through diplomacy, she noted.

The Associated Press published a report Wednesday saying China provided the IAEA with intelligence linked to Iran's alleged attempts to make nuclear arms.

"The Chinese government's position on the Iranian nuclear issue had always been reliable," Jiang said, adding China believes that all parties should use creativity and show flexibility to find a way out of the dispute.

China would continue to make constructive efforts in this regard, Jiang said.

China has constantly been against tight UN Security Council sanctions against Iran and has always diluted the US-led efforts to impose harsh penalties on Tehran.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=50184&sectionid=351020104

Hmm...

I like how they don't even deny having stolen the information. Kinda hard to trust spies.

The assumptive ideas about our right and obligation to willfully use military force, covert or otherwise, to assert our will over other sovereign states has become so ingrained we actually get angry when someone suggests we shouldn't

Boy...you are not a whistling dixie about that either. I run into where I live...and to top it all off this anger is coming from folks who are at church every sunday and carry a bible around with them at work, and not just one person! I know those same folks have good hearts too when it comes to family and friends. How can we become so detached from people that live on the other side of the world or even to the south of us? It makes me sad to see that...it truly does.

How can we become so detached from people that live on the other side of the world or even to the south of us? It makes me sad to see that...it truly does.
I think we have an intuitive, maybe intrinsic or atavistic, sense of "us" and "them" that gets in the way of sense. We inherently identify with those in our demographic and alienate or dehumanize those outside through generalization and ready acceptance of features that distinguish the Other from ourselves.

A very simple but widespread example is our separation of Homo sapiens into various Races, despite that we're all part of a single species. At the other extreme, we turn the Other into the Enemy, making it all the easier to inflict whatever cruelties we feel the Enemy deserves.

Children (http://Children) standing near a fighter were hit.....ever wonder why that is? If I were a parent, I'd sure as hell make sure my children were nowhere near any fighters. I don't care if they are freedom fighters, terrorists, whatever! I think 1 of the posters on that site put it best.

It is terrible. Children are but pawns over there to attempt to become martyrs. It seems pretty obvious to me. It is terrible over there what they are doing to themselves and their families. They send those children out in the streets of war at a early age.

I can say without a doubt if someone is going to bull doze my house I surely would not stand in front of to die for my house. I am very blessed that I live where war is not in my backyard.

I do not blame folks who live over there for leaving their country one bit. Lots have come to America and other Euro countries. I would not want to live in a war zone either. I would probably die trying to get the heck out of there before I would die trying to stay there. So for them to bull doze my house I would see it as just another sign telling me to get the heck out of there.

I was not raised with a war going on around me. I was not raised surrounded by leaders, neighbors and family, telling me to hate those folks. So war would be very foreign for me. So for them to live in peace it could be quite foreign for them, would be my assumption.

How things are over there I believe have become a accepted way of life and they believe it is their destiny until they feel they have genocided their enemy.

I guess there always has to be pawns in this world for folks in power and they have been the chosen ones to act out the play with right now in the world. I believe they need to look to their leaders and and past their own prejudice and hate (if they can do that with all they have seen and heard) and ask themselves...are our leaders doing right by us and our families....really?

Life is good and parents should protect their children not expose them to effects of prejudice and hate. That is not what should be taught to children. Spreading that is not good for any of us in this world. Our soldiers we love come back with post tramatic syndrome for a reason. The effects of everything that encompasses war is just poison and is just not meant for our well being. I pray they find good leaders over there that understand this.

I am glad for the moment it is not in our backyard and I hope it never does make it here. I would never want war to become a part of my daily life.

It is terrible. Children are but pawns over there to attempt to become martyrs. It seems pretty obvious to me. It is terrible over there what they are doing to themselves and their families. They send those children out in the streets of war at a early age.

I can say without a doubt if someone is going to bull doze my house I surely would not stand in front of to die for my house. I am very blessed that I live where war is not in my backyard.

When you own nothing but the home you live in and the clothes on your back... Your home is worth more then it is to someone who has thousands of dollars in the bank, or insurance to fall back on.

For most of those who stand in front of the bulldozers, it is a simple matter of... "God if they take my house, we live on the street..."

The homeless people in America have it great compared to those in war zones. Imagine your children growing up on the street, having to steal to eat. A house can mean life or death in a warzone. If you happen to live in Gaza or the West bank, it could almost be more dangerous to be in your house :(

Either way, I cannot even describe how it would be as I have never had the misfortune to live such a life. So pray for those who got the short end of the stick and were born in such places.

Either way, I cannot even describe how it would be as I have never had the misfortune to live such a life. So pray for those who got the short end of the stick and were born in such places

Thats probably the best statement you've ever made on this board.
/salute

It looks like it may be too late to stop Bush...

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=5168



Exclusive: Iran, Syria, Lebanon on military alert over US Gulf movements and Israel’s home defense drill
April 6, 2008, 5:36 PM (GMT+02:00)


USS Abraham Lincoln heads to Persian Gulf
According to British media, the US is set to attack Iranian military facilities. DEBKAfile’s military sources add that the USS Abraham Lincoln Strike Force is heading for the Persian Gulf.

War tensions in the Middle East have shot up - not only over the signals flashing between Syria, Lebanon, and Israel, but also on the US-Iranian front in Iraq in the wake of rising in violence around the Basra conflagration.

Tuesday, April 8, US Iraq commander, Gen. David Petraeus and ambassador to Baghdad, Ryan Crocker, will stress in their report to Congress that Iran is waging war on America in Iraq, say sources in Washington, London and Baghdad.

This emerged strongly last week, when US intelligence learned that Iran had intervened directly in the Iraqi government’s crackdown on renegade militias in Basra and southern Iraq, by directing and provisioning those militias through the Revolutionary Guards’ al Qods Brigades.

Official sources in London predict that Iran’s intervention against the American effort to stabilize Iraq may well prompt a US attack on the military installations in Iran which are orchestrating the interference.

Gen. Petraeus is on record as accusing Iran of being the source of the daily rocket bombardment of Baghdad’s Green Zone, seat of government and US diplomatic and military headquarters.

DEBKAfile’s military sources report that Moscow has dropped its two nickels into the rising war alarm. In the last two weeks, Russian military and intelligence officials have been leaking claims of intensified American military movements around Iranian shores.

Iran is certain to come up in Presidents George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin’s farewell talks in the Black Sea resort of Sochi Sunday, along with other controversial business, such as Moscow’s objections to NATO’s eastern expansion and US missile shield in East Europe.

Saturday, US defense secretary Robert Gates turned up in Oman, the site of big American air bases, for talks with Sultan Qaboos. He then flew straight back to Washington. While Gates insisted to correspondents aboard his plane that the US is committed to a diplomatic solution for Iran’s covert nuclear program, the surpise visit struck sparks in the already fraught regional atmosphere, particularly as it followed on the heels of US Vice President Dick Cheney’s talks in Oman two weeks ago.

