PDA

View Full Version : War With Iran is coming per London Times



canexplain
09-02-2007, 10:26 AM
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2369001.ece



cant we ever learn .... so what do you guys think .... mind our own business, just a little bitty "pinprick" war, or bomb the hell out of them ... cr****

mountmccabe
09-02-2007, 10:40 AM
"War With Iran is coming per London Times"

That isn't what that article says.


So the Pentagon has drawn up plans for various attacks on Iran. That's called thinking ahead. They make plans for tons of things that never happen so as to be prepared for the few things that do happen.

canexplain
09-02-2007, 10:49 AM
well it was all over talk radio friday too ... before the article came out ... they said sometime after labor day ... now i dont think that will happen, but it wouldnt surprise me in the least if it did .... and then the head dude from iran came out today and said he had 3k of those machines that enrich uranium .... so was the title being an alarmist sp, maybe, .... cr****

joggs1
09-02-2007, 10:49 AM
do we have to go on killing lets tell these stupid fucking polititions to get a grip and listen to some fucking music instead of wanting to blow someone up for the fun of it

canexplain
09-02-2007, 10:58 AM
do we have to go on killing lets tell these stupid fucking polititions to get a grip and listen to some fucking music instead of wanting to blow someone up for the fun of it

yep, at least you brits are for sure getting out of iraq .... cr****

arbouler
09-02-2007, 11:06 AM
can the government even afford another war?

dorkfish
09-02-2007, 11:07 AM
operation rest of the brown ones

canexplain
09-02-2007, 11:12 AM
can the government even afford another war?

if you mean money, they can just print more ... if you mean in other terms .... NO ..... cr****

Wheres the beef?
09-02-2007, 11:31 AM
if you mean money, they can just print more ... if you mean in other terms .... NO ..... cr****

Yep. After labor day there is going to be a huge PR blitz to get people all riled up to go to war. Expect to hear the following:

"Iran is meddling in Iraq"
"Iran has nuclear weapons"
"Iran supports Alquaida"

When public opinion doesnt sway towards war with Iran I expect another false flag attack possibly a dirty bomb or an attack on a US carrier in the persian gulf.

betao
09-02-2007, 11:42 AM
bombing for peace is like fucking for virginity.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
09-02-2007, 12:02 PM
WWIII if this is the case..

DeltaSigChi4
09-02-2007, 02:41 PM
Kill Bush.

E

TomAz
09-02-2007, 02:58 PM
"War With Iran is coming per London Times"

That isn't what that article says.


So the Pentagon has drawn up plans for various attacks on Iran. That's called thinking ahead. They make plans for tons of things that never happen so as to be prepared for the few things that do happen.


well it was all over talk radio friday too ... before the article came out ... they said sometime after labor day ... now i dont think that will happen, but it wouldnt surprise me in the least if it did .... and then the head dude from iran came out today and said he had 3k of those machines that enrich uranium .... so was the title being an alarmist sp, maybe, .... cr****

Contingency plans + talk radio doesn't mean anything. We have contingency plans for the invasion of Canada, too. and talk radio will tell you that the earth is regularly visited by extraterrestrials who are trying to save us from ourselves. Or who are going to take over. Or who have already taken over.

I think was with Iran is looking increasingly likely but the only thing that's going to prevent it is rational thought, not paranoia, hysteria and bumper sticker logic.

Cpt. Funkaho
09-02-2007, 03:00 PM
can the government even afford another war?

That hasn't stopped them the past several times, what makes you think it would make a difference now?

mountmccabe
09-02-2007, 05:12 PM
WWIII if this is the case..

Wow. No.

I mean, how?

I can't imagine calling it a World War unless most major powers are involved and, even more important: on separate sides. And that the fighting is spread out across the world. How does any of that happen if the U.S. attacks Iran?

RotationSlimWang
09-02-2007, 05:17 PM
Heh. I love it when Americans seem to think that war with the Middle East (even as a totality, let alone single nations) would consistute WWIII.

The Middle East has no real power. They are not a significant threat.

WWIII WILL happen after several more of our mistaken attempts to engineer the world in our image manage to piss off Europe and Asia enough that we get some REAL powers aligned against us.

menikmati
09-02-2007, 05:19 PM
yep yep

Wheres the beef?
09-02-2007, 05:27 PM
I think was with Iran is looking increasingly likely but the only thing that's going to prevent it is rational thought, not paranoia, hysteria and bumper sticker logic.

I can't even contemplate how I would be alive if it wasn't for bumper stickers. Without bumperstickers I wouldn't know that "Shit Happens" or "My Child is an Honor Student at El Dorado Elementary" or "Kerry/Edwards '04" or all the other useful information that guide my life and influence my decisions. Without bumper stickers this nation would be lost.

fatbastard
09-02-2007, 06:04 PM
The middle east has the oil.


First you need to get the money, when you get the money you get the power, when you get the power then you get the women. TM

DeltaSigChi4
09-02-2007, 06:08 PM
Most of you [non-reading types] probably don't realize that the start of a world war doesn't necessarily entail every nation in the world engaged in it. One can start with a single bullet -- and has before. With a single nation invading another. Read a book.

E

Wheres the beef?
09-02-2007, 06:14 PM
Most of you [non-reading types] probably don't realize that the start of a world war doesn't necessarily entail every nation in the world engaged in it. One can start with a single bullet -- and has before. With a single nation invading another. Read a book.

E

Not every war involves bombs and guns. Many nations of the world could easily bring our country to its knees without ever firing a gun. Get a clue.

PineapplePete
09-02-2007, 06:20 PM
http://blogs.indiewire.com/eug/archives/images/team-america-20040719101833503.jpg

TomAz
09-02-2007, 06:43 PM
Wow. No.

I mean, how?

I can't imagine calling it a World War unless most major powers are involved and, even more important: on separate sides. And that the fighting is spread out across the world. How does any of that happen if the U.S. attacks Iran?

well it depends what is meant by 'world war'. WW I was confined to Europe.

but a US-Iran war means we've got fighting going on in at least 3 countries.. (Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq). It likely means Israel gets drawn in. who knows what happens in Pakistan? could be fronts from turkey to india. that's not 'the world' but it's not a localized conflict either.

Mr.Nipples
09-02-2007, 06:46 PM
yrZOVBHXva8

DeltaSigChi4
09-02-2007, 06:51 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v604/DeltaSigChi4/1210571681_l.gif

E

mountmccabe
09-02-2007, 07:09 PM
well it depends what is meant by 'world war'. WW I was confined to Europe.

No it wasn't.

You could argue that the major powers involved were all from Europe other than the United States but these powers had colonies and territories and interests all over the place and the fighting was global even if it was concentrated in Europe.



but a US-Iran war means we've got fighting going on in at least 3 countries.. (Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq). It likely means Israel gets drawn in. who knows what happens in Pakistan? could be fronts from turkey to india. that's not 'the world' but it's not a localized conflict either.

There wouldn't be anything unified about those conflicts, though.

And fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq isn't the same as fighting against those nations.

I am not saying it'd be a good thing or easy or anything like that but the US with allies involved in an unrelated series of police actions and maybe one legit war (with Iran) in the Middle East is not anything I'd think historians in the future would call a World War.

I'mn't saying I know international relations well enough to say for sure but I don't see how anybody of any consequence gets involved against the U.S. I don't see how this escalates in anything near that fashion.

Wheres the beef?
09-02-2007, 07:16 PM
The key difference between Iraq/Afghanistan and Iran is that Iran has a very capable army and two powerful allies in Russia and China. Russia is pissed at our arrogance in meddling with its "frontyard" and recently resumed "mock" long range bomber runs to targets in Europe. Russia has not made it a secret that would come to Iran's aid and China, well China basically owns us and they arent happy with us then you better watch out.

Wheres the beef?
09-02-2007, 07:18 PM
I am not saying it'd be a good thing or easy or anything like that but the US with allies involved in an unrelated series of police actions and maybe one legit war (with Iran) in the Middle East is not anything I'd think historians in the future would call a World War.

No I think they would call it what it is, an illegal powergrab and desperate play to maintain US hegemony in the face of failing foreign and domestic policies over the last 45 years.

fatbastard
09-02-2007, 07:29 PM
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/uploads/bush-arrested-in-ottawa-for-war-crimes.jpg

marooko
09-02-2007, 08:02 PM
I can't even contemplate how I would be alive if it wasn't for bumper stickers. Without bumperstickers I wouldn't know that "Shit Happens" or "My Child is an Honor Student at El Dorado Elementary" or "Kerry/Edwards '04" or all the other useful information that guide my life and influence my decisions. Without bumper stickers this nation would be lost.

i never realized the affect bumper stickers have had on my life.


The middle east has the oil.

"... because we got the bombs,....Two words. Nuclear fucking weapons, okay?"

mountmccabe
09-02-2007, 08:06 PM
The key difference between Iraq/Afghanistan and Iran is that Iran has a very capable army and two powerful allies in Russia and China. Russia is pissed at our arrogance in meddling with its "frontyard" and recently resumed "mock" long range bomber runs to targets in Europe. Russia has not made it a secret that would come to Iran's aid and China, well China basically owns us and they arent happy with us then you better watch out.

Neither the Korean War nor the Vietnam War are considered World Wars. But this is significantly closer than anything I could put together.

Mostly it makes me not want to think about it anymore. Or just to focus on the fact that there're a lot of conditionals that lead up to this.

TomAz
09-02-2007, 08:13 PM
The key difference between Iraq/Afghanistan and Iran is that Iran has a very capable army and two powerful allies in Russia and China. Russia is pissed at our arrogance in meddling with its "frontyard" and recently resumed "mock" long range bomber runs to targets in Europe. Russia has not made it a secret that would come to Iran's aid and China, well China basically owns us and they arent happy with us then you better watch out.

Russia.. maybe.. though their own past failures in the region may limit their hand somehwat.

China.. no way. China's all about selling shit to us. no way they mess that up. No nation in the world has more motivation to play peacekeeper than China right now.

Wheres the beef?
09-02-2007, 08:21 PM
Russia.. maybe.. though their own past failures in the region may limit their hand somehwat.

China.. no way. China's all about selling shit to us. no way they mess that up. No nation in the world has more motivation to play peacekeeper than China right now.

Yeah its a tough call. On one side China needs a market to sell its goods and what better than the dumb americans. On the other hand we have borrowed hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars from China. I think that their investment in the influential buy-out company blackstone really shows china's true colors. If China wanted to, it could put the economic screws to our government buy threatening to divest its central bank of dollars and sell its T-Bill holdings. That alone would crash wallstreet overnight. Its mightier than any nuclear bomb.

TomAz
09-02-2007, 08:32 PM
Yeah its a tough call. On one side China needs a market to sell its goods and what better than the dumb americans. On the other hand we have borrowed hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars from China. I think that their investment in the influential buy-out company blackstone really shows china's true colors. If China wanted to, it could put the economic screws to our government buy threatening to divest its central bank of dollars and sell its T-Bill holdings. That alone would crash wallstreet overnight. Its mightier than any nuclear bomb.

eh.. but at the expense of their own economy. why invest billions in an asset only to fuck it up? china's best interests lie in the continued growth of free trade. and they are largely free of any cumbersome religious fanaticism to get in the way of that philosophy.

