The Iran Charade So They Lied Again

[Ozarks]

Any argument that in opposition to the policies of Israel is "anti-semantic?" Grow the hell up. This issue is pretty personal because of your roots. Otherwise, you wouldn't throw something out there so slanderous and insulting.

So you don't really understand what you are saying, and you assume I'm a Jew

If America does not administer and monitor the situation, why are we in the middle of this Israel-Palestinian conflict? Why is the USA involved in conflict resolution?

The US is trying to broker a peace deal to stop the killing, you are opposed to that too, I see.

So when you say "they don't monitor anything," it's a load of crap. America has spies in Israel and Israel has spies on them.

Every country has spies,now who needs to "grow up"

Arab areas in Israel are not developed properly, have faulty, unmaintained infrastructure, and access to water resources denied, schools underfunded In the Israeli city, their infrastructure and development is incredibly maintained, and jewish citizens have access to the best of the best. Obtuse? Think not.

It's called "corruption" within the PLO the world has given BILLIONS upon BILLIONS to the Palestinian Authority for roads,water, economic development etc.
So,you are simply repeating things you have been told. Even the Palestinian Authority acknowledges the corruption.

It's funny how you throw all this insults. I did nothing to insult you, so stop with your emotional dramatic branding shit.

Anyone so obtuse to compare the murder of 6 million people by the nazis, to whats going on in Israel/Gaza Strip/west Bank today should be insulted, publicly and often.

If arabs operate in the same lines of racism as Israel, they shouldn't get aid either.

They do, thats why jews don't live in arab countries, the arabs kill them.

I acknowledge the economic benefits of the Iraqi war.

There are none.

The situation should be dealt through multi-national combination of diplomacy, and sanctions.

That's whats happening.

[Bong30]

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran will not halt uranium enrichment even with delivery of fuel from Russia for its first nuclear power plant, a senior Iranian official said on Monday, adding he could not yet confirm Iran had received the fuel.


"There is no talk of halting enrichment. Nothing is related to freezing enrichment. The delivery (of fuel) is not in the framework of the (U.N.) resolutions or the framework of talks," the senior official told Reuters.

Asked if Iran would halt enrichment under any condition, he said: "No, not at all."




front page drudge.....Im just saying

[greg420]

just read all this thread...quite interesting, but what i really don't understand, is why is iran a 'criminal'?
even if, and its a big if, they do have nuclear weapons, what are they gonna do with them?
they're not stupid, they know that if they used a nuclear weapon on anyone, then everyone would smack down hard on their candy asses. their country would be destroyed if they used one. they're not gonna use it even if they do have one.
which is why i don't get why the US feels it has to get involved when really its not a huge problem and not really much to do with them *coughs* Oil *cough*

[420izzle]

just read all this thread...quite interesting, but what i really don't understand, is why is iran a 'criminal'?
even if, and its a big if, they do have nuclear weapons, what are they gonna do with them?
they're not stupid, they know that if they used a nuclear weapon on anyone, then everyone would smack down hard on their candy asses. their country would be destroyed if they used one. they're not gonna use it even if they do have one.
which is why i don't get why the US feels it has to get involved when really its not a huge problem and not really much to do with them *coughs* Oil *cough*

While the Iranian government is no good either, America is acting shameful and is acting the 'criminal' in this case. Meddling in the internal affairs of foreign nations and threatening World War! We continue to isolate ourselves and upset the world climate with neo-con rhetoric and threatening more war - this sequential war garbage. And the lie of century is perpetrated by the rogue criminals in our government. Iran's President Did Not Say "Israel must be wiped off the map". And yet the Bought and Paid for Media continue to spew these lies! And we all know Israel has enough nuclear capability to defend themselves and destroy half the globe. The US gets involved to secure power and the fuel of for our pretend prosperity, and, as the PNAC agenda itself states, spread peace through strength. Not to mention, the elitists agenda is only perpetrated by the strength of the American Empire.

RP08

[thcbongman]

So you don't really understand what you are saying, and you assume I'm a Jew



The US is trying to broker a peace deal to stop the killing, you are opposed to that too, I see.



Every country has spies,now who needs to "grow up"


It's called "corruption" within the PLO the world has given BILLIONS upon BILLIONS to the Palestinian Authority for roads,water, economic development etc.
So,you are simply repeating things you have been told. Even the Palestinian Authority acknowledges the corruption.


Anyone so obtuse to compare the murder of 6 million people by the nazis, to whats going on in Israel/Gaza Strip/west Bank today should be insulted, publicly and often.