DEBKAfile’s Middle East sources sum up how Tehran and Damascus read these events and the picture they have built up of Washington’s intentions as combined with Israel’s military steps:

1. US is preparing to attack the Iranian military installations linked to subversion in Iraq. The operation will widen out into strikes on the Islamic Republic’s suspect nuclear sites.

2. Israel will use the chance for a concurrent attack on Syria.

3. Israel will attack Hizballah’s strongholds in Lebanon.

4. A broad, coordinated US-Israeli offensive will be mounted against Iran, Syria and Hizballah.

Iran and Syria view Israel’s four-day home defense exercise against missile attack, conventional or non-conventional, beginning Sunday, as setting the stage for these attacks.

Both believe Washington and Jerusalem are in close military step. Neither is reassured by soothing statements from prime minister Ehud Olmert and defense minister Barak that Israel does not seek violent confrontation - especially when the US administration is withholding all comment. Hence the high state of preparedness ordered by the jittery governments in Tehran, Damascus and Beirut.

$50 vBookie bucks that if Bush attacks Iran, he will not be leaving office in January. He and Cheney have put everything in place for him to be able to declare martial law on the flimsiest of circumstances, and unless he was planning to see the "war" through to it's conclusion I do not believe he would commit to another front without having already designed plans to ensure there was a sufficient force available; i.e. draft.

If Bush attacks Iran, we WILL have more attacks on U.S. soil, and he will have his justification for suspending elections, declaring martial law, confiscating property, suspending the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and pretty much whatever else a petty dictator, like he seems to so badly want to be, can dream up.

$50 vBookie bucks that if Bush attacks Iran, he will not be leaving office in January. He and Cheney have put everything in place for him to be able to declare martial law on the flimsiest of circumstances, and unless he was planning to see the "war" through to it's conclusion I do not believe he would commit to another front without having already designed plans to ensure there was a sufficient force available; i.e. draft.

If Bush attacks Iran, we WILL have more attacks on U.S. soil, and he will have his justification for suspending elections, declaring martial law, confiscating property, suspending the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and pretty much whatever else a petty dictator, like he seems to so badly want to be, can dream up.Could we please not quote some of my worst fears on the board? :mad:

As an interesting hypothetical exercise - do you suppose there's enough opposition in the US towards Bush/Cheney to overthrow them if they did try that? Americans have a history of not following laws they don't like.

Or are we about to end up like Jericho?

Could we please not quote some of my worst fears on the board? :mad:

As an interesting hypothetical exercise - do you suppose there's enough opposition in the US towards Bush/Cheney to overthrow them if they did try that? Americans have a history of not following laws they don't like.

Or are we about to end up like Jericho?

Liberal vs Conservative may be our next war.

That sounds like about as fair a fight as the French vs. The Nazis.

That sounds like about as fair a fight as the French vs. The Nazis.

Hopefully our gang members will help out :(

Damn right they will. and it wont be in defense of the Neo-Fuerher you can bet.

Considering CVN 72 was scheduled for a 7 month deployment under 5th fleet for relief of the current carrier group and a strike group by defintion.

http://www.milnet.com/pentagon/cvbg.html


First, it is important to note that there really is no real definition of a strike group. Strike groups are formed and disestablished on an as needed basis, and one may be different from another. However, they all are comprised of similar types of ships. Typically a carrier strike group might have:

a carrier – The carrier provides a wide range of options to the U.S. government from simply showing the flag to attacks on airborne, afloat and ashore targets. Because carriers operate in international waters, its aircraft (http://www.milnet.com/pentagon/airwing.html)do not need to secure landing rights on foreign soil. These ships also engage in sustained operations in support of other forces.
a guided missile cruiser – multi-mission surface combatant. Equipped with Tomahawks for long-range strike capability.
two guided missile destroyers – multi-mission suface combatants, used primarily for anti-air warfare (AAW)
an attack submarine – in a direct support role seeking out and destroying hostile surface ships and submarines
a combined ammunition, oiler, and supply ship – provides logistic support enabling the Navy's forward presence: on station, ready to respond The Carrier Strike Group (CSG) could be employed in a variety of roles, all of which would involve the gaining and maintenance of sea control:

Protection of economic and/or military shipping.
Protection of a Marine amphibious force while enroute to, and upon arrival in, an amphibious objective area.
Establishing a naval presence in support of national interests. I think Jedd can step away from the bong paranora is a known side effect.
If an immenient attack is to be carried out So Bush Cheney can wage a war on Iran to stay in office more than a single carrier would be going. They arent going to wait 3 days for it to get there the ( B-2 ) http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/b2/

would of already done the job much easier and painlessly. I swear to many people are watching jones conspiracies than the issues that are really affecting america atm.

Im more upset about $3.94 strawberries,52 cent lemons make the cost of making lemoncello eye popping. big goverment bail outs and escalating unemployment rising energy costs.
Was wierd thing I noticed today on appointments I saw 3 gas stations with "out of gas signs " one with Premium only. Not that the stores make much off the gas a penny or two if there lucky.

If ever there was a sure way to get us to attack you, historically speaking: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/07/iran-to-opec-stop-oil-sal_n_95345.html

Considering CVN 72 was scheduled for a 7 month deployment under 5th fleet for relief of the current carrier group and a strike group by defintion.

http://www.milnet.com/pentagon/cvbg.html


First, it is important to note that there really is no real definition of a strike group. Strike groups are formed and disestablished on an as needed basis, and one may be different from another. However, they all are comprised of similar types of ships. Typically a carrier strike group might have:
a carrier – The carrier provides a wide range of options to the U.S. government from simply showing the flag to attacks on airborne, afloat and ashore targets. Because carriers operate in international waters, its aircraft (http://www.milnet.com/pentagon/airwing.html)do not need to secure landing rights on foreign soil. These ships also engage in sustained operations in support of other forces.
a guided missile cruiser – multi-mission surface combatant. Equipped with Tomahawks for long-range strike capability.
two guided missile destroyers – multi-mission suface combatants, used primarily for anti-air warfare (AAW)
an attack submarine – in a direct support role seeking out and destroying hostile surface ships and submarines
a combined ammunition, oiler, and supply ship – provides logistic support enabling the Navy's forward presence: on station, ready to respond The Carrier Strike Group (CSG) could be employed in a variety of roles, all of which would involve the gaining and maintenance of sea control:
Protection of economic and/or military shipping.
Protection of a Marine amphibious force while enroute to, and upon arrival in, an amphibious objective area.
Establishing a naval presence in support of national interests.I think Jedd can step away from the bong paranora is a known side effect.
If an immenient attack is to be carried out So Bush Cheney can wage a war on Iran to stay in office more than a single carrier would be going. They arent going to wait 3 days for it to get there the ( B-2 ) http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/b2/

would of already done the job much easier and painlessly. I swear to many people are watching jones conspiracies than the issues that are really affecting america atm.