Wheres the beef?
09-02-2007, 09:05 PM
eh.. but at the expense of their own economy. why invest billions in an asset only to fuck it up? china's best interests lie in the continued growth of free trade. and they are largely free of any cumbersome religious fanaticism to get in the way of that philosophy.

Well not so much. The reason China does so well is that hey have used a "basket" of currencies to determine their exchange rate whereby the basket sets an average that their currency is pegged at. Even given wide swings in global currency rates, a basket rate makes a currency that much more stable but also hides the true effects of the world market on a currency. If the value of the yuan was left to the free market it would skyrocket because the demand for yuan (you need to buy yuans to buy chinese goods and since china makes everything ) is partly based on the import-export ratio of that country's assets.

So China keeps their currency artificially low to make their goods appear as a bargain on the world economy. This fuels there per capita income and GDP but it wont last forever.

And the US is more in debt to China than any nation. Nobody comes close. Plus because when we buy chinese goods we must exchange dollars for yuans which leaves china with lots of dollars. So China invests those dollars in various things and while you dont want to kill the golden goose there will be a time when we have outlived our usefulness and needless wars only accelerate this future.

J~$$$
09-02-2007, 09:07 PM
http://rawstory.com//news/2007/Pentagon_draws_Threeday_blitz_plan_for_0901.html

The buzz is getting louder.

Kuncinch 08

TomAz
09-02-2007, 09:13 PM
I'm with you up to the last sentence. the US is a productive and profitable society. fucking it up will fuck up the world economy. srsly.

this notion that 'we owe china billions so they will make us tapdance to their song' is only valid up to a very limited point. US is still by far the most important market in the world. it's more like the two of us are locked in a position where if one of us goes down so does the other. which makes china siding with iran (or anyone else) unlikely. IMO.

the argument arises, 'but oil, in the long run, is more important than transient trade relationships'. I don't buy it. fuck up the world trade balance and you throw the world economy back 100 years, and your oil isn't worth 1/10th what it is now.

Wheres the beef?
09-02-2007, 09:55 PM
I'm with you up to the last sentence. the US is a productive and profitable society. fucking it up will fuck up the world economy. srsly.

this notion that 'we owe china billions so they will make us tapdance to their song' is only valid up to a very limited point. US is still by far the most important market in the world. it's more like the two of us are locked in a position where if one of us goes down so does the other. which makes china siding with iran (or anyone else) unlikely. IMO.

the argument arises, 'but oil, in the long run, is more important than transient trade relationships'. I don't buy it. fuck up the world trade balance and you throw the world economy back 100 years, and your oil isn't worth 1/10th what it is now.

I'll agree with you here that is quite a symbiotic relationship and even more so because of Americans willingness to overlook gross human rights and environmental violations for cheap goods (as long as its in some other country). And it seems that China has boughten into the Fossil Fuel Age even if for a limited time. There are increasing reports of China going "green" and this was expected but how much attention, based on percentage GDP, is actually given to it will really tell the tale.

But I think the fundamental difference between the US and China is that US has a poor technology/manufacturing/bio-engineering base (the leading industries to improve ones comparitive advantage in global trade imo) when compared to other industrialized nations and is in a poor position to weather a global financial crisis(the recent subprime market is a drop in the bucket compared to what im talking about). Indeed the worst effects will be felt the hardest and the longest in the US.

clarky123
09-02-2007, 10:00 PM
Great news 07:00 GMT British troops are starting to pull out of Basra.....you are on your own chaps!!

canexplain
09-05-2007, 02:54 PM
so did you see the article about that jet flying all over the US with a bunch of nukes ... of course they said "hey they cant explode" what the good is a nuke that wont explode ...yikes, i hope they just dont drop them on peoples heads ... that might be an expensive war (just like the fucking one we are in) ... cr****

canexplain
09-05-2007, 02:57 PM
http://rawstory.com//news/2007/Pentagon_draws_Threeday_blitz_plan_for_0901.html

The buzz is getting louder.

Kuncinch 08

i missed that a couple of days ago Justin ... just goes to show, get your news first .... where ????? .. on the coachella board of course :) cr****

Yablonowitz
09-05-2007, 03:04 PM
A day after the Government Accountability Office reported that the Iraqis have met just three of 18 benchmarks they had agreed to meet, George W. Bush offered a slightly rosier assessment of the war during his visit to Australia today. Asked by Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile to say how things are going in Iraq, the president of the United States declared: "We're kicking ass."

Now on to Iran!

J~$$$
09-05-2007, 03:05 PM
"We're kicking ass."

our own.

TomAz
09-05-2007, 04:23 PM
http://food-for-worms.com/strips/0002-iran.jpg

Alchemy
09-05-2007, 04:43 PM
We are going to war with Iran. The voice of the White House has spoken:

1-eyuFBrWHs

canexplain
09-05-2007, 05:08 PM
don't usually go off like this but ...... I did not do enough to change the world ... I just got trashed, went to shows, lived and loved .... I did protest, send snail mail to my representatives, protested, almost got thrown in jail a number of times for my political views, and made my thoughts known ... and where did it lead to ... a black hole ... like
well we got out of that one (nam), don't worry about the economy (tech bubble burst, oil crises (esp in Denver and LA in the 70's) lalalalalal .... fuck them and everyone who thinks they are right (of course we never really know who the "they" are, but for me they are republicans, bigots, religious fanatics , the list could really go on and on) .... if you believe what the insurance companies say, I have about 14 years to live (those damn actuarial ) charts ... so fuck you guys that think we can be the police of the world, that we are sooooo fucking right and you should do as we say, ..... some of the old "bumper sticker thinking" is still around ... you cant bring it down to a bumper sticker, sorry but it is somewhat more complicated then that ... you really have to think if you want to make the right choice .... is mine the right choice, I cant answer that, but just be fucking involved ... I will take my chance and debate you till I am blue, but to just sit there and say .."geez, that is what the president said so it must be true",if you are that easy, I have a business I want you to invest in .... grrrrrr ... I am just rambling here after watching the news .... Craig, Iraq, Iran, bush, ... so in like 15 years I will be gone, having a life a lot of people would love ( sidebar , if you are an American, do you realize that you are better off, smarter, any positive thing you can think of, ... better off then I bet 75 percent of the world) ... we are special, tag, you guys are it to prove that is such a simple statement, of course America is the best place in the world ... but times change, if you want to have the great life I have had, done things most people could only dream of (but easy to have if you just be yourself and pay attention ), damn, I knew I couldn't put this into words ... if you want it, you got it (sorry for the cheap music play), but if you just sit there and be apathetic, or agree only because that is what you parents were, then you "reap what you sow" .... to quote the bible is a push for me, but there are lessons to be learned in all reading, and the bible , I cant say is a "good read", but there is a lot to take from it ..my last hurray, first there is the dnc here in 08, after that, I am done ... peace to all of you ..... cr******

Alchemy
09-05-2007, 05:11 PM
don't usually go off like this but ...... I did not do enough to change the world ... I just got trashed, went to shows, lived and loved .... I did protest, send snail mail to my representatives, protested, almost got thrown in jail a number of times for my political views, and made my thoughts known ... and where did it lead to ... a black hole ... like
well we got out of that one (nam), don't worry about the economy (tech bubble burst, oil crises (esp in Denver and LA in the 70's) lalalalalal .... fuck them and everyone who thinks they are right (of course we never really know who the "they" are, but for me they are republicans, bigots, religious fanatics , the list could really go on and on) .... if you believe what the insurance companies say, I have about 14 years to live (those damn actuarial ) charts ... so fuck you guys that think we can be the police of the world, that we are sooooo fucking right and you should do as we say, ..... some of the old "bumper sticker thinking" is still around ... you cant bring it down to a bumper sticker, sorry but it is somewhat more complicated then that ... you really have to think if you want to make the right choice .... is mine the right choice, I cant answer that, but just be fucking involved ... I will take my chance and debate you till I am blue, but to just sit there and say .."geez, that is what the president said so it must be true",if you are that easy, I have a business I want you to invest in .... grrrrrr ... I am just rambling here after watching the news .... Craig, Iraq, Iran, bush, ... so in like 15 years I will be gone, having a life a lot of people would love ( sidebar , if you are an American, do you realize that you are better off, smarter, any positive thing you can think of, ... better off then I bet 75 percent of the world) ... we are special, tag, you guys are it to prove that is such a simple statement, of course America is the best place in the world ... but times change, if you want to have the great life I have had, done things most people could only dream of (but easy to have if you just be yourself and pay attention ), damn, I knew I couldn't put this into words ... if you want it, you got it (sorry for the cheap music play), but if you just sit there and be apathetic, or agree only because that is what you parents were, then you "reap what you sow" .... to quote the bible is a push for me, but there are lessons to be learned in all reading, and the bible , I cant say is a "good read", but there is a lot to take from it ..my last hurray, will be the dnc here in 08, after that, I am done ... peace to all of you ..... cr******

Wise words from cr*****

DeltaSigChi4
09-05-2007, 08:59 PM
Not every war involves bombs and guns. Many nations of the world could easily bring our country to its knees without ever firing a gun. Get a clue.

I know more about war than you, yo momma, your unknown father, you momma's momma, and yo momma's momma's momma.

And everyone who lives in your neighborhood. And everyone in your entire extended family.

E

RotationSlimWang
09-05-2007, 09:05 PM
PFC Wintergreen complex.

theburiedlife
09-05-2007, 11:39 PM
Edit: Woops, shifted groups in right places now.


Great news 07:00 GMT British troops are starting to pull out of Basra.....you are on your own chaps!!

Well done chaps, for getting beaten by a couple of Militia Groups. There's another word for that, Retreating. Operation Overwatch is complete bullshit.


Yep. After labor day there is going to be a huge PR blitz to get people all riled up to go to war. Expect to hear the following:

"Iran is meddling in Iraq"
"Iran has nuclear weapons"
"Iran supports Alquaida"


Kingsblend, I agree with a good deal of what you have to say about this, but a couple of things have to confronted about this statement.

We can't beat around the bush and blame local Shiite militia groups in the southern and Baghdad areas of Iraq without looking at Iran. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has stated publicly that Iran is filling the power vacuum in regions that coalition forces cannot cover (1). Iran clearly has a stake in this whether western powers want it or not, there is clearly involvement.

Iran is obviously trying to make power plays by influencing Iraq, and in response, the US and other forces are trying to seal off Iran from regional dominance by having a presence in Afghanistan, Iraq, and strong ties with Pakistan's secular military regime. If this fails and civil war spills across the Middle East states, it will eventually turn into a power struggle between Saudi Arabia (A predominantly Sunni State) and Iran (A complete Shiite State)

No, Iran does not have nuclear weapons. but Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has announced that Iran has in it's production 3,000 centrifuges used to enrich uranium. (2) If that's not an obvious clue to what Iran's Intentions are, I'm not sure what is. The only way to solve this is diplomatically, clearly an invasion would be the largest fallacy in logic since the Iraq War.

And finally, Iran does not support Al-Qaeda , a Sunni organization. They are run by a famous Sunni, Osama Bin Laden, of the Saudi Family. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a Shiite, his nation is Shiite, and Hezbollah, the organization which he directly funds, is Shiite.