They do, thats why jews don't live in arab countries, the arabs kill them.


There are none.



That's whats happening.

I applaud you for your intellectual dishonesty. You would make an excellent politician.

You accuse me of hating jews because of the position I desire for the US to take on Israel, isolationism. This equates to hating jews? Can you point out where I wanted jews to die? Or discriminate against them?

That's like me saying your racist against muslims because of the positions you take. Not only is there no foundation, it's simply idiotic to play the "prejudice" card in a debate. Don't like their opinion? Smear them as a bigot. Classy.

I only assume you are a jew because you threw out such a slanderous term and you felt offended. Perhaps you used this word in too many debates that you lost sense of this powerful accusation. In fact, I remember pointing this out to you when you accused someone else of being anti-semantic. It's safe to say if I went through your history, you threw out this term plenty of times.

But you seem to not get my argument and go straight to the anti-semantic card. Let me boldface it for you. The US should not be involved with any country in the Middle East with the exception of Iraq and for trade. That includes being a major player in brokering peace deals. This does not equate me not wanting peace between Israel and Palestine. There are domestic issues in America that need to be solved, especially on the economic front. The UN should take a more active role in the negotiations, and another country that bears an attitude towards peace take over. US involvement is a little more than figurehead, considering the positions they take towards foreign policy. All the progress made under Clinton ceded when Bush came to office. US involvement is not the answer.

When you mention that all countries have spies, you contradict your initial point that the US takes no position in administering and monitoring other countries activities. Rather, you choose to further slander me with a direct personal attack. Do you usually lose track of your arguments? Just because they monitor other countries means I'm oppose to having intelligence agencies? Do you really see things so black-white?

Your point on your Palestinian Authority is invalid. I'm refering to Arab Israeli citizens, which the PLO has no authority over, Israel does. And boy do they mistreat them. Everyone knows the PLO is corrupt. You don't seem to recognize the corruption on Israel. Which only strengthens my position on why the US should not be involved with this mess.

You also don't seem to recognize the rampant racism in Israel. When I compared this racism to the nazis the comparison. I should specify the era before kristelnacht happened. The climate is no different, jews were denied access to infrastructure, and were treated like 2nd class citizens. Much of the policy of Israel was inspired upon the suffering they suffered in Nazi Germany. Violence committed against arabs in the Israeli population. I could predict what your next argument would be, "oh so you want the jews to be bombed by palestinians?" Absolutely not, but I simply don't condone these actions perpetuated by either side.

And to the point where some arabs are racism against jews, thanks captain obvious, tell me something I didn't know. So it goes back to the consistant point in my argument: we should not administer aid to any of these middle eastern countries except Iraq.

And you say the Iraqi war didn't bring any economic benefits? Damn you are sure naive. If this country had no oil, do you honesty think the US would come save the day? Look no further than a 7 year sample on the US economic data. Notice the downward trend from 2003 up until the precise moment Bush decided let's go into Iraq. Then notice it steadily climbing. Using war as a economic stimulus. Gosh, wouldn't that qualify as a economic benefit? Why were companies happy that we went into Iraq? Simply there is money to be made!! 2nd, America helped build a pipeline to get oil out of Iraq. I wonder why? Ah.....secure resources. Partnership with Iraq so we can have priority over the resources. Then when the violence in Iraq dies down: Reconstruction contracts, potential economic development in Iraq. Foreign investment. What a concept. There is plenty of cash to be made on Iraq. The downside to this of course is a weakening dollar, decreasing purchasing power. If Bush didn't go into Iraq, America was headed into a recession. He kept the economy afloat for a while longer.

To the point where "that's what they are already doing." Yes, but minus the US would be a lot cooler.

The alliance with Israel has caused nothing but trouble in bringing anti-American sentiment around the world. In Europe they report both sides of the crimes committed by both Palestine and Israel. And they stay out of it. That's what the US should do, and let someone else take over. There are bigger priorities the US should deal with, rather than give Aid to Israel.

[L Rag]

I applaud you for your intellectual dishonesty. You would make an excellent politician.

You accuse me of hating jews because of the position I desire for the US to take on Israel, isolationism. This equates to hating jews? Can you point out where I wanted jews to die? Or discriminate against them?

That's like me saying your racist against muslims because of the positions you take. Not only is there no foundation, it's simply idiotic to play the "prejudice" card in a debate. Don't like their opinion? Smear them as a bigot. Classy.