Im more upset about $3.94 strawberries,52 cent lemons make the cost of making lemoncello eye popping. big goverment bail outs and escalating unemployment rising energy costs.
Was wierd thing I noticed today on appointments I saw 3 gas stations with "out of gas signs " one with Premium only. Not that the stores make much off the gas a penny or two if there lucky.

I didn't hit any bongs... I found a new article from an Israeli source, and thought it might be worthy of posting/believing. Only time will tell ;)

If ever there was a sure way to get us to attack you, historically speaking: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/07/iran-to-opec-stop-oil-sal_n_95345.html

Iran is playing a dangerous game... but the outcome of this risk will either be a huge gain for them in the form of the US economy being ravaged, or a military strike, which still won't do anything about the changes.

There is no way we could ever occupy Iran, so there is no way to stop Iran from pushing opec to drop the dollar.

Liberal vs Conservative may be our next war.

You may be very surprised at how many of us "conservatives" are thoroughly disgusted by the Bush-Cheney regime.

You may be very surprised at how many of us "conservatives" are thoroughly disgusted by the Bush-Cheney regime.

You guys will defect from the Conservative side!

You guys will defect from the Conservative side!


I already did, thanks to Gingrich and Hyde, to the Independent side.

A true conservative wants to have minimal government involvement in the average citizens life, with minimal taxes which are collected to balance spending.

A true liberal wants to use government to address the ills of society and use the tax monies collected from those that can afford to help those who cannot afford.

I find myself in the middle, wanting to see some things fixed regardless of if it needs more taxation; but, at the same time, growing more and more resentful of the intrusion into the average citizen's life of big government under the auspices of security.

Katrina showed the entire country how fucked up our government had become, with a man who had absolutely no expertise in any kind of organizational skills or relief management or crisis response being in charge of the national department formed to address exactly those needs. One can only wonder why "Brownie" was not sent over to replace Bremer.

In a national outpouring of rage at this administration, we sent a Democrat majority to Washington, to counter what we saw as a deterioration of our nation's principles, and we have been rewarded with nothing but political jockeying for prime time news slots to voice one message over the other. It does not matter which party controls the legislature if the primary goal is one-up-mans-ship. It used to be the goal of those elected to serve the country, rather than their own ambitions.

/bleh A long day, and too much cynicism and wine.

In a national outpouring of rage at this administration, we sent a Democrat majority to Washington, to counter what we saw as a deterioration of our nation's principles, and we have been rewarded with nothing but political jockeying for prime time news slots to voice one message over the other.Quite a few good points in your post, but I'll add a couple things. First, the Dems have a slim majority in the Senate, and Republicans have indulged in a record-breaking number of filibusters. Then they have to contend with Bush's veto. Very difficult to accomplish anything under those twin conditions.

Also, there are also enough Dems going along with bad policies as to get in the way of progress, and the leadership is 50/50 on decision making. So it goes -- maybe next year will see positive change.

Quite a few good points in your post, but I'll add a couple things. First, the Dems have a slim majority in the Senate, and Republicans have indulged in a record-breaking number of filibusters. Then they have to contend with Bush's veto. Very difficult to accomplish anything under those twin conditions.

Also, there are also enough Dems going along with bad policies as to get in the way of progress, and the leadership is 50/50 on decision making. So it goes -- maybe next year will see positive change.

My comment regarding the Democrat majority and nothing getting done was not meant to disparage the Dems. My comments about about jockeying for prime time and one-ups-man-ship has mostly to do with Reid and Pelosi. Those two should be sent to a refresher course on how to be a public servant, 'cus they look to me to be only serving their own egos; basically they are the Democrat version of a Tom Delay.

I agree, maybe (hopefully, please please please, fingers crossed) next year we will see positive change.

Well it seems we might be getting closer to war...

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61277

Petraeus points to war with Iran

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: April 10, 2008
8:27 pm Eastern

© 2008

The neocons may yet get their war on Iran.

Ever since President Nouri al-Maliki ordered the attacks in Basra on the Mahdi Army, Gen. David Petraeus has been laying the predicate for U.S. air strikes on Iran and a wider war in the Middle East.

Iran, Petraeus told the Senate Armed Services Committee, has "fueled the recent violence in a particularly damaging way through its lethal support of the special groups."

These "special groups" are "funded, trained, armed and directed by Iran's Quds Force with help from Lebanese Hezbollah. It was these groups that launched Iranian rockets and mortar rounds at Iraq's seat of government (the Green Zone) ... causing loss of innocent life and fear in the capital."

Is the Iranian government aware of this – and behind it?

"President Ahmadinejad and other Iranian leaders" promised to end their "support for the special groups," said the general, but the "nefarious activities of the Quds force have continued."
Are Iranians then murdering Americans, asked Joe Lieberman:

"Is it fair to say that the Iranian-backed special groups in Iraq are responsible for the murder of hundreds of American soldiers and thousands of Iraqi soldiers and civilians?"

"It certainly is. ... That is correct," said Petraeus.

The following day, Petraeus told the House Armed Services Committee, "Unchecked, the 'special groups' pose the greatest long-term threat to the viability of a democratic Iraq."

Translation: The United States is now fighting the proxies of Iran for the future of Iraq.

The general's testimony is forcing Bush's hand, for consider the question it logically raises: If the Quds Force and Hezbollah, both designated as terrorist organizations, are arming, training and directing "special groups" to "murder" Americans, and rocket and mortar the Green Zone to kill our diplomats, and they now represent the No. 1 threat to a free Iraq, why has Bush failed to neutralize these base camps of terror and aggression?

Hence, be not surprised if President Bush appears before the TV cameras, one day soon, to declare:

"My commanding general in Iraq, David Petraeus, has told me that Iran, with the knowledge of President Ahmadinejad, has become a privileged sanctuary for two terrorist organizations – Hezbollah and the Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard – to train, arm and direct terrorist attacks on U.S. and coalition forces, despite repeated promises to halt this murderous practice.

"I have therefore directed U.S. air and naval forces to begin air strikes on these base camps of terror. Our attacks will continue until the Iranian attacks cease."

Because of the failures of a Democratic Congress elected to end the war, Bush can now make a compelling case that he would be acting fully within his authority as commander in chief.

In early 2007, Nancy Pelosi pulled down a resolution that would have denied Bush the authority to attack Iran without congressional approval. In September, both Houses passed the Kyl-Lieberman resolution designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization.

Courtesy of Congress, Bush thus has a blank check for war on Iran. And the signs are growing that he intends to fill it in and cash it.

Israel has been hurling invective at Iran and conducting security drills to prepare its population for rocket barrages worse than those Hezbollah delivered in the Lebanon War.

Adm. William "Fox" Fallon, the Central Command head who opposed war with Iran, has been removed. Hamas and Hezbollah have been stocking up on Qassam and Katyusha rockets.