/rant off

(1) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6967502.stm
(2) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6975287.stm

clarky123
09-06-2007, 12:55 AM
Well done chaps, for getting beaten by a couple of Militia Groups. There's another word for that, Retreating. Operation Overwatch is complete bullshit.

Your country is fighting an un-winnable battle. I don't actually think you are in a position to discuss retreat. Let me elaborate for you - The entire operation from the Top Down is complete bullshit.

Alchemy
09-06-2007, 05:15 AM
This isn't an un-winnable battle. For we have the power of Christ at our side.

http://content.ytmnd.com/content/7/9/7/79712f7c0b7ab28f4c3294d5eb80f8ed.jpg

http://thedefeatists.typepad.com/apoplectic/images/war_on_christmas.jpg

clarky123
09-06-2007, 05:20 AM
The End is Nigh

canexplain
09-06-2007, 05:24 AM
i just heard that Syria and Israel are shooting at each other ... grrrr cr****

clarky123
09-06-2007, 05:30 AM
Good grief, I understand Syria have all sorts of nasty chemical weapons which they are ready to fire at people.

Alchemy
09-06-2007, 05:35 AM
Good grief, I understand Syria have all sorts of nasty chemical weapons which they are ready to fire at people.

And Israel is no push over either...

http://www.merriol.freeserve.co.uk/products/images/Ninja_01.jpg
http://www.merriol.freeserve.co.uk/products/images/Ninja_02%20copy.jpg
http://www.merriol.freeserve.co.uk/products/throw.jpghttp://www.merriol.freeserve.co.uk/products/sim.jpg

Yablonowitz
09-06-2007, 07:08 AM
Iran is obviously trying to make power plays by influencing Iraq, and in response, the US and other forces are trying to seal off Iran from regional dominance by having a presence in Afghanistan, Iraq, and strong ties with Pakistan's secular military regime. If this fails and civil war spills across the Middle East states, it will eventually turn into a power struggle between Saudi Arabia (A predominantly Shiite State) and Iran (A complete Sunni State)

No, Iran does not have nuclear weapons. but Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has announced that Iran has in it's production 3,000 centrifuges used to enrich uranium. (2) If that's not an obvious clue to what Iran's Intentions are, I'm not sure what is. The only way to solve this is diplomatically, clearly an invasion would be the largest fallacy in logic since the Iraq War.

And finally, Iran does not support Al-Qaeda . They are run by a famous Shiite, Osama Bin Laden, of the Saudi Family. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a Sunni, his nation is Sunni, and Hezbollah, the organization which he directly funds, is Sunni.



You got your facts wrong, muchambo. Iran is about 90% Shia, do you not remember the Iran-Iraq War? Iraq was governed by a Sunni dictator and Iran's Shia dominated country were gassed and killed by the thousands by Saddam Hussein (with finanical support from the west). Their current involvement in Iraq is based far more on religious protection of the shia as it is a political ploy to gain authority within Iraq, combined with an understandable concern about US involvement near their border. It's not even remotely surprising that they are providing weapons to Shia militia groups.

J~$$$
09-06-2007, 07:39 AM
We lost. Bring our troops home. We are still tight with the jews. Fuck it we cant steal all the oil.

J~$$$
09-06-2007, 07:41 AM
PS we are the police of the world. If not us the UN? *giggles* We need to get back to the days of a hand shake and smile...then the knife in the back not this cowboy bullshit.

theburiedlife
09-06-2007, 08:46 AM
Your country is fighting an un-winnable battle. I don't actually think you are in a position to discuss retreat. Let me elaborate for you - The entire operation from the Top Down is complete bullshit.

Did I say anything about the outcome of this war for the U.S.? no.
Were those forces pulling out of Iraq when they left Basra? no.
Are they just sitting on the sidelines outside of town to let the ill-equpped and poorly trained iraqi forces take the blunt of the beating? Yes.


You got your facts wrong, muchambo. Iran is about 90% Shia, do you not remember the Iran-Iraq War? Iraq was governed by a Sunni dictator and Iran's Shia dominated country were gassed and killed by the thousands by Saddam Hussein (with finanical support from the west). Their current involvement in Iraq is based far more on religious protection of the shia as it is a political ploy to gain authority within Iraq, combined with an understandable concern about US involvement near their border. It's not even remotely surprising that they are providing weapons to Shia militia groups.

Besides the correction (simple mistake), you didn't disprove factual anything i stated. I know very well of that war and it's outcomes. I was trying to show kingsblend why Iran has a stake in this war.

TomAz
09-06-2007, 08:52 AM
Their current involvement in Iraq is based far more on religious protection of the shia as it is a political ploy to gain authority within Iraq...




"The political power of the occupiers is collapsing rapidly," Ahmadinejad said at a press conference in Tehran, referring to U.S. troops in Iraq. "Soon, we will see a huge power vacuum in the region. Of course, we are prepared to fill the gap, with the help of neighbors and regional friends like Saudi Arabia, and with the help of the Iraqi nation."

just sayin'.

Yablonowitz
09-06-2007, 08:56 AM
Besides the correction, you didn't disprove factual anything i stated. I know very well of that war and it's outcomes. I was trying to show kingsblend why Iran has a stake in this war.

I don't think that's a debate. I was just correcting the shia/sunni issue which is a big reason Iran is involved with Iraq. The Sunnis were pretty brutal to the Shia when they were in power and so there's alot of hostility down there because of Iran's religious allegiance to the shia. They don't think in nation state terms quite as solidly as we do. And I don't think their involvement is based on a desire to take control of Iraq.

algunz
09-06-2007, 08:56 AM
For me, what's the scariest, is that Bush is probably going to push this "war" hard just to get it started before he's out of office. So, we as a country, are left to clean up more of his bullshit trash.

Fucker!!

TomAz
09-06-2007, 08:59 AM
I don't think that's a debate. I was just correcting the shia/sunni issue which is a big reason Iran is involved with Iraq. The Sunnis were pretty brutal to the Shia when they were in power and so there's alot of hostility down there because of Iran's religious allegiance to the shia. They don't think in nation state terms quite as solidly as we do. And I don't think their involvement is based on a desire to take control of Iraq.

Gee willackers, Yablo, you don't get what's going on at all.

theburiedlife
09-06-2007, 09:04 AM
I don't think that's a debate. I was just correcting the shia/sunni issue which is a big reason Iran is involved with Iraq. The Sunnis were pretty brutal to the Shia when they were in power and so there's alot of hostility down there because of Iran's religious allegiance to the shia. They don't think in nation state terms quite as solidly as we do. And I don't think their involvement is based on a desire to take control of Iraq.

Yeah I shouldn't, but sometimes i swap the group's interchangeably when talking about this conflict. Thanks for the follow up.

I agree with what you have to say about the power struggle down there, but i think Iran would like to see the nation split into three (PKK, Shiite, and Sunni regions). I wouldn't be surprised if that was what they were trying to formulate through their funding of these groups.

Also, it was predominantly the Bath party that caused the atrocities, not the faction of Sunni civilians who lived relatively peaceful alongside their neighbors before the civil war, if Iran truly wanted vengeance then its hard to find any remnants of the loyalist followers or former Bath party members, Chemical Ali was just executed a couple days ago.

I found this humorous look at U.S. foreign policy, take a look.
http://australianpolitics.com/news/2003/07/03-07-19.shtml

Yablonowitz
09-06-2007, 09:11 AM
Gee willackers, Yablo, you don't get what's going on at all.

And you back that up with a quote from Ahmadinejad? Tom...he has no power, for some reason the press has elevated his significance in the running of Iran when it's the Shah and his council who make all the decisions. Ahmadinejad is full of rhetorical blustery bullshit and the press laps it up and prints it like it means anything. Plus, it's just a little bit odd that he said Saudi Arabia is poised to step in to help rule Iraq when they barely have a Shia population, compared to Iran. I don't think those two would really work well together.

The political gamesmanship isn't what's behind the shipment of weapons to shia militia in Iraq. It's part of their sectarian strife. That part of the world just doesn't adhere to political boundaries and are more focused on the shia/sunni conflict...clearly both sides eventually want a religious government running the region.

J~$$$
09-06-2007, 09:21 AM
Ali Khamenei has been doing quite a bit of good for Iran and the people. Its the fucking douchebag Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that has been a blight to his nation kind of like our president.

canexplain
09-06-2007, 09:25 AM
keep going gang, i like it when the threads i start get up to 100 posts ... woot, woot ,, .... cr****

RotationSlimWang
09-06-2007, 09:25 AM
Just out of curiousity, are any of you white American assholes regurgitating a single piece of information about Iran that you acquired from somewhere other than popular news?

I mean, really--anything. Like, a book? Anyone? Bueller?

J~$$$
09-06-2007, 09:28 AM
First hand. I got peeps in Iran. On the same note im not sayin much, so whateva.

TomAz
09-06-2007, 09:29 AM
And you back that up with a quote from Ahmadinejad? Tom...he has no power, for some reason the press has elevated his significance in the running of Iran when it's the Shah and his council who make all the decisions. Ahmadinejad is full of rhetorical blustery bullshit and the press laps it up and prints it like it means anything. Plus, it's just a little bit odd that he said Saudi Arabia is poised to step in to help rule Iraq when they barely have a Shia population, compared to Iran. I don't think those two would really work well together.

The political gamesmanship isn't what's behind the shipment of weapons to shia militia in Iraq. It's part of their sectarian strife. That part of the world just doesn't adhere to political boundaries and are more focused on the shia/sunni conflict...clearly both sides eventually want a religious government running the region.

You're veering into absurdity here.

We are discussing what the Iranian leadership's motivation might be for involvement in Iraq. You've offered your opinion and nothing else. I've offered an actual quote from an actual Iranian leader. And your're playing the credibility card? ummm, who are you, Ayatollah Yablonowitz?

Perhaps you could enlighten us as to how you have so much insight into the Iranian thought process. What facts are your opinions based on.

TomAz
09-06-2007, 09:31 AM
Just out of curiousity, are any of you white American assholes regurgitating a single piece of information about Iran that you acquired from somewhere other than popular news?

I mean, really--anything. Like, a book? Anyone? Bueller?


We're having a serious adult conversation here. Go play with your toys.

RotationSlimWang
09-06-2007, 09:33 AM
Answer my question you fucking relic.

Yablonowitz
09-06-2007, 10:05 AM
You're veering into absurdity here.

We are discussing what the Iranian leadership's motivation might be for involvement in Iraq. You've offered your opinion and nothing else. I've offered an actual quote from an actual Iranian leader. And your're playing the credibility card? ummm, who are you, Ayatollah Yablonowitz?

Perhaps you could enlighten us as to how you have so much insight into the Iranian thought process. What facts are your opinions based on.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/tehran/inside/govt.html


SUPREME LEADER


At the top of Iran's power structure is the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who succeeded Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the father of the Iranian Revolution, upon Khomeini's death in 1989. Khomeini and Khamenei are the only two men to have held the office since the founding of the Islamic Republic in 1979.