I only assume you are a jew because you threw out such a slanderous term and you felt offended. Perhaps you used this word in too many debates that you lost sense of this powerful accusation. In fact, I remember pointing this out to you when you accused someone else of being anti-semantic. It's safe to say if I went through your history, you threw out this term plenty of times.

But you seem to not get my argument and go straight to the anti-semantic card. Let me boldface it for you. The US should not be involved with any country in the Middle East with the exception of Iraq and for trade. That includes being a major player in brokering peace deals. This does not equate me not wanting peace between Israel and Palestine. There are domestic issues in America that need to be solved, especially on the economic front. The UN should take a more active role in the negotiations, and another country that bears an attitude towards peace take over. US involvement is a little more than figurehead, considering the positions they take towards foreign policy. All the progress made under Clinton ceded when Bush came to office. US involvement is not the answer.

When you mention that all countries have spies, you contradict your initial point that the US takes no position in administering and monitoring other countries activities. Rather, you choose to further slander me with a direct personal attack. Do you usually lose track of your arguments? Just because they monitor other countries means I'm oppose to having intelligence agencies? Do you really see things so black-white?

Your point on your Palestinian Authority is invalid. I'm refering to Arab Israeli citizens, which the PLO has no authority over, Israel does. And boy do they mistreat them. Everyone knows the PLO is corrupt. You don't seem to recognize the corruption on Israel. Which only strengthens my position on why the US should not be involved with this mess.

You also don't seem to recognize the rampant racism in Israel. When I compared this racism to the nazis the comparison. I should specify the era before kristelnacht happened. The climate is no different, jews were denied access to infrastructure, and were treated like 2nd class citizens. Much of the policy of Israel was inspired upon the suffering they suffered in Nazi Germany. Violence committed against arabs in the Israeli population. I could predict what your next argument would be, "oh so you want the jews to be bombed by palestinians?" Absolutely not, but I simply don't condone these actions perpetuated by either side.

And to the point where some arabs are racism against jews, thanks captain obvious, tell me something I didn't know. So it goes back to the consistant point in my argument: we should not administer aid to any of these middle eastern countries except Iraq.

And you say the Iraqi war didn't bring any economic benefits? Damn you are sure naive. If this country had no oil, do you honesty think the US would come save the day? Look no further than a 7 year sample on the US economic data. Notice the downward trend from 2003 up until the precise moment Bush decided let's go into Iraq. Then notice it steadily climbing. Using war as a economic stimulus. Gosh, wouldn't that qualify as a economic benefit? Why were companies happy that we went into Iraq? Simply there is money to be made!! 2nd, America helped build a pipeline to get oil out of Iraq. I wonder why? Ah.....secure resources. Partnership with Iraq so we can have priority over the resources. Then when the violence in Iraq dies down: Reconstruction contracts, potential economic development in Iraq. Foreign investment. What a concept. There is plenty of cash to be made on Iraq. The downside to this of course is a weakening dollar, decreasing purchasing power. If Bush didn't go into Iraq, America was headed into a recession. He kept the economy afloat for a while longer.

To the point where "that's what they are already doing." Yes, but minus the US would be a lot cooler.

The alliance with Israel has caused nothing but trouble in bringing anti-American sentiment around the world. In Europe they report both sides of the crimes committed by both Palestine and Israel. And they stay out of it. That's what the US should do, and let someone else take over. There are bigger priorities the US should deal with, rather than give Aid to Israel.

QFT +rep

Are you in a debating team man?:jointsmile:

[thcbongman]

QFT +rep

Are you in a debating team man?:jointsmile:

Nope, but thanks for the compliment! I just enjoying debating. Might be premature to compliment tho! I'm waiting for Ozark, this is only starting to heat up.

[mfqr]

mfgr - I truly believe that all religious societies have an obligation to "police" their members and clergy. The perpetration of evil, though, is not limited to muslims - they just happen to have been the topic of discussion here. Personally, I think that all religions are inherently evil.

PC :smokin:

And I would agree with you on that, except for the policing part... because I'm not exactly sure what you mean by that. I do agree with you on the part of all religions being inherently evil... at least that is how it is used. These Christian leaders, Muslim leaders, etc, are all taking advantage of people's ignorance. The only religion (and actually, some would say it's not a religion) I think is inherently good and peaceful would be Buddhism. The Buddhist monks in Tibet have never retaliated against China for its tyrannical reign over Tibet, mostly against the Buddhist monks. They always have remained peaceful.