Vice President Cheney has lately toured Arab capitals.

And President Ahmadinejad just made international headlines by declaring that Tehran will begin installing 6,000 advanced centrifuges to accelerate Iran's enrichment of uranium.

This is Bush's last chance to strike and, when Iran responds, to effect its nuclear castration. Are Bush and Cheney likely to pass up this last chance to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities and effect the election of John McCain? For any attack on Iran's "terrorist bases" would rally the GOP and drive a wedge between Obama and Hillary.

Indeed, Sen. Clinton, who voted to declare Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, could hardly denounce Bush for ordering air strikes on the Revolutionary Guards' Quds Force, when Petraeus testified, in her presence, that it is behind the serial murder of U.S. soldiers.

The Iranians may sense what is afoot. For Tehran helped broker the truce in the Maliki-Sadr clash in Basra, and has called for a halt to the mortar and rocket attacks on the Green Zone.

With a friendly regime in Baghdad that rolled out the red carpet for Ahmadinejad, Iran has nothing to gain by war. Already, it is the big winner from the U.S. wars that took down Tehran's Taliban enemies, decimated its al-Qaida enemies and destroyed its Sunni enemies, Saddam and his Baath Party.

No, it is not Iran that wants a war with the United States. It is the United States that has reasons to want a short, sharp war with Iran.

Jedd this isn't a slam or a flame or anything, but seriously, where do you get the time and information to constantly put out maps, quotes, and page after page of information (not that it is correct or incorrect).... what do you do for a living?

Does someone pay you to attempt to sway the Ayro board in an effort to create Iranian sympathy?

It's really not very hard to find information if you want to be informed (again, not that Jedd is correct or incorrect).

Jedd this isn't a slam or a flame or anything, but seriously, where do you get the time and information to constantly put out maps, quotes, and page after page of information (not that it is correct or incorrect).... what do you do for a living?

Does someone pay you to attempt to sway the Ayro board in an effort to create Iranian sympathy?

Well you see... since Al Gore invented the internet, news has been available on websites for people to read.

It is an astounding revelation isn't it?

So while I am at work, I take the time to browse the news every now and then and when I pick up something interesting I post it here to discuss it.

I know it seems a daunting task, but some of us can type more then 1 word per minute :)

:(

Can you go into this *internet* thing a little more? You have piqued my interest.....

well, you see, it consists of a series of tubes...

Looks like terrorists have struck Iran now... Wonder who is behind this.


(CNN) -- A hand-made bomb exploded after evening prayers Saturday at a mosque in the southern Iranian city of Shiraz, and Iran's state-run television reported nine dead and 105 wounded.
http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/WORLD/meast/04/12/iran.explosion/art.shiraz.iran.jpgShiraz, Iran, is well known for being home to many scholars, artists and poets.

http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/base_skins/baseplate/corner_wire_BL.gif

The blast and subsequent fire happened about 6 p.m. in the men's section of the mosque while a cleric was addressing the worshippers, according to the Fars news agency.

The sermon denounced Bahai and Wahabi faiths, both of which are considered heresies by some Shiites.
The explosion blew out windows in several nearby houses, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported. Buildings shook more than half a mile away, The Associated Press reported, citing local media accounts.
No one claimed immediate responsibility for the blast.

Bombings are unusual in Iran (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/iran), though the predominantly Shiite Muslim country has endured sporadic attacks in recent years.
The last major bombing occurred in February 2007, when a car bomb blew up near a bus carrying members of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Corps, leaving a dozen dead and injuring dozens more in the southeastern part of the country.

Shiraz, a city of more than 1 million people in central Iran, is well known for being home to many scholars, artists and poets and for its local craftsmanship of rugs and metalwork. It is about 400 miles south of Iran's capital, Tehran.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/04/12/iran.explosion/index.html

Osama ?

Looks like terrorists have struck Iran now... Wonder who is behind this.



Any chance it might be some Sunni militants who have tired of Iran arming and training those that persist in killing Sunni families in Iraq? Of course, I am only going by the published reports of Iran's involvement, and the comments of the U.S. military command staff in Iraq.

Any chance it might be some Sunni militants who have tired of Iran arming and training those that persist in killing Sunni families in Iraq? Of course, I am only going by the published reports of Iran's involvement, and the comments of the U.S. military command staff in Iraq.

All the signs so far point to Al Queda, or Jundallah, which is a group that is associated with Al Queda.

All the signs so far point to Al Queda, or Jundallah, which is a group that is associated with Al Queda.

That would be Sunni then, am I not right? I thought OBL was Sunni?

That would be Sunni then, am I not right? I thought OBL was Sunni?

Aye, Sunni

Iran claims it was an accident... That munitions for a Iran/Iraq memorial presentation the week before went off killing 9 people and injuring 200.

However, it is believed by many that they are not being truthful in order to not show the ease at which such casualties can be inflicted in a terrorist attack in one of Iran's most secure city's.

Here is a video of the bomb going off.

LZaZbfyB2Tk

Got a longer version of that?

I saw no secondary explosions that would normally indicate an accident with munitions or fireworks...

And I was impressed with the guy in the middle there. Seems he recovered himself admirably to try and control the crowd from stampeding each other.

I found a longer version.

Now, after all the confusion, when all the people start going towards the blast point, The announcer on the microphone says the following in Farsi.

"Stay Calm"
"They cannot scare us like this"
"Stay Calm"
"It was in the section of the brothers, and they are working on it"
"Sisters, please stay calm, please, Calm"
"God willing next weekend, now please leave. Calmly"
"Dr. ?????"
"Go out, if you stay inside we cannot work"
"Dr.'s go to the door, brothers calmly leave"
"Until everyone leaves I will be standing here"

Before all that you hear people screaming "OH GOD" and a lot of crying. :(

wOLgG9AgTnw

The explosions at the beginning may be fake

Iran says U.S. aids rebels at its borders
The violence may be driving Tehran's efforts to back its own allies in Iraq.

By Borzou Daragahi, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
April 15, 2008

BAGHDAD -- A series of conflicts with insurgent groups along Iran's borders may be impelling Tehran to back its own allies in Iraq in what it regards as a proxy war with the U.S., according to security experts and officials in the U.S., Iran and Iraq.

Dozens of Iranian officials, members of the security forces and insurgents belonging to Kurdish, Arab Iranian and Baluch groups have died in the fighting in recent years. It now appears to be heating up once again after an unusually cold and snowy winter.

In recent weeks, Iranians have begun the now-routine bombardment of suspected rebel Iranian Kurd positions in northern Iraq, and guerrillas have claimed incursions into northwestern Iran.

Some Iranians blamed Sunni Arab radicals for an explosion Saturday that killed 12 and injured 202 at a gathering where a preacher criticized the Wahhabi form of Islam that inspires Osama bin Laden.