According to Iran's Constitution, the Supreme Leader is responsible for the delineation and supervision of "the general policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran," which means that he sets the tone and direction of Iran's domestic and foreign policies. The Supreme Leader also is commander-in-chief of the armed forces and controls the Islamic Republic's intelligence and security operations; he alone can declare war or peace. He has the power to appoint and dismiss the leaders of the judiciary, the state radio and television networks, and the supreme commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. He also appoints six of the twelve members of the Council of Guardians, the powerful body that oversees the activities of Parliament and determines which candidates are qualified to run for public office.

The Supreme Leader's sphere of power is extended through his representatives, an estimated 2,000 of whom are sprinkled throughout all sectors of the government and who serve as the Leader's clerical field operatives. In some respects the Supreme Leader's representatives are more powerful than the president's ministers and have the authority to intervene in any matter of state on the Supreme Leader's behalf.

PRESIDENT

The president is the second highest ranking official in Iran. While the president has a high public profile, however, his power is in many ways trimmed back by the constitution, which subordinates the entire executive branch to the Supreme Leader. In fact, Iran is the only state in which the executive branch does not control the armed forces.

The president is responsible for setting the country's economic policies. Though he has nominal rule over the Supreme National Security Council and the Ministry of Intelligence and Security, in practice the Supreme Leader dictates all matters of foreign and domestic security. Eight vice presidents serve under the president, as well as a cabinet of 22 ministers. The Council of Ministers must be confirmed by Parliament.

Mohammad Khatami was elected president in 1997 in a stunning upset over the conservative establishment candidate, Speaker of the Parliament Ali-Akbar Nateq-Nouri. Khatami captured nearly 70 percent of the popular vote, with about 80 percent of eligible voters turning out.


Now, I don't have a ready made quote from the supreme leader of Iran to back up my claim but I'll be surprised if you could find one from him to support what that puppet Ahmeniwhatever says. All I can say, which is weak at the moment, is that I've read several articles on Salon about Iran's involvement in Iraq down by the border, much of it explaining how it is motivated by a desire to protect the Shia. There is weak evidence PROVING the source of the weapons or whether or not it was publicly condoned.

TomAz
09-06-2007, 10:07 AM
and what are Salon's sources?

Yablonowitz
09-06-2007, 10:09 AM
and what are Salon's sources?

Tom - I'm at this little place called "work" right now and they occasionally request that I do that little thing called "work."

I will investigate further. My main observation from what I've read is that I don't see Iran preparing to occupy Iraq...at least not at this point.

canexplain
09-06-2007, 10:12 AM
BTW, I just read what I wrote last night … sorry I was kind of trashed … I believe everything I wrote, but for grammar, making sense, etc, it was a poor example of expressing my thoughts …. Ron ****

clarky123
09-06-2007, 10:20 AM
Context - Prize for explaining why there are Sunnis and Shia in the first place as that seems to be one important piece of information not discussed here?

TomAz
09-06-2007, 10:21 AM
it's a piece of information. it's not relevant.

clarky123
09-06-2007, 10:24 AM
Oh, it's relevant all right, but if you don't know that's fine carry on.

Yablonowitz
09-06-2007, 10:27 AM
Context - Prize for explaining why there are Sunnis and Shia in the first place as that seems to be one important piece of information not discussed here?

I'll readily admit I don't know the origins of that split. If you can enlighten us with some reliable source of information, I would read it.

TomAz
09-06-2007, 10:34 AM
it had to do with who they saw as the rightful heirs of Mohammed.

and it's irrelevant.

PotVsKtl
09-06-2007, 10:37 AM
It really isn't relevant. Why they hate each other has no bearing on what they are doing about it thousands of years later.

clarky123
09-06-2007, 10:40 AM
SUNNI Vs SHIA
The authenticity of the Qur'anic text is the driver of 99% of disputes. The other 1% is because they just like a fight, like we do on here!

mob roulette
09-06-2007, 10:40 AM
I think Yablonowitz would make a very good ayatollah.

PotVsKtl
09-06-2007, 10:44 AM
You are not a member of the "we" on this board clarky123. You are an unwanted hanger-on.

clarky123
09-06-2007, 10:44 AM
It really isn't relevant. Why they hate each other has no bearing on what they are doing about it thousands of years later.

For fuck sake Pot are you drunk?

J~$$$
09-06-2007, 10:44 AM
A dingleberry.

PotVsKtl
09-06-2007, 10:48 AM
For fuck sake Pot are you drunk?

What do you not understand? What possible beneficial impact would spelling out the motivations behind the Sunni / Shia split have on this particular conversation?

clarky123
09-06-2007, 10:48 AM
You are not a member of the "we" on this board clarky123. You are an unwanted hanger-on.

Good.

clarky123
09-06-2007, 10:53 AM
What do you not understand? What possible beneficial impact would spelling out the motivations behind the Sunni / Shia split have on this particular conversation?

A conversation, may I add, that you have not contributed to untill you saw your opportunity to launch an attack. Now go and complain to the authorities about being short changed or something.

PotVsKtl
09-06-2007, 10:54 AM
That's not an answer.

clarky123
09-06-2007, 10:56 AM
That's not an answer.

Tell you what, the second I think you deserve an answer about anything from me I'll let you know.

PotVsKtl
09-06-2007, 10:58 AM
Tell you what, the second I think you deserve an answer about anything from me I'll let you know.

You'll be soaking in sunflower oil by 7 p.m.

mob roulette
09-06-2007, 10:58 AM
http://blogs.indiewire.com/eug/archives/images/team-america-20040719101833503.jpg

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Yablonowitz everybody. All hail.

RotationSlimWang
09-06-2007, 11:00 AM
Pot v. Skittles would make a good terrorist leader. Yabs, not so much.

theburiedlife
09-06-2007, 11:05 AM
Pot I'm going to go ahead and say that the religious divisions still have an impact on this region, it's really just a boiling over between tensions mounting in increasingly polarized Islamic states. I think Yablo spoke correctly when he said the Ayatollah has the most sway in Iran.

TomAz
09-06-2007, 11:06 AM
What do you not understand? What possible beneficial impact would spelling out the motivations behind the Sunni / Shia split have on this particular conversation?

I really am on the edge of my seat to see if clarky can offer a cogent response to this one.

theburiedlife
09-06-2007, 11:08 AM
I really am on the edge of my seat to see if clarky can offer a cogent response to this one.

He already failed by the time you punched that sentence out.

PotVsKtl
09-06-2007, 11:08 AM
Pot I'm going to go ahead and say that the religious divisions still have an impact on this region, it's really just a boiling over between tensions mounting in increasingly polarized Islamic states. I think Yablo spoke correctly when he said the Ayatollah has the most sway in Iran.

The religious divisions most certainly do have an impact on the region. The reasons for those divisions don't have an impact on the particulars of the current conversation.

TomAz
09-06-2007, 11:09 AM
Pot I'm going to go ahead and say that the religious divisions still have an impact on this region, it's really just a boiling over between tensions mounting in increasingly polarized Islamic states. I think Yablo spoke correctly when he said the Ayatollah has the most sway in Iran.

no one disputes that the existence of religious divisions contribute to tensions

what is in dispute is if the 1000+ year old cause of the dispute is relevant in any way to what's going on today.

J~$$$
09-06-2007, 11:12 AM
hi.

http://rawstory.com//news/2007/Study_US_preparing_massive_military_attack_0828.ht ml

theburiedlife
09-06-2007, 11:19 AM
Oh, well besides the Ayatollah's "divine right" for establishing a theocracy I can't believe these differences play a notable difference. In other words: i agree with your statements.

canexplain
09-06-2007, 11:55 AM
ah i like clarky123, ya gotta love those brits ... cr****

PotVsKtl
09-06-2007, 01:03 PM
No. No, you really don't.

RotationSlimWang
09-06-2007, 01:10 PM
I'm gonna go watch Lawrence of Arabia and come back with some fucking answers, gentlemen. =)

Alchemy
09-06-2007, 02:19 PM
Bin Laden is releasing a new video this week. Brian Eno is producing.

RotationSlimWang
09-08-2007, 02:16 PM
Answers retrieved from Lawrence of Arabia:

1) This shit is fucked.

2) It's easy to make a three hour plus movie when every scene is bookended by two minutes of wide shots of the fucking desert.

3) T.E. Lawrence is no longer relevant. Also, Turks are pricks.

Answers retrieved from actually studying that part of the world:

1) Radical Muslims are less driven by religion than we think. The truth of the matter is that they are driven by the pursuit of resources and respect from the western world.

2) We should turn over management of Iraq to another Muslim country, even Iran, frankly. Iran does not now nor has it ever presented a significant threat, and they would be so appreciative of the nod of the head we'd be giving them that they might chill the fuck out a little bit.

3) The pursuit of nuclear weapons is not the real worry. In fact, the only way this region is ever going to stabilize is if every country has nuclear bombs--mutually assured annihiliation will deliver peace, but just Israel having them will not.

clarky123
09-08-2007, 02:35 PM
Precis please - but well done?
It's not a nuclear issue it never was. This, I think (along with many others) is a war for Oil.
Sooner we understand that, its okay. If George can't get his Christian views over (this is important remember) it becomes a religious issue. America wins - fuck them, no one gets it.

RotationSlimWang
09-08-2007, 02:43 PM
No, it's not a nuclear issue, but that is the justification they're giving, hence the need to dispose of that side of the argument. It's not about being Christian either--it's about power, as all conflicts are.

clarky123
09-08-2007, 02:47 PM
I agree. great. This could run this thread. However, I'm not taking any more shit on it untill people have their facts clear.

RotationSlimWang
09-08-2007, 03:03 PM
These are hardly facts, man. It's all theory.

malcolmjamalawesome
09-08-2007, 03:30 PM
Here's a theory: MY BALLS ARE HUGE.

RotationSlimWang
09-08-2007, 03:31 PM
That's purely hypothetical, Malcolm. They didn't feel that big the time you dropped them on my neck.

Well, they didn't.

malcolmjamalawesome
09-08-2007, 03:33 PM
To be sure, I need a control group.

theburiedlife
09-09-2007, 11:02 AM
Precis please - but well done?
It's not a nuclear issue it never was. This, I think (along with many others) is a war for Oil.
Sooner we understand that, its okay. If George can't get his Christian views over (this is important remember) it becomes a religious issue. America wins - fuck them, no one gets it.

It's not a war for oil, silly.

It's our attempt to set up a permanent foothold in the middle east. Our former pillars of support came from Iran and Saudi Arabia, but when the Shah of Iran was ousted and the Saudi's gave very restrictive access to our military bases, we needed to find a new region to place a large army in to have control over vested American interests in that region, not only Oil. By this time we have implemented 4 permanent bases in Iraq, totaling out foreign base count to 737 .

Believe me, I think it's as fucked as much as the next guy. But before blurting out the first thing that comes to mind in that blob of flesh you call a head, please, try and put some thought into it.

canexplain
09-12-2007, 06:37 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/09/12/russia.parliament.ap/index.html

oh here are some new kids for bush to play with ... isnt it grande ... cr****

RotationSlimWang
09-12-2007, 07:37 AM
It's not a war for oil, silly.

It's our attempt to set up a permanent foothold in the middle east. Our former pillars of support came from Iran and Saudi Arabia, but when the Shah of Iran was ousted and the Saudi's gave very restrictive access to our military bases, we needed to find a new region to place a large army in to have control over vested American interests in that region, not only Oil. By this time we have implemented 4 permanent bases in Iraq, totaling out foreign base count to 737 .