I think Christianity and Islam actually oppresses the spiritual being (mostly Christianity, though, as I see it), as opposed to releasing it and letting it thrive. Buddhism, however, focuses on letting it thrive, to become enlightened.

The fundamentalist Christians are possibly the most ignorant people I've seen... it's a huge cult... they even brainwash their kids with this shit from the beginning. Complete indoctrination, to the point where the children cannot even begin to imagine a life without a higher being, and to the point where the child is completely ignorant about other views on life. Mental enslavement. That is how I see it.

[Ozarks]

I applaud you for your intellectual dishonesty. You would make an excellent politician.

You accuse me of hating jews because of the position I desire for the US to take on Israel, isolationism. This equates to hating jews? Can you point out where I wanted jews to die? Or discriminate against them?

I haven't "accused" you of anything, except not knowing the the difference between mass murder and self defense, and being a bigot.

That's like me saying your racist against muslims because of the positions you take. Not only is there no foundation, it's simply idiotic to play the "prejudice" card in a debate. Don't like their opinion? Smear them as a bigot. Classy.

If the jews want to create their own state, there's alot of land in the Antarctic.

^^^^
YOU

You are a bigot, look at your posts, take out the word jew and insert any other word, black, gay, disabled, take your pick.

I only assume you are a jew because you threw out such a slanderous term and you felt offended. Perhaps you used this word in too many debates that you lost sense of this powerful accusation.
In fact, I remember pointing this out to you when you accused someone else of being anti-semantic. It's safe to say if I went through your history, you threw out this term plenty of times.

I call a spade a spade, and these people, like you don't like it.

But you seem to not get my argument and go straight to the anti-semantic card. Let me boldface it for you. The US should not be involved with any country in the Middle East with the exception of Iraq and for trade. That includes being a major player in brokering peace deals. This does not equate me not wanting peace between Israel and Palestine.

I get it, I just think you are wrong, we are supporting a peace and democracy in the region.

All the progress made under Clinton ceded when Bush came to office. US involvement is not the answer.

What progress ? Arafat WALK AWAY and refused to sign the deal

When you mention that all countries have spies, you contradict your initial point that the US takes no position in administering and monitoring other countries activities.

Perhaps a dictionary would help, spying has nothing to do with "Administrating or monitoring".

You also don't seem to recognize the rampant racism in Israel. When I compared this racism to the nazis the comparison. I should specify the era before kristelnacht happened. The climate is no different, jews were denied access to infrastructure, and were treated like 2nd class citizens. Much of the policy of Israel was inspired upon the suffering they suffered in Nazi Germany. Violence committed against arabs in the Israeli population. I could predict what your next argument would be, "oh so you want the jews to be bombed by palestinians?" Absolutely not, but I simply don't condone these actions perpetuated by either side.

There is difference here that you seem to miss, the jews didn't attack Germaney, Israels policies are based on security not racism

And to the point where some arabs are racism against jews, thanks captain obvious, tell me something I didn't know.

If arabs operate in the same lines of racism as Israel, they shouldn't get aid either.

^^^^^^^^
You Again

And you say the Iraqi war didn't bring any economic benefits? Damn you are sure naive. If this country had no oil, do you honesty think the US would come save the day? Look no further than a 7 year sample on the US economic data. Notice the downward trend from 2003 up until the precise moment Bush decided let's go into Iraq. Then notice it steadily climbing. Using war as a economic stimulus. Gosh, wouldn't that qualify as a economic benefit? Why were companies happy that we went into Iraq? Simply there is money to be made!! 2nd, America helped build a pipeline to get oil out of Iraq. I wonder why?

The only country that Iran exports to is France, we build the pipeline because Iraq needs the money from the oil. 5,10 years from now, I hope you're right.

Right know we're losing money.

The alliance with Israel has caused nothing but trouble in bringing anti-American sentiment around the world.

Doing the right thing and standing with our friends has made us stronger and more respected, I don't care if they like us or not, this isn't a popularity contest.

[L Rag]

You are a bigot, look at your posts, take out the word jew and insert any other word, black, gay, disabled, take your pick.

Is anyone else completely in the dark as to how he is a bigot? You took his sentence completely out of context.

I get it, I just think you are wrong, we are supporting a peace and democracy in the region.

I dont know how you can say America is supporting peace in the region with a straight face. :wtf:

Perhaps a dictionary would help, spying has nothing to do with "Administrating or monitoring".

Actually I'd say spying is very similar to monitoring.