None of the groups appear to pose a serious threat to Iran, but Tehran regards them as Washington's allies in an effort to pressure it to scale back its nuclear program and withhold support for militant groups fighting Israel. American and Iraqi officials in turn accuse Iran of supporting Shiite Muslim militias and other militant groups in Iraq to keep the U.S. preoccupied and the Baghdad government weak.

Although a U.S. intelligence estimate in December undercut claims that Iran has a secret nuclear weapons program and appeared to lower the possibility of a direct military conflict over Iran's uranium enrichment operations, tensions over Iraq have increased. U.S. officials accuse Iran of backing Shiite militias close to cleric Muqtada Sadr that fought Iraqi government forces to a standstill in Basra and Baghdad two weeks ago.

Tempting assets

Analysts say the anti-Iranian groups are tempting assets for the U.S. They say it would be a surprise if the groups were not receiving U.S. funding, but that the strategy would probably not work.

"It will give more encouragement to Iran's hard-liners to step up their own efforts to assist anti-American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan," said Bruce Riedel, a former CIA analyst now at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank.

Among the most active groups is the Party for Free Life in Kurdistan, known by its Kurdish acronym, PEJAK. It has hundreds of well-trained fighters along with camps in northern Iraq.

Iranian soldiers guarding the border are sometimes ambushed by PEJAK fighters. Iran responds with artillery attacks that send Iraqi villagers scurrying for cover. Border skirmishes last summer and fall between Iranian security forces and PEJAK left dozens dead on both sides.

PEJAK emerged this decade as an Iranian offshoot of the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK, an armed group formed to fight a separatist war against the Turkish government.

Former members say PEJAK was meant to circumvent Western restrictions on contacts with the PKK, which has been labeled a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department and the European Union.

"The PKK wanted to have a relationship with America, so it formed and used PEJAK," said Mamand Rozhe, a former commander who defected from the group four years ago.

U.S. military officials visited PEJAK's camps in northern Iraq just after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, said Osman Ocalan, a brother of the PKK's imprisoned leader and a founder of PEJAK.

"Since the beginning, we thought we would get the American help," said Ocalan, who left the group two years ago. "And it's a good relationship now. . . . They are in talks with each other, and there is some military assistance."

Ocalan and others say U.S. help has included foodstuffs, economic assistance, medical supplies and Russian military equipment, some of it funneled through nonprofit groups. Every two or three months, U.S. military vehicles can be seen entering PKK and PEJAK strongholds, Ocalan said.

"There's no systematic relationship, no number to call," he said. "Americans do not intend to have an official relationship. Whenever there's any kind of question by the Turks, they can say we don't have a relationship."

A PEJAK leader, Abdul Rahman Haji-Ahmadi, was publicly given a cold shoulder when he went to Washington last summer.

PEJAK's activities may have created obstacles for those working inside Iran for peaceful change. Dozens of Kurdish activists in Iran have been thrown in jail on charges of supporting the rebel group.

"I think that on balance PEJAK does more harm than good," said Aso Saleh, an Iranian journalist and ethnic Kurd who fled his country after being charged with state security crimes that carry a possible death sentence.

"PEJAK's actions give the government the excuse to militarize the region," Saleh said. "It gives the Islamic Republic the excuse to crack down on civil opposition."

Elsewhere, Iranian authorities blamed U.S.-backed elements for a series of bomb attacks in the oil-rich southwestern province of Khuzestan that killed dozens of people from 2005 to 2007. Baluch militants have killed dozens of members of Iran's security forces, including 11 elite Revolutionary Guards in a car bomb attack last year in Zahedan, a town near the border with Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Last fall, a young Kurdish woman killed several officers and soldiers in a suicide attack along Iran's northwestern border.

Other groups can provide precious intelligence to the U.S. The decades-old Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran, or KDPI, whose members have been the victims of scores of assassinations in Iraq and Europe, allegedly at the hands of Iranian intelligence operatives, has relations with Washington that stretch back decades.

"It's a very warm relationship," said Rostam Jahangiri, leader of the group's Irbil, Iraq, office. "We interact here and in Washington. . . . Sometimes it's once a month. Sometimes it's after three or four months."

The secretive Mujahedin Khalq, also regarded by the U.S. and EU as a terrorist organization, may have little support among Iranians, but its networks extend deep into Iranian territory, and it is credited with exposing Iran's nuclear program in 2002.

Other groups include Jundollah, which operates out of the southwestern Pakistani province of Baluchistan, and Arab groups in Iran's southwest.

The leftist Komala Party of Iran hasn't staged any military operations inside Iran since 1992, but several hundred or so fighters continue to train at their base camp in Zergwe in the autonomous Kurdish northern region of Iraq.

Abdullah Mohtadi, a leader of one of two Komala factions, said he met with White House and State Department officials in 2005 and 2006 to discuss Iran.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asked Congress in early 2006 for $75 million to promote democracy in Iran, of which $66 million was approved -- most of it for Persian-language broadcasting. But about $20 million was set aside for unidentified groups the State Department described as "nongovernmental organizations, businesses and universities," for Internet development and "cultural affairs." Congress set aside an additional $60 million for the effort in the current fiscal year.

U.S. officials did not respond to a request for comment on claims that PEJAK or other groups receive funding.

No group officially acknowledges receiving U.S. aid. But many say they would welcome it.

"If you're a political movement that is part of an opposition, you need help from abroad," Mohtadi said. "We're not ashamed to admit it."

A push for rebel aid

Many in Washington have advocated such aid. The rebels fight the same Revolutionary Guard that oversees at least part of Iran's nuclear program and probably funnels support to militant groups in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.

"It would be a scandal if the U.S. was not funding these groups," said John Pike, director of globalsecurity.org, a website about intelligence and military issues. "The support would be covert and might be done in ways that the groups themselves remain unaware of the ultimate source of their funding."

Still, most of the groups suffer severe weaknesses. KDPI and Komala have endured tumultuous splits in recent years, KDPI in part over whether to align itself with the U.S.

Both PEJAK and the Mujahedin Khalq operate like cults, barring members from having sexual relations and discouraging personal lives. Each touts a strict Marxist ideology.

Iranian diplomats and politicians say they have intelligence to back up their claims that the U.S. aids these groups, but have never publicly provided proof.

"We know the MKO and PEJAK both have relations with the U.S.," said Hamidreza Taraghi, an official of the Islamic Coalition Party, which is close to Iran's conservative religious leadership.

"The Americans have given the MKO a lot of technology to monitor Iranian phone traffic," he said in an interview. "Where is the Baluchistan separatist money coming from?"

Iraqi Kurds say perceived U.S. support for PEJAK and other anti-Iranian groups prompted Iranians to reactivate Ansar al Islam, a Sunni Muslim group with ties to Al Qaeda that has been launching attacks against Kurdish officials.

The Ansar al Islam fighters have been used as a "pressure card" by the Iranians, said Jafar Barzinji, the minister of affairs for peshmerga, or Kurdish security forces, who oversees military issues in Iraq's autonomous Kurdish region.