Believe me, I think it's as fucked as much as the next guy. But before blurting out the first thing that comes to mind in that blob of flesh you call a head, please, try and put some thought into it.

Homie, the U.S. was backing The Islamic Revolution even though publicly we maintained we supported the monarchy. Read up on it--we didn't not send the Shah any help for months on end for no reason.

Also, why do we need a foothold in the middle east? What the fuck do you think we made Israel for? We backed the creation of a whole new nation in trade for the fact that the whole populous would serve as a highly trained military installation against the Muslim world. There's no security threat to us in that part of the world, so what is it that these men are so concerned with having an occupying military presence for?

It's not all about oil, no. But I'd like you to explain what the fuck our interests in that region could be besides oil--nothing of any value comes out of there. It's a fucking desert.

canexplain
09-12-2007, 08:30 AM
It's a fucking desert


so is coachella lol ... cr****

RotationSlimWang
09-12-2007, 08:40 AM
And the only time anyone tries to invade that valley is when they throw the best music festival in the world--otherwise I'd sure as fuck stay away.

J~$$$
09-12-2007, 08:43 AM
Prime real estate.

betao
09-12-2007, 08:44 AM
black eyed peas could headline the middle east festival. no wait, then the middle east would hate america even more.

damnit.

canexplain
09-12-2007, 09:01 AM
Prime real estate.

J actually have you seen where the price of houses are going down in some places really badly ... vegas, and i think so kali are being hit harder then most ... idiots anyway for building a city in the middle of a desert .. one day we arent going to give them any more water, and then the water wars will start ... cr****

J~$$$
09-12-2007, 09:06 AM
I wish I owned senior water rights here in Colorado. Even jr. water rights. That shit is going to be worth more than oil and gold combined.

canexplain
09-12-2007, 10:00 AM
I wish I owned senior water rights here in Colorado. Even jr. water rights. That shit is going to be worth more than oil and gold combined.

yep, ya cant drink oil or eat gold .... it is going to be ugly ... hope it is so far in the future i dont have to see it, but my guess is within 25 years .... phoenix, and vegas will wilt away, then the hords of so kali people will try to invade our mnts for the snow and water and we will just have to hold them back with giant loud speakers playing bht, the dead, or all those jammy bands some of us here in co like ... cr****

RotationSlimWang
09-12-2007, 10:04 AM
C'mon, Ron, be serious here. Do you really think you're going to be capable of properly defending your land and water when you see an army of 10,000 women and men who all look EXACTLY like Paris Hilton run screaming from LA all the way to your house?

You'll be far too stunned with their glamour and exposed labias to even lift your gun.

canexplain
09-12-2007, 10:10 AM
C'mon, Ron, be serious here. Do you really think you're going to be capable of properly defending your land and water when you see an army of 10,000 women and men who all look EXACTLY like Paris Hilton run screaming from LA all the way to your house?

You'll be far too stunned with their glamour and exposed labias to even lift your gun.

well if the men look like paris then i am heading east to kansas :) paris is wacko but alright in my book ... paris is my middle name so i have to have some compassion for her cr****

RotationSlimWang
09-12-2007, 10:11 AM
Would you like to show us your labia? C'mon, I know you're just dying. It's okay.

J~$$$
09-12-2007, 12:20 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/country_profiles/1102477.stm

canexplain
09-12-2007, 12:25 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/country_profiles/1102477.stm
i am glad i am here and not in russia or europe right now .... politicians grrrrr ... cr****

J~$$$
09-12-2007, 12:30 PM
http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=df7617fc-4f3a-4d09-be33-8a481eef4aa6&&Headline=Russia+tests+%e2%80%98Father+of+all+bombs %e2%80%99

canexplain
09-12-2007, 12:44 PM
http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=df7617fc-4f3a-4d09-be33-8a481eef4aa6&&Headline=Russia+tests+%e2%80%98Father+of+all+bombs %e2%80%99

my favorite part of the article "But, he added, "it is environmentally friendly" now i am not so worried :( hey you gonna demonstrate with me come next summer and the dnc ... if things dont change , i am actually taking vacation because i feel they are going to throw my butt in jail ... cr****

J~$$$
09-12-2007, 12:44 PM
Yeah im going to jail.

canexplain
09-12-2007, 01:14 PM
Yeah im going to jail.

will you protect me from all those bad gang people lol .. we should send our girls in to clear out the place before they send us lol ... cr****

RotationSlimWang
09-12-2007, 01:16 PM
A little birdie told me something of consequence on the global scale might be going down on 9/14. Not sure what, let's see what plays out, and if nothing happens I don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

J~$$$
09-12-2007, 01:16 PM
My lady is workin it from the inside shes volunteering.

canexplain
09-12-2007, 01:23 PM
My lady is workin it from the inside shes volunteering.

i thought about that srsly, but i am getting so negative , i think i would be a hinderence .... i am going for the gold this time .... since it didnt work 40 years ago in chi town, hey i am home, at least i wouldnt have far to go back home after the tear gas, rubber bullets, and all of the things that are bound to happen ... i have to get my damn operation first so i dont keel over dead during the run down lodo with the cops after us lol .. cr****

J~$$$
09-12-2007, 01:27 PM
They are not going let us even get close to downtown.

J~$$$
09-12-2007, 01:27 PM
We are going to have to hang out in aurora with the homeless people that they are kicking out of downtown for that week.

canexplain
09-12-2007, 01:34 PM
Justin, ever been to the Marquis here in town …. Okkervil river is there tomorrow … that might be fun but haven’t been to that joint before … cr****

J~$$$
09-12-2007, 01:37 PM
Im thinking of going. 12 bucks you cant beat that.

canexplain
09-12-2007, 01:45 PM
Im thinking of going. 12 bucks you cant beat that.

for sure, if we go, we'll buy you each a beer (they cant be that much lol) ... .... ron ****

Yablonowitz
09-24-2007, 07:11 AM
Like I was saying about Ahmadinejad.....



TEHRAN — When Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was first elected president, he said Iran had more important issues to worry about than how women dress. He even called for allowing women into soccer games, a revolutionary idea for revolutionary Iran.

Today, Iran is experiencing the most severe crackdown on social behavior and dress in years, and women are often barred from smoking in public, let alone attending a stadium event.

Since his inauguration two years ago, Mr. Ahmadinejad has grabbed headlines around the world, and in Iran, for outrageous statements that often have no more likelihood of being put into practice than his plan for women to attend soccer games. He has generated controversy in New York in recent days by asking to visit ground zero — a request that was denied — and his scheduled appearance at Columbia University has drawn protests.

But it is because of his provocative remarks, like denying the Holocaust and calling for Israel to be wiped off the map, that the United States and Europe have never known quite how to handle him. In demonizing Mr. Ahmadinejad, the West has served him well, elevating his status at home and in the region at a time when he is increasingly isolated politically because of his go-it-alone style and ineffective economic policies, according to Iranian politicians, officials and political experts.

Political analysts here say they are surprised at the degree to which the West focuses on their president, saying that it reflects a general misunderstanding of their system.

Unlike in the United States, in Iran the president is not the head of state nor the commander in chief. That status is held by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader, whose role combines civil and religious authority. At the moment, this president’s power comes from two sources, they say: the unqualified support of the supreme leader, and the international condemnation he manages to generate when he speaks up.

“The United States pays too much attention to Ahmadinejad,” said an Iranian political scientist who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. “He is not that consequential.”

That is not to say that Mr. Ahmadinejad is insignificant. He controls the mechanics of civil government, much the way a prime minister does in a state like Egypt, where the real power rests with the president. He manages the budget and has put like-minded people in positions around the country, from provincial governors to prosecutors. His base of support is the Basiji militia and elements of the Revolutionary Guards.

But Mr. Ahmadinejad has not shown the same political acumen at home as he has in riling the West. Two of his ministers have quit, criticizing his stewardship of the state. The head of the central bank resigned. The chief judge criticized him for his management of the government. His promise to root out corruption and redistribute oil wealth has run up against entrenched interests.

Even a small bloc of members of Parliament that once aligned with Mr. Ahmadinejad has largely given up, officials said. “Maybe it comes as a surprise to you that I voted for him,” said Emad Afrough, a conservative member of Parliament. “I liked the slogans demanding justice.”

But he added: “You cannot govern the country on a personal basis. You have to use public knowledge and consultation.”

Rather than focusing so much attention on the president, the West needs to learn that in Iran, what matters is ideology — Islamic revolutionary ideology, according to politicians and political analysts here. Nearly 30 years after the shah fell in a popular revolt, Iran’s supreme leader also holds title of guardian of the revolution.

Mr. Ahmadinejad’s power stems not from his office per se, but from the refusal of his patron, Ayatollah Khamenei, and some hard-line leaders, to move beyond Iran’s revolutionary identity, which makes full relations with the West impossible. There are plenty of conservatives and hard-liners who take a more pragmatic view, wanting to retain “revolutionary values” while integrating Iran with the world, at least economically. But they are not driving the agenda these days, and while that could change, it will not be the president who makes that call.

“Iran has never been interested in reaching an accommodation with the United States,” the Iranian political scientist said. “It cannot reach an accommodation as long as it retains the current structure.”

Another important factor restricts Mr. Ahmadinejad’s hand: while ideology defines the state, the revolution has allowed a particular class to grow wealthy and powerful.

When Mr. Ahmadinejad was first elected, it appeared that Iran’s hard-liners had a monopoly on all the levers of power. But today it is clear that Mr. Ahmadinejad is not a hard-liner in the traditional sense. His talk of economic justice and a redistribution of wealth, for example, ran into a wall of existing vested interests, including powerful clergy members and military leaders.

“Ahmadinejad is a phenomenon,” said Mohammad Ali Abtahi, a former vice president under the more moderate administration of Mohammad Khatami. “On a religious level he is much more of a hard-liner than the traditional hard-liners. But on a political level, he does not have the support of the hard-liners.”

In the long run, political analysts here say, a desire to preserve those vested interests will drive Iran’s agenda. That means that the allegiance of the political elite is to the system, not a particular president. If this president were ever perceived as outlasting his usefulness, he would probably take his place in history beside other presidents who failed to change the orientation of the system.

Iranians will go to the polls in less than two years to select a president. There are so many pressures on the electoral system here, few people expect an honest race. The Guardian Council, for example, controlled by hard-liners, must approve all candidates.

But whether Mr. Ahmadinejad wins or loses, there is no sense here in Iran that the outcome will have any impact on the fundamentals of Iran’s relations with the world or the government’s relation to its own society.

“The situation will get worse and worse,” said Saeed Leylaz, an economist and former government official. “We are moving to a point where no internal force can change things.”

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 07:40 AM
Can you please site a source that sounds more like opinion.

clarky123
09-24-2007, 07:45 AM
cite you moron!

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 07:49 AM
Thanks Clarky how long were you waiting for that?

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 07:49 AM
Im in the same boat as Delta with the fan boys.

RotationSlimWang
09-24-2007, 08:36 AM
Sigh. God I wish that our news organizations would make any effort to actually explain why things are the way they are in that part of the world instead of just making it sound like the entire Muslim world likes being led by their religious leaders because the Koran preaches violence, which it doesn't--at least not any more than any other of the non-Eastern religions.