Iraqi Kurds say they have asked Iranian authorities to rein in Ansar. "They never deny that they're supporting them," Barzinji said. "They always promise a solution in the near future." Sometimes, he said, they bring up PEJAK.

Fareed Asasard, head of the Kurdish Strategic Studies Center, a think tank in the Iraqi Kurdish city of Sulaymaniya, recently visited Tehran to meet with analysts at a research institution close to supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

"The reason for their support of Ansar is PEJAK," he said. "They're 100% worried about PEJAK's actions."

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedi...585,full.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-fg-proxy15apr15,1,1982585,full.story)

UH OH

We were not in Iraqi waters'
Thu, 17 Apr 2008 05:31:08
http://www.presstv.com/photo/20080417/gholizadeh20080417051452625.jpg The British sailors that were captured in Iran.
The British Defense Ministry has admitted that the fifteen British sailors who were held by Iran last year were not captured in Iraqi waters.

The new documents which are released by the Defense Ministry under Freedom of Information Act can turn the case into a scandal for the British government since it had publicly claimed that the Iranian forces had captured the British sailors in the Iraqi waters.

The contingent of Britons was captured because the US-led coalition in Iraq had unilaterally designated a maritime boundary for Iraq and Iran without informing the latter, The Times reported on Thursday.

The 15 sailors and marines were seized on March 23 near the Arvandrud waterway which divides Iran and Iraq and were released nearly two weeks later.

Following the detention of the British sailors, the Western media claimed that the sailors were on a routine mission inspecting merchant ships in Iraqi waters when the boats of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps Navy arrived to capture them.

MGH/RE

http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=51936&sectionid=351020101

More information... Iran = teh evil!


Report reveals Iran seized British sailors in disputed waters


Fifteen British sailors and Marines were seized by Iran in internationally disputed waters and not in Iraq’s maritime territory as Parliament was told, according to new official documents released to The Times.

The Britons were seized because the US-led coalition designated a sea boundary for Iran’s territorial waters without telling the Iranians where it was, internal Ministry of Defence briefing papers reveal.

Documents released under the Freedom of Information Act detail for the first time the blunders last spring that led to what an all-party committee of MPs came to describe as a “national embarrassment”.

The captured 14 men and one woman were paraded on Iranian TV for a fortnight before being freed a year ago by a smiling President Ahmadinejad, who gave them new suits and bags of presents.

Newly released Ministry of Defence documents state that:

— The arrests took place in waters that are not internationally agreed as Iraqi;

— The coalition unilaterally designated a dividing line between Iraqi and Iranian waters in the Gulf without telling Iran where it was;

— The Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ coastal protection vessels were crossing this invisible line at a rate of three times a week; It was the British who apparently raised their weapons first before the Iranian gunboats came alongside;

— The cornered British, surrounded by heavily armed Iranians, made a hopeless last-minute radio plea for a helicopter to come back and provide air cover.

Iran always claimed that it had arrested the Britons for violating its territorial integrity.

Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, repeatedly told the Commons that the personnel were seized in Iraqi waters.

The MoD, in a televised briefing by Vice-Admiral Charles Style, the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff, produced a map showing a line in the sea called “Iraq/Iran Territorial Water Boundary”. A location was given for the capture of the Britons inside what the chart said were “Iraq territorial waters”.

But the newly released top-level internal briefing accepts that no such border exists.

The report, addressed to Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, the Chief of the Defence Staff, blames the incident on the absence of an agreed boundary and a failure to coordinate between Iraq, Iran and the coalition.

Under the heading “Why the incident occurred”, the report examines the history of a border that has been disputed since a treaty between the Persian and Ottoman empires in 1639.

Professor Robert Springborg, of the School of Oriental and African Studies, said yesterday that it was negligent to fail to clarify with the Iranians where the notional boundary was.

Using the Freedom of Information Act, The Times made requests about the events. The MoD released two documents, although parts are censored.
One is the report to Sir Jock dated April 13, 2007, a week after the Britons returned home unharmed. It was compiled after they had been debriefed. The other is the communications log between the mother ship HMS Cornwall and the two seaboats used by the boarding party.

What they said
“There is no doubt that HMS Cornwall was operating in Iraqi waters and that the incident itself took place in Iraqi waters . . . In the early days the Iranians provided us with a set of coordinates, and asserted that was where the event took place, but when we told them the coordinates were in Iraqi waters they changed that set and found one in their own waters. I do not think that even they sustain the position that the incident took place anywhere other than in Iraqi waters”

“Since the outset of the Iraq-Iran War there has been no formal ratified TTW [territorial waters] agreement in force between Iraq and Iran . . . In the absence of any formal agreement, the coalition tactical demarcation (the Op Line) is used as a notional TTW boundary.

It is a US NAVCENT [US Naval Forces Central Command] construct based on an extension of the Algiers accord demarcation line beyond the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab [waterway] into the NAG [northern Arabian Gulf]. While it may be assumed that the Iranians must be aware of some form of operational boundary, the exact coordinates to the Op Line have not been published to Iran.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3761058.ece

I don't mean to bump this thread to start a flame war, but I noticed that it has not been commented on and wonder what opinions of this story are.

Especially from Halo. I heard that only channel 4 news in England reported this story, and that BBC and Skynews have kept silent about it.

Have you heard anything about this Halo?

It's ignored because both sides are set in stone.

Keep up your Iran propaganda and I'll keep believing it's ruled by a dangerous subset of the Iranian powergroups.

It's ignored because both sides are set in stone.

Keep up your Iran propaganda and I'll keep believing it's ruled by a dangerous subset of the Iranian powergroups.

I liked you better when you had me on ignore... please add me back and stfu :) Thanks


-Edit
Keep up your Iran propaganda

Couldn't let this go.... Do you not think this was news? jesus christ the government of England lied about the incident and its all over the net, and you call it Iranian propaganda from me?

Well, it doesn't seem that both sides are "set in stone" at all, given that the British Defence Ministry has apparently admitted what is claimed in the articles. I'm not sure of the exact nature of the international dispute over these waters (300 countries say this, Iran says that?), but it's diplomatic dipshittery to redraw the map in invisible ink.

I liked you better when you had me on ignore... please add me back and stfu :) Thanks


Listen ya waste of air, I wasn't being rude to ya.

I'd be glad to return to it, you are full of shit and I'd love to spend time driving you back to "I fuck all your women!!".

My opinion on Iran will not change, I don't want war but I do want sanctions that drive the powers that be out of power over there.

OH I know the response....

But but but bush1!! waaaahh

Fuck off

Listen ya waste of air, I wasn't being rude to ya.

I'd be glad to return to it, you are full of shit and I'd love to spend time driving you back to "I fuck all your women!!".

My opinion on Iran will not change, I don't want war but I do want sanctions that drive the powers that be out of power over there.

OH I know the response....

But but but bush1!! waaaahh

Fuck off

Last I checked you had me on ignore, and it was better that way... add me to it again please, I enjoy these forums when I don't have to talk to you. I will keep you on it as well :)

Well, it doesn't seem that both sides are "set in stone" at all, given that the British Defence Ministry has apparently admitted what is claimed in the articles. I'm not sure of the exact nature of the international dispute over these waters (300 countries say this, Iran says that?), but it's diplomatic dipshittery to redraw the map in invisible ink.

The dispute was between Iran and Iraq when Sadaam lived. As the article says, Iran had crossed that border that the US decided on, 3 times a day without incident, because they were going off of what they had as their own border.

The British also raised their weapons first it says in the article. How could anyone consider this anything then a blunder on the part of the British, with a huge cover up to try and not let it get out that they made such a stupid mistake?

A war could have started because of England's stance on what happened... And that is irresponsible and sad.

Just heard on MSNBC... A US contracted ship has fired at Iranian boats.

Keep playing with fire and eventually your nose will get burnt.

Keep playing with fire and eventually your nose will get burnt.

The same can be said for America, who is now forced to deal with the results of our meddling in the domestic affairs of foreign countries.

It's not like we overthrew their democratically elected leader or anything.

This is weird... It was all over MSNBC, and not on any other station, and now it is gone from MSNBC's site. I originally heard it on MSNBC TV. Gonna look into this more, but I am curious as to why it vanished.

Jeeze Ainwein,

I understand you didn't serve, I understand you don't understand losing friends and fellow servicemen on the U.S.S Cole and at Khobar towers 6 months after you left.

Every post however is pure vitrol towards the country that is likely paying part of the tuition you are enjoying atm.

Want to post on the topic, this time a ship coming within 100 yards and ignoring all warnings, fine. Want to spit your usual combination of self loathing and slander save it please.

Jeeze Ainwein,

I understand you didn't serve, I understand you don't understand losing friends and fellow servicemen on the U.S.S Cole and at Khobar towers 6 months after you left.

Every post however is pure vitrol towards the country that is likely paying part of the tuition you are enjoying atm.

Want to post on the topic, this time a ship coming within 100 yards and ignoring all warnings, fine. Want to spit your usual combination of self loathing and slander save it please.

You clump an Al Queda attack with Iran... the cole, had NOTHING to do with Iran. No wonder you have so much hate. You generalize them all together.

Listen... if an Iranian vessel was off the coast of California, we would come with 5M if we wanted right?

Our ships are in Iranian waters... any anger or negativity pointed at Iran for getting close to our ships represents a holier then thou attitude that seems to be prevalent among most Americans(at least the Faux News types).

Put yourself into the position of an Iranian soldier, and tell me... would you allow a ship to pass through your waters without showing them they are in your waters, and checking them out in the process?

Replace Iranian with American, and American with Iranian and you would be up in arms... I can't believe it!

Found the story...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24312230/

Seems it was over exaggerated on the news... warning shots is what they have said now.

Nah I certainly wasn't trying to lump them together.

The proctocols are established because of the events, not the folks behind the attacks.

So warning shots have to fired after a certain range is penetrated. No longer do lil ships get to cruise up next to our Navy after the Cole.

Same with Khobar towers, no longer are the perimeters so close to the housing of our servicemen.

Not the people behind the attacks, instead I'm looking at the failure in our process that allowed them to happen in the first place.

Nah I certainly wasn't trying to lump them together.

The proctocols are established because of the events, not the folks behind the attacks.

So warning shots have to fired after a certain range is penetrated. No longer do lil ships get to cruise up next to our Navy after the Cole.

Same with Khobar towers, no longer are the perimeters so close to the housing of our servicemen.

Not the people behind the attacks, instead I'm looking at the failure in our process that allowed them to happen in the first place.

Yea, I understand that. The navy has every right to fire warning shots at a ship, and if the ship keeps approaching after warning shots, to destroy the ship. I wont argue there.

Want to post on the topic, this time a ship coming within 100 yards and ignoring all warnings, fine. Want to spit your usual combination of self loathing and slander save it please.What the hell are you talking about?

The fact of the matter is us overthrowing Mossadegh set the stage for the Iranian Revolution. We are very much to blame for Khomeini coming to power and the state that has emerged over the last couple decades. This is simply a fact. Ignoring it, while convenient, is to have absolutely no perspective on the situation.

If you can explain to me how this is in any way libelous, please do. If not, shut the fuck up already. Your service doesn't make you an expert of foreign policy and I'm tired of you trying to use bullshit anecdotes to make your points.

Run it up those 3 inch heels of yours and into your ass you feckless child.

My point stands, you continually attack the US and are flat out so full of vitrol I have to wonder if you're also taking an online course to Berkley.

My anecdotes are pertinent, while your lack of serving anyone but yourself is equally of note.

Jedd and I were discussing an event off the coast of Iran and you jump in with your usual US hating bs. You might note Jedd and I's discussion was of note while yours was...well your usual shit.

Don't like it? Put me on ignore, nothing you say has merit...hell has less merit than Jedd does of late.

Ainwein is absolutely correct that our overthrow of Mossadegh has led to the current situation. There's no getting around it, and it's not 'hating the US' to state it, anymore than saying "Vietnam didn't go so well" is 'hating the US.' This doesn't necessarily justify any actions Iran takes, but it does show why they'd be inclined to take certain actions.

I also don't see how anecdotes regarding the Cole and Khabar towers -- al-Qaeda operations -- are pertinent to an altercation with an Iranian boat. Lastly, IMO, brandishing one's military service against those with differing opinions seems contrary to the very ideals behind that service.

Your anecdotes are nothing more than an attempt to make yourself an authority on various topics.

I think this rep hit says it the best:

But he turned a wrench on an airplane once in Iraq, therefore he's better than us!

I'm simply tired of your bullshit posts, which constantly reference your service as a crutch for some completely illogical argument. Again, NO ONE wants ANYONE to die, especially those that protect us.

Bringing up that you know people who have died in service, however, has ABSOLUTELY NO FUCKING BEARING on anything that we talk about, and it comes off as a completely transparent and quite pathetic way to lend credibility to yourself.

America is not going to get better by stupidly accepting the status quo, which you constantly seem to advocate. We need to identify problem issues and address them accordingly, learning from our mistakes and eventually becoming better because of it... You know, how we've been developing since our inception.

Doing this is in no way unpatriotic - it is necessary.

I also don't see how anecdotes regarding the Cole and Khabar towers -- al-Qaeda operations -- are pertinent to an altercation with an Iranian boat.


HUH?!?

Did you read Fandros' and Jedd's posts? If not for the Cole event we would not be as quick to fire warning shots over the bow of approaching smaller craft.

And regardless of events over 50 years ago and their affect on today's events, they are less pertinent to the discussion of the naval matter today than the mention of the Cole.