The Islamic world has ALWAYS been devoted to their faith and faith leaders first. The Koran--actually, I'm sorry, I get in the habit of Americanizing it--Qu'ran (or rather the series of disciples [to use the Christian equivalent term] who refined and expounded on Muhammad's teachings to create a system of polices and laws for Muslims to live by) dealt with the concept of government by declaring it a necessary evil, but one that is meant to be impotent.

For all these centuries it was an accepted part of Muslim life that government was meant to be endured but never considered meaningful--hence the long-standing tradition of puppet governments who could only act in ways that the Shah (in older times there were different names and structures for the religious authority but Shah is familiar to us so I'll keep using it) approved of. It has nothing to do with the recent fundamentalist movement.

In the interest of shorter posts, I'll continue this diatribe in a conclusion to follow immediately...

RotationSlimWang
09-24-2007, 08:52 AM
This bullshit about Islam being a violent religion is such a fucking crock, it annoys me so much. The reason they ended up the way they are now is specifically because they wanted NOTHING to do with the rest of the world for so long. With the exception of the Ottoman Empire, the Islamic world was one of the very least aggressive societies on Earth for several centuries up until the shock of post-WWII globalization hit them.

The sudden realization that they were drastically outmatched by the West instigated a rash of catch-up throughout the middle east. They tried in many cases to get in on this new fad of nationalism and adopt Western ways to get up to speed, but they were so far behind that no amount of democracy, western schooling, and in some cases a never-before-seen reversal of this power relationship between government and Islamic authority could prepare them for the humiliation of Isreal. Not just our completely unjust installation of a nation in the middle of their occupied lands, but the two wars that utterly embarassed their once great society destroyed this new way of thought, and they reverted to Islamic rule out of fear that it was the rejection of Allah that had brought this upon them.

My point being: the crux of this entire issue doesn't really have to do with religion, it has to do with respect. The Islamic world has felt ashamed and slighted ever since we installed that military powerhouse Israel in their backyard. To be a successful Islamic leader you practically HAVE to preach hatred of the West, because we have shown them nothing but. We have repeatedly meddled in their affairs, encouraged them to kill each other when we weren't killing them ourselves, and tried to engineer their leadership to our own ends. And now we're about to launch another unjust war against Iran (yes, it is happening, it's not even rumor if you read between the lines) on the same grounds that proved to be false last time. You know what will fix our problem with the middle east? Appeasement. Yes, I fucking said it.

Show them some respect. Make them feel a bit better about being the only place in the world less backwards-assed than Africa. Recognize their leaders, stop spreading fear and mistrust of them, and grant them enough creedence to make them look good to their populous and there will be no need nor anything to gain for them to spout inflammatory rhetoric.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 08:55 AM
When they accept my Capitalism. I will respect their religion. PS this isnt about religion.

RotationSlimWang
09-24-2007, 08:57 AM
When they accept my Capitalism. I will respect their religion. PS this isnt about religion.

I dunnae get this. Jokey joke?

algunz
09-24-2007, 08:59 AM
I totally agree with your historical perspective, but to say that showing them a little respect would pacify them seems to demean them even further.

RotationSlimWang
09-24-2007, 09:12 AM
I totally agree with your historical perspective, but to say that showing them a little respect would pacify them seems to demean them even further.

Well how do you propose we make amends for decades of disrespect? In other words... huh?

algunz
09-24-2007, 09:29 AM
I don't think it's that simple. It's like saying if you beat a child for years upon years and one day you give him a hug all is forgiven. There are too many layers to this to say if you just show them respect all is good. How 'bout get our troops out of there, how 'bout stop threatening war, how 'bout create a healthier trade relationship without us as the controlling factor?

I know, I know . . . you're gonna say this all stems from "respect."

Yablonowitz
09-24-2007, 09:35 AM
Can you please site a source that sounds more like opinion.

New York Times, brother J.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/world/middleeast/24iran.html?hp

RotationSlimWang
09-24-2007, 09:36 AM
I don't think it's that simple. It's like saying if you beat a child for years upon years and one day you give him a hug all is forgiven. There are too many layers to this to say if you just show them respect all is good. How 'bout get our troops out of there, how 'bout stop threatening war, how 'bout create a healthier trade relationship without us as the controlling factor?

I know, I know . . . you're gonna say this all stems from "respect."

Um, yeah, I am. If you knew that, as I would think anyone with a high-school teacher's reading comprehension ability would have gleaned from what I wrote, then why did you just write all that as if you didn't know that would be an integral part?

Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot--you teach junior high.

algunz
09-24-2007, 09:47 AM
But those things I mentioned are not necessarily due only to respect. It's called foreign policy. Yes, respect should be a part of that, but logic and economics are also integral. Respect is not the only piece of the puzzle. As I said, it's not that simple. For too many years we have approached the Middle East as if they were easily manipulated & controlled, and look where it has gotten us. They are tired of being treated like junior high school kids.

RotationSlimWang
09-24-2007, 09:49 AM
Hah, wow, you guys gotta check this out if you haven't heard of it/read it already. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad%27s_letter_to_George_W._Bush_% 288_May_2006%29

This is Ahmadinejad's letter to Bush from 2006. It's too long to quote, but really, really take a look at that. Just skim if you have to. The man sounds more intelligent, reasonable, peaceful, and eloquent than any English-speaking person I've ever heard speak on these matters. I can't believe we're going to attack these people.

RotationSlimWang
09-24-2007, 09:52 AM
But those things I mentioned are not necessarily due only to respect. It's called foreign policy. Yes, respect should be a part of that, but logic and economics are also integral. Respect is not the only piece of the puzzle. As I said, it's not that simple. For too many years we have approached the Middle East as if they were easily manipulated & controlled, and look where it has gotten us. They are tired of being treated like junior high school kids.

...... jesus, fucking, jesus..... Gunz, what the hell? Seriously, what the hell? Are you just fucking with me or something? Did you read my whole post or just the word "respect?" All you're doing is saying that we made the same exact mistakes that I said we made and acting like you're disagreeing with me. Cut it the fuck out, man, it's driving me nuts. Please.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 09:54 AM
Hah, wow, you guys gotta check this out if you haven't heard of it/read it already. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad%27s_letter_to_George_W._Bush_% 288_May_2006%29

This is Ahmadinejad's letter to Bush from 2006. It's too long to quote, but really, really take a look at that. Just skim if you have to. The man sounds more intelligent, reasonable, peaceful, and eloquent than any English-speaking person I've ever heard speak on these matters. I can't believe we're going to attack these people.

Its tact, this guy wants war just as bad as Bush does.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 09:58 AM
We entered into a conflict that has been going on for hundreds of years. They are not tired of shit. On paper this war looked fantastic, liberate the people. Provide the women with equality because the women teach the children in a peaceful manner. The kids are the ones dying because they don't know any better. Muslims push fear and intolerance just as much as any other religion and government.

DeltaSigChi4
09-24-2007, 10:00 AM
Yes, and when was the last time the "moslems" started a war, you dumb fuck. It's not the moslems intent on bringing war to every corner of the earth for mere profit purposes. Cunt.

E

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 10:08 AM
My religion doesnt have a sixth pillar of hostility.

algunz
09-24-2007, 10:09 AM
"How much longer can the world tolerate this situation? Where will this trend lead the world? How long must the people of the world pay for the incorrect decisions of some rulers? How much longer will the specter of insecurity – raised from the stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction – hunt the people of the world? How much longer will the blood of the innocent men, women and children be spilled on the streets, and people’s houses destroyed over their heads? Are you pleased with the current condition of the world? Do you think present policies can continue? If billions of dollars spent on security, military campaigns and troop movement were instead spent on investment and assistance for poor countries, promotion of health, combating different diseases, education and improvement of mental and physical fitness, assistance to the victims of natural disasters, creation of employment opportunities and production, development projects and poverty alleviation, establishment of peace, mediation between disputing states, and extinguishing the flames of racial, ethnic and other conflicts, where would the world be today? Would not your government and people be justifiably proud? Would not your administration’s political and economic standing have been stronger? And I am most sorry to say, would there have been an ever increasing global hatred of the American government?"

-Ahmadinejad

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 10:12 AM
Why are you quoting this fucking douche bag? He doesn't even provide this within his own country.

algunz
09-24-2007, 10:14 AM
...... jesus, fucking, jesus..... Gunz, what the hell? Seriously, what the hell? Are you just fucking with me or something? Did you read my whole post or just the word "respect?" All you're doing is saying that we made the same exact mistakes that I said we made and acting like you're disagreeing with me. Cut it the fuck out, man, it's driving me nuts. Please.

"My point being: the crux of this entire issue doesn't really have to do with religion, it has to do with respect." RSW

I'm reacting to your main point. This issue can & should no longer be simplified. Sorry for frustrating you, Am I getting you horny? Apparently, that's all I care about when it comes to you. :winkiss

algunz
09-24-2007, 10:15 AM
Why are you quoting this fucking douche bag? He doesn't even provide this within his own country.

Because it is interesting

RotationSlimWang
09-24-2007, 10:16 AM
We entered into a conflict that has been going on for hundreds of years. They are not tired of shit. On paper this war looked fantastic, liberate the people. Provide the women with equality because the women teach the children in a peaceful manner. The kids are the ones dying because they don't know any better. Muslims push fear and intolerance just as much as any other religion and government.

You people fucking amaze me. I have to stop coming here, seriously. I can't believe I hear so many people advocating bombing Iran just randomly out in the world. Swallowing it all yet again.

What conflict did we enter into that's been going on for hundreds of years, exactly? Who have they been pushing fear and intolerance on except themselves, if you choose to define their religious practices as that in your beautifully ethnocentric way.

And you really think that Iran wants to go to war with us? How? Why? For what possible reason? So that their country can be destroyed? It's like you fucking people forget that these leaders are still people trying to maintain their position within their own nation. Why would he want a war that would certainly result in him being ousted from power?

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 10:17 AM
Because its interesting.......? Thats what I told my teachers in 7th grade when I had no clue what I was talking about.

algunz
09-24-2007, 10:20 AM
Maybe that's where I got it from then.

It's interesting what fucking hypocrites we ALL can be.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 10:27 AM
You people fucking amaze me. I have to stop coming here, seriously. I can't believe I hear so many people advocating bombing Iran just randomly out in the world. Swallowing it all yet again.

What conflict did we enter into that's been going on for hundreds of years, exactly? Who have they been pushing fear and intolerance on except themselves, if you choose to define their religious practices as that in your beautifully ethnocentric way.

And you really think that Iran wants to go to war with us? How? Why? For what possible reason? So that their country can be destroyed? It's like you fucking people forget that these leaders are still people trying to maintain their position within their own nation. Why would he want a war that would certainly result in him being ousted from power?

Where did I advocate bombing Iran? They go around blowing themselves up for fun huh?

Yes,they have been pushing fear and intolerance on their own people. Thats what religion does it helps keep the weak enslaved. Ahmadinejad is wartime president just as Bush. He threatens Israel every chance he gets. Peaceful is he. He wont be ousted for war. Was our president?