I also don't see how anecdotes regarding the Cole and Khabar towers -- al-Qaeda operations -- are pertinent to an altercation with an Iranian boat. Lastly, IMO, brandishing one's military service against those with differing opinions seems contrary to the very ideals behind that service.

If it was actually an American Navy Ship then they have a whole lot to do with what Fandros is saying. Simply put, the US (yea I know we put ourself in our current hated position) will not and should not allow any vessel near our navy ships PERIOD because of those events, it makes no difference who is running those boats either..friend or foe. This isn't the case here anyways.

Damn Byl you did it AGAIN!@

Damn Byl you did it AGAIN!@

LOL, we seem to think alike.

My "anecdote" has everything to do with what Jedd and I were discussing. Everything was civil until the class clown jumped in waving his mouth around to get attention.

It had nothing to do with the overthrow of the Iranian Govt. Not one damn thing at all. The attack upon the Cole changed the protocols for dealing with smaller ships approaching our ships in hostile waters.

Follow the bouncing ball, quit the attacks until you understand the subject matter.

sheessshh we put these kids through school and they instantly know better even before they've lived...lol

You're all missing my point: personal anecdotes about people dying to al-Qaeda strikes have no bearing on our relationship with Iran . Keep in mind the original context:
I understand you didn't serve, I understand you don't understand losing friends and fellow servicemen on the U.S.S Cole and at Khobar towers 6 months after you left.That's what I was responding to, not the later developed point about approach protocols and such (which I don't see anyone having an issue with).

Nice even handed approach Thor. His taking my quote and talking about it being our fault also has nothing to do with what Jedd and I were discussing.

Keep it on the up and up!!

Check this out... will give you a look at why Iran/US relations are how they are today. And why the past is indeed relevant to every single thing that happens between the two countries today.

AJRcOF7rEfQ

And the accord that we have broken many times...

January 19, 1981, were brokered by the Algerian government between the USA and Iran to resolve the situation that arose by the capture of American citizens in the American embassy in Tehran. By this accord the American citizens were set free.

Among its provisions it was stated:

* The US would not intervene in Iranian internal affairs
* The US would remove a freeze on Iranian assets and trade sanctions on Iran
* Both countries would end litigation between their respective governments and citizens referring them to international arbitration, namely the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal.
* The US would ensure that US court decisions regarding the transfer of any property of the former Shah would be independent from "sovereign immunity principles" and would be enforced
* Iranian debts to US institutions would be paid

The US chief negotiator was then-Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher.

The past affects everything, from the way they look at us, to the way they act towards us.

Iran's tables awaited nuclear proposal
Thu, 22 May 2008 23:49:05
http://www.presstv.com/photo/20080522/pirhayati20080522221214984.jpg
Iran's package of solutions on energy demand, establishing world security and overcoming economic challenges has been made public.

In the new round of nuclear talks, the Islamic Republic of Iran is intent on broad consensus between all concerned parties. According to the proposal, this will guarantee the establishment of sustainable regional and international peace and security.

In the package Tehran makes clear it complete preparedness for negotiations on all aspects of the following issues.

Political-economic issues:

1. Defending human rights and human dignity and respect toward the culture of nations

2. Promoting peace and stability, encouraging regional and global democracy with respect to the rights and interests of nations, lawfully assisting states to secure territorial integrity, preventing violence and military adventurism, fighting terrorism and its root causes

To achieve this, the Islamic Republic of Iran is prepared to help establish peace and stability and help restore democracy in various regions, including the Middle East, the Balkans, Africa and Latin America.

3. Combating common security threats posed by terrorism, narcotics, illegal immigration as well as organized crime

B) Economic issues

1. Support cooperation in the field of energy and its generation, transformation and consumption security,
2. Promote trade and Investment cooperation,
3. Configure an overall strategy for poverty eradication throughout the world, as well as measures to heal outstanding social rift,
4. Reducing the profound damages incurred by price fluctuations and reinstituting of monetary and financial instuments to support states.

C) Nuclear issues

As an active member of the IAEA and NPT, Iran is ready to put the following issues at the top of the agenda:

1. Providing greater assurances concerning non-diversion in states' nuclear activities,
2. Establishment of a consortium for uranium enrichment and nuclear fuel production in different parts of the world, including Iran,
3. Forging joint cooperation aimed at utilization of peaceful nuclear energy by all interested countries,
4. Full implementation of nuclear disarmament and establishment of a follow-up committee,
5. Increased role of the International Atomic Energy Agency's supervision on global nuclear activities,
6. Joint global cooperation concerning nuclear physics security.

The Islamic Republic of Iran is ready for far ranging and productive negotiations. The talks can be assessed at a later date, over a period of six months and a decision taken be over continuation the initiative.

http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=56884&sectionid=351020104

It fits that they left out A) and went right to B) and C).

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/05/26/iran.nuclear/index.html


"The agency is continuing to assess the information and explanations provided by Iran," the report said. "However, at this stage, Iran has not provided the agency with all the information, access to documents and access to individuals necessary to support Iran's statements."

Iran's nuclear program has spurred concerns by the United States and much of the West. In March, after the IAEA released a similar report on the program, the United Nations Security Council voted to impose new sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program.


If its all about peaceful nuclear power, then whats the problem cooperating with the IAEA?

I think the problem is, people want them to prove that something doesn't exist, and that is impossible.

http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=57458&sectionid=351020104

I think the problem is, people want them to prove that something doesn't exist, and that is impossible.




Not at all. It is very much possible. Allow the IAEA access to the plants and the procedures for handling both waste and the energy produced. Let the experts on nuclear energy view what is occurring within the nuclear program, and it should be obvious after such an open display of cooperation that the program is designed for energy, and not weapons.

Not at all. It is very much possible. Allow the IAEA access to the plants and the procedures for handling both waste and the energy produced. Let the experts on nuclear energy view what is occurring within the nuclear program, and it should be obvious after such an open display of cooperation that the program is designed for energy, and not weapons.

It is impossible to prove that something does not exist. When evidence is found that it exists they must answer why it exists.

The IAEA has seen everything, and the only thing remaining now is questions regarding past projects. There is no way to prove you do not have something that you do not have... sorry.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7126117.stm

The new NIE confirms that Iran did, indeed, have an illicit nuclear weapons programme.

But it says that programme ceased operating in 2003 and, as of mid-2007, had probably not started up again.

...

It says that US intelligence estimates - with "moderate-to-high confidence" - that Iran currently does not currently have a nuclear weapon.

Even our own intelligence suggests there's no weapon program operating. This debacle is WMDs in Iraq all over again.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7126117.stm



Even our own intelligence suggests there's no weapon program operating. This debacle is WMDs in Iraq all over again.

I just hope that this debacle stays the current course til January so that Bush doesn't get us mired in another war to secure his 'legacy' before he leaves office.