RotationSlimWang
09-24-2007, 10:27 AM
"My point being: the crux of this entire issue doesn't really have to do with religion, it has to do with respect." RSW

I'm reacting to your main point. This issue can & should no longer be simplified. Sorry for frustrating you, Am I getting you horny? Apparently, that's all I care about when it comes to you. :winkiss

No honey, you're the one that gets horny, not me.
we have shown them nothing but. We have repeatedly meddled in their affairs, encouraged them to kill each other when we weren't killing them ourselves, and tried to engineer their leadership to our own ends
Show them some respect. Make them feel a bit better about being the only place in the world less backwards-assed than Africa. Recognize their leaders, stop spreading fear and mistrust of them, and grant them enough creedence to make them look good to their populous and there will be no need nor anything to gain for them to spout inflammatory rhetoric.
Way to select exactly one sentence of my posts and thrust your own interpretation upon what "respect" refers to, ignoring all the rest of that and then acting like you were telling me something I didn't realize. What the fuck did you think "respect" meant, anyway? Get Kanye to give them a shout-out on his next album?

And the issue IS simple, you dumb fucking cunt. All that's required is treating them like we do any other country in the civilized world. THAT would be what respect means. And before you go and list all your brilliant and original points--by which I mean you typing out things that are obviously encompassed by my sentiment or things I explicitly stated like waging war on them and secretly manipulating their governments--please take a step back and try to remember that (a) I'm not a fucking idiot, (b) I know a lot more about this than you, and (c) you make your living making sure kids do the busywork you assigned them.

RotationSlimWang
09-24-2007, 10:36 AM
Where did I advocate bombing Iran? They go around blowing themselves up for fun huh?

Yes,they have been pushing fear and intolerance on their own people. Thats what religion does it helps keep the weak enslaved. Ahmadinejad is wartime president just as Bush. He threatens Israel every chance he gets. Peaceful is he. He wont be ousted for war. Was our president?

I wasn't referring to you with the bombing, that was commentary about people "out in the world" I believe. You are not in the world. Or reality.

They push fear and intolerance on their own people... hmm... well first, that ain't your fucking business. Or our business. And CERTAINLY not our military's business. It is their nation, they have the right to be governed however they like. I don't think you appreciate the fact that many of these people actually do believe that the "intolerance" you perceive is the way their faith dictates they must live to be in accordance with God's wishes. If you want to go overthrow their religion in the name of ending intolerance, I think you might be confused about who's being intolerant.

Threatening war does not make you a wartime president. Waging war makes you a wartime president. You know, that thing we do. Iran hasn't waged war on shit in a couple decades. Making empty threats against Israel--again, empty because if they tried anything they know they would be literally ANNIHILATED--is somewhat understandable considering that Israel continues to lie about having nuclear weapons and is the second largest military force in the world right in their backyard.

And I wasn't saying his people were going to oust him for going to war, you fucking idiot. WE would oust him when WE invade their country. You know, like we just did twice in a row? Remember those mistakes? And here you are, all gung ho to make another one. Fucking unbelievable...

algunz
09-24-2007, 10:38 AM
All right limp dick, If you want to generalize yet another global issue and act as if you've solved it with a rambling of cock much like the shithead that got tased, then you have successfully made your point. I was not disagreeing with you shit for brains, I was simply clarifying that it is NOT that simple and the idea that "All that's required is treating them like we do any other country in the civilized world" is scary, and we are then even more fucked than we are now. So deep breaths, how 'bout you take a step back and try to remember that (a) You're not a fucking idiot, so stop trying so hard to prove otherwise, (b) We all should no more about this than we think we do, and (c) y'all need to get off the fucking teacher bullshit - I'm so sorry that you had shitty teacher's, but I can't apologize for the whole profession. So, here's another bowl.

TomAz
09-24-2007, 10:41 AM
do they not teach about the Iranian Hostage Crisis in school?

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 10:52 AM
Drugs are okay because I have never been addicted to them.

RotationSlimWang
09-24-2007, 11:13 AM
All right limp dick, If you want to generalize yet another global issue and act as if you've solved it with a rambling of cock much like the shithead that got tased, then you have successfully made your point. I was not disagreeing with you shit for brains, I was simply clarifying that it is NOT that simple and the idea that "All that's required is treating them like we do any other country in the civilized world" is scary, and we are then even more fucked than we are now. So deep breaths, how 'bout you take a step back and try to remember that (a) You're not a fucking idiot, so stop trying so hard to prove otherwise, (b) We all should no more about this than we think we do, and (c) y'all need to get off the fucking teacher bullshit - I'm so sorry that you had shitty teacher's, but I can't apologize for the whole profession. So, here's another bowl.

Answers are usually a lot simpler than people make them out to be. There is nothing scary about treating them like we do other civilized countries--they have every fucking right in the world to be treated as such, and it is failing to do that that has created this situation. I don't understand how you can't see that given that the points you were making before are pretty much exactly that.

do they not teach about the Iranian Hostage Crisis in school?Are you saying that's an act of war? Or somehow a reflection upon the current government of Iran? I love how people pull up these acts of terrorism like they're evidence of the massive threat these people present. I'm just taking a guess, but I think even counting 9/11 if you totaled up all the deaths from every act of terrorism done supposedly in the name of Islam (really in the name of an oppressed part of the world) it wouldn't even be 4000. That's not an act of war. That's one day of nation building.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 11:15 AM
Im going to blow myself up in the name of ARCADE FIRE!!!!!!!

algunz
09-24-2007, 11:21 AM
ROAR, LIONS, ROAR
WAKE THE ECHO OF THE HUDSON VALLEY

Demonstrators Protest Ahmadinejad Speech at Columbia (Update3)
By Janine Zacharia and Henry Goldman

Sept. 24 (Bloomberg) -- Protesters at Columbia University demonstrated against a speech by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad scheduled for this afternoon.

At least two rallies sponsored by campus groups -- one on campus, the other near Columbia's entrance on Manhattan's Upper West Side -- are scheduled for today. About 4,000 people are on the sidewalks of Broadway between 116th and 117th Street. Police declined to estimate the size of the crowd.

``I think it is disgusting that Columbia is having this Haman, this Hitler, speak here,'' said Harv Hilowitz, referring to an ancient Persian official who ordered the killing of Jews and to Adolf Hitler, who led Germany during the mass murder of Jews during World War II.

Hilowitz, a graduate of Columbia's Teacher's College who traveled two hours from Kingston, New York, to protest outside Columbia, said, while waving an Israeli flag, that freedom of speech shouldn't be afforded to ``dictators'' like Ahmadinejad.

Hundreds of students from Rutgers University in New Jersey, and New York's Brooklyn College and Queens College are taking organized buses to the demonstrations, said Jennifer Cogan, a rally organizer from an off-campus, pro-Israel organization.

Ahmadinejad, speaking shortly before his Columbia appearance, blamed the controversy on ``some pro-government members of the press'' who ``provoked'' the protests. He said the calls to prevent him from speaking conflicted with U.S. principles of free speech.

`Another Point of View'

``Why do some people not want to hear another point of view?'' he said through an interpreter to reporters in Washington via a video link. ``I'm surprised that in a place where they claim they have freedom of information they are trying to prevent people from talking.''

Ahmadinejad also denied that his country wished to dominate Iraq or other Middle Eastern states and criticized the U.S. presence there.

``We think that regional countries themselves can know how to run the affairs of the region best,'' he said. ``They don't need a guardian from outside to tell them how to do it.''

Columbia has faced sharp criticism since it announced last week that it had invited Ahmadinejad, who is in New York for the United Nations General Assembly meetings.

Columbia President Lee Bollinger, defending the university's decision to ask Ahmadinejad, who has questioned the Holocaust and called for Israel's destruction, said the Iranian leader must take questions and accept ``sharp challenges'' as a condition of speaking at the university.

`Conditions'

``We have insisted that a number of conditions be met,'' Bollinger said in a statement last week. The university chief said he would challenge Ahmadinejad on issues such as the Iranian leader's denial of the Holocaust, his vow to destroy Israel, support for terrorism and nuclear ambitions.

Not everyone was disappointed in Columbia's decision to invite the Iranian president. Students who snagged the some 500 tickets for the speech started lining up at least four hours early.

``I'm really proud of the school's decision to host him,'' said Michael Clyne, who is studying for a master's degree in international affairs at Columbia.

``The students, by and large, want the forum here. The rest of the country doesn't go to school at a university. They're perceiving this as a platform for him to simply feed us propaganda, but we're too intelligent for that,'' Clyne said.

Address the UN

Ahmadinejad, 50, is scheduled to address leaders from the UN's 192 members tomorrow.

President George W. Bush and his military commanders have accused Iran of supplying training and weaponry to rebels in neighboring Iraq who are attacking U.S. troops. The administration also accuses Iran of using its nuclear energy program as a cover for making bombs and has refused to rule out military strikes against the Islamic Republic.

Ahmadinejad, who was elected in 2005, accuses the U.S. of seeking to dominate the Middle East. Under his presidency, Iran has forged ahead with its nuclear activities in the face of two sets of UN sanctions imposed since December, saying its atomic program is to generate power.

The New York Police Department last week rejected a request by Ahmadinejad to visit the lower Manhattan site where al-Qaeda terrorists destroyed the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. The president sought to lay a wreath at Ground Zero.

Bollinger Statement

Bollinger said in his statement, posted on the university's Web site, that Columbia's annual World Leaders Forum sometimes includes ``contact with beliefs many, most or even all of us will find offensive or even odious.'' Practicing freedom of speech means ``we do not honor the dishonorable when we open the public forum to their voices.''

A cluster of Iranian-Americans demonstrated outside the university today holding Iranian flags.

``There is no freedom of speech in Iran,'' said Ahmad Mazahery, a 55-year-old, Iranian-American civil engineer who drove from Washington, D.C., to protest. ``Inviting such a person is a disgrace to this university.''

Charles Jacobs, president of the Boston-based David Project, a pro-Israel group that opposes Ahmadinejad's Columbia appearance, said, ``It might be a learning experience, but it's a much bigger opportunity for'' Ahmadinejad. ``He's going to give these students the false impression that talk, exchange of ideas, is enough to stop him,'' said Jacobs.

State lawmakers threatened to withhold funding from Columbia over this year's invitation to Ahmadinejad, saying it legitimizes him and what they called the terrorist-sponsoring dictatorship in Iran, the New York Sun reported today.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 11:23 AM
Harv Hilowitz. awesome.

I would love to hear another point of view. Just not from this guy. Ahmadinejad is just as smug as Chavez. But Randy loves him so I guess its all good.

canexplain
09-24-2007, 11:26 AM
i am not saying it was a setup, but it looks like that iran dude sort of got set up at columbia :) the president of columbia said he was a ruthless dictator, and said something about his intellect, and the iran dude said the remarks were insults ... and that was just the introductions lol .. havent seen how the rest of it went yet .... canx**

algunz
09-24-2007, 11:30 AM
Answers are usually a lot simpler than people make them out to be. There is nothing scary about treating them like we do other civilized countries--they have every fucking right in the world to be treated as such, and it is failing to do that that has created this situation. I don't understand how you can't see that given that the points you were making before are pretty much exactly that.


It's not the treating them like any other civilized country that's the scary part or even the simple part. It's the "that's all we need to do to make things right" that's scary. Every country is unique and every method of "dealing" with them should be different. (And yes there are hundreds of years of upheaval and mistreatment that we in the modern world are having to address when we approach the Middle East) They deserve our respect and an opportunity to be treated like decent human beings, but when they are being lead or mislead by leaders such as Ahmadenijad then we, at the base, can NOT treat them like any other country. We do not treat Saudi Arabia the same way we do France. We do not treat Sudan like we do Israel. What we need to do is reevaluate our specific Foreign Policy with Iran, and learn how to deal logically with Ahmadenijad so that all people involved gain the most positive outcome. Unfortunately, if I really thought that was possible, then I have definitely been hitting the pipe too much.

Yablonowitz
09-24-2007, 11:39 AM
All this attention on a guy who doesn't have ANY control over the foreign policy of Iran.

It's a waste of time to devote any energy at all on this. It's a fucking dog and pony show and everyone who goes out and protests or makes a big stink so this shit hits the news is making an insignificant figurehead look like a genuine threat to our national security.

They should never have invited him to speak in the first place...not because of the stupid shit he's said, but because of the meaning people give it and him.


If we just spent 1/8th of the press on, say, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as we do on things like this, we might actually get some fucking context and, I don't know if it's possible, but a certain sense of the complicated mess that is the Middle East.

It's just demonize, demonize, demonize. Simplify, polarize, bomb, protest, get bombed back, demonize, simplify, polarize....ad infinitum.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 11:44 AM
``There is no freedom of speech in Iran,'' said Ahmad Mazahery, a 55-year-old, Iranian-American civil engineer who drove from Washington, D.C., to protest. `Inviting such a person is a disgrace to this university.''

Every Iranian American I know shares this sentiment. He has done nothing good for his country or his people.

RotationSlimWang
09-24-2007, 11:47 AM
Christ, Gunz. Goddammit. I can't even do this anymore. Read into what I say a little bit, would you, please? Yes, I wasn't saying we need to do exactly to Iran what we do to Canada, or France, or Russia, or Sri Lanka. Good point. You nailed me there. No way you could have interpreted my meaning as anything else.

Not letting the man speak sounds like fear and intolerance to me. I love how this guy is evil for saying that Israel had no business being built over the Palestineans (which killed tens of thousands, by the way, if you want to talk about terrorism and deaths and the such), but all the sandy civilians who died under our hands are just casualties of war and not victims of terrorism on a scale so large it approaches genocide except we weren't trying to kill ALL of them. So we're okay.

I can't do this anymore. I'm out of this thread for the day.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 11:48 AM
Why do you keep trying to put words in peoples mouth?

TomAz
09-24-2007, 12:01 PM
Randy is one of those people who is so sure of his point of view that, in his mind, the only reason everyone else doesn't share it is some combination of the their stupidity and having been brainwashed. He will scream at us til he's blue in the face and still wonder why we don't see it his way.

Someone once said that the sign of intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in one's head at the same time and still retain the ability to function.

Yablonowitz
09-24-2007, 12:03 PM
Randy is one of those people who are so sure of his point of view that, in his mind, the only reason everyone else doesn't share it is some combination of the their stupidity or having been brainwashed.

I told tom to say that. He's easy.

TomAz
09-24-2007, 12:04 PM
May I have my cookie now, master?

algunz
09-24-2007, 12:06 PM
Someone once said that the sign of intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in one's head at the same time and still retain the ability to function.


Randy can barely hold his dick in his hand.

Yablonowitz
09-24-2007, 12:08 PM
May I have my cookie now, master?

After you repeat the following equation properly:

Challengers > The Stage Names



Thanks.

algunz
09-24-2007, 12:11 PM
All this attention on a guy who doesn't have ANY control over the foreign policy of Iran.

It's a waste of time to devote any energy at all on this. It's a fucking dog and pony show and everyone who goes out and protests or makes a big stink so this shit hits the news is making an insignificant figurehead look like a genuine threat to our national security.

They should never have invited him to speak in the first place...not because of the stupid shit he's said, but because of the meaning people give it and him.


Columbia has a long history of inviting assholes(Jim Gilchrist), idiots (Farrakahn), and the disliked (Ahmadenijad). Mainly to inspire discussion amongst the student body and to keep our feet grounded in our tradition of protest. The administration & staff embrace the controversy.

canexplain
09-24-2007, 12:13 PM
I was thinking about how now Rage Pattoon can drink in Canada since he is 19 .. here it is 21 ... thus ...

Age To Drink In Iran > When Hell Freezes Over


canx**

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 12:18 PM
Alcohol is everywhere in Iran. People drink up a storm, men and women dance and party like crazy but it is done in the privacy, hidden within their homes. Thats the shitty part about it. I have even seen Iran Islamic police going against the grain in their own homes. The people want change, but there is still an overwhelming and constant state of fear. War is not the answer to this change either.

EDIT.

TomAz
09-24-2007, 12:20 PM
After you repeat the following equation properly:

Challengers > The Stage Names



Thanks.

desperate times call for desperate measures, eh yablo?

Yablonowitz
09-24-2007, 12:22 PM
Columbia has a long history of inviting assholes(Jim Gilchrist), idiots (Farrakahn), and the disliked (Ahmadenijad). Mainly to inspire discussion amongst the student body and to keep our feet grounded in our tradition of protest. The administration & staff embrace the controversy.

My point is that it's a false controversy. He doesn't deserve that sort of legitimacy. They are helping cloud the issue, personalize a situation that's anything but, and crowd out attention that should be focused elsewhere.

Why not have Andrew Dice Clay Jr. next time?

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 12:25 PM
You honestly believe that this guy has no pull in Iran?

Yablonowitz
09-24-2007, 12:25 PM
Alcohol is everywhere in Iran. People drink up a storm, men and women dance and party like crazy but it is done in the privacy, hidden within their homes. Thats the shitty part about it. I have even seen Iran Islamic police going against the grain in their own homes. The people want change, but there is still an overwhelming and constant state of fear. War is not the answer to this change either.

EDIT.

They had started to loosen up a while back but it looks like the hardliners reclaimed power.

I'm not smart enough to know what we should do...I just have opinions on what we shouldn't, which, unfortunately is what we ARE doing.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 12:27 PM
I saw these happenings 6 months ago. First hand accounts, videos. Teens in parks necking but doing it discreetly such as having a look out.

Yablonowitz
09-24-2007, 12:28 PM
You honestly believe that this guy has no pull in Iran?

Within his country, he may, but in terms of the importance he's given as a symbol of Iranian foreign policy, he has no pull. The Shah controls the military in Iran. His words to the world mean very little. Read that article.

TomAz
09-24-2007, 12:31 PM
Nuke the ayatollah
put him in a hole-ah
bomb iran
bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb iran

algunz
09-24-2007, 12:33 PM
My point is that it's a false controversy. He doesn't deserve that sort of legitimacy. They are helping cloud the issue, personalize a situation that's anything but, and crowd out attention that should be focused elsewhere.

Why not have Andrew Dice Clay Jr. next time?

He's the "President" of a country that we have practically declared war upon. I think Bush gave him that legitimacy. And because he was invited by a university does not give anyone legitimacy, it simply gives them an opportunity to try to claim it on their own.

Also, I have a faint memory of the Dice Man being at CU my freshman year ('91), but that might have been one of the comedy clubs downtown. Of course, I'll bet he has a standing invitation.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 12:37 PM
Within his country, he may, but in terms of the importance he's given as a symbol of Iranian foreign policy, he has no pull. The Shah controls the military in Iran. His words to the world mean very little. Read that article.

His words mean very little, his presence means so much. What is he trying to accomplish? He clearly has an agenda and is the face Iran. Hence the forign policy of Iran. If he means so little the country why send him over here? Why doesn't the Shah come over and try to promote peaceful dialog?

canexplain
09-24-2007, 12:38 PM
He's the "President" of a country that we have practically declared war upon. I think Bush gave him that legitimacy. And because he was invited by a university does not give anyone legitimacy, it simply gives them an opportunity to try to claim it on their own.

Also, I have a faint memory of the Dice Man being at CU my freshman year ('91), but that might have been one of the comedy clubs downtown. Of course, I'll bet he has a standing invitation.

i saw the dice man this one time .. it was when he was doing that terrible movie ford fairlane ... they filmed some of it at red rocks .... so they had some band, i cant remember who, and filmed some of the movie .. it was cold as hell .. canx**

TomAz
09-24-2007, 12:43 PM
Within his country, he may, but in terms of the importance he's given as a symbol of Iranian foreign policy, he has no pull. The Shah controls the military in Iran. His words to the world mean very little. Read that article.


He words mean very little, his presence means so much. What is he trying to accomplish? He clearly has an agenda and is the face Iran. Hence the forign policy of Iran. If he means so little the country why send him over here? Why doesn't the Shah come over and try to promote peaceful dialog?

The Shah is long gone. Dead.

I think you mean the Ayatollah.


Shah (dead):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/c6/Mohammadreza_Shah.jpg/200px-Mohammadreza_Shah.jpg

Ayatollah (current supreme ruler of Iran):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0b/Grand_Ayatollah_Ali_Khamenei%2C.jpg/225px-Grand_Ayatollah_Ali_Khamenei%2C.jpg

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 12:46 PM
werd. I meant Khamenei.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 01:38 PM
Asked about executions of homosexuals in Iran, Ahmadinejad said the judiciary system executed violent criminals and high-level drug dealers, comparing them to microbes eliminated through medical treatment. Pressed specifically about punishment of homosexuals, he said: "In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country."

With the audience laughing derisively, he continued: "In Iran we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who's told you that we have this."

clarky123
09-24-2007, 01:42 PM
Thanks Clarky how long were you waiting for that?

Not long, it's like every time you hit the keyboard!

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 01:49 PM
<3 cunty123

TomAz
09-24-2007, 02:02 PM
'Obeid-e Zakani

The greatest practitioner of erotic satire is 'Obeid-e Zakani (Nezam al-din 'Obeid Allah Zakini), who died around 1370. Much of his work, which is partly in prose and partly in verse, has considerable literary merit. It frequently takes the form of short anecdotes or jokes, some of them quite coarse and of a type still repeated everywhere.

For example: "A sodomite says to a young boy, 'If you let me fuck you, I promise I will use only half my dick.' The boy consents. The sodomite rams it in to the hilt. The boy reminds him of his promise. The sodomite replies that he meant the second half of his dick."

canexplain
09-24-2007, 02:11 PM
on hardball they were saying what i said about 4 hours ago, just better .. 4 talking heads and they all thought the dude from columbia might have been out of place in what he said even before the talks started .. canx**

TomAz
09-24-2007, 02:16 PM
This is why I think inviting Ahmadinejad to speak isn't such a bad idea. Let him wallow in his own absurdity right here in front of us.

canexplain
09-24-2007, 02:21 PM
This is why I think inviting Ahmadinejad to speak isn't such a bad idea. Let him wallow in his own absurdity right here in front of us.

well that was the idea and then we acted stupid and made him look a little bit good .. he did say the holicost sp was real ... thats a big deal ... the right always uses that for a major point against him .. canx**

Yablonowitz
09-24-2007, 02:52 PM
The Shah is long gone. Dead.

I think you mean the Ayatollah.


Shah (dead):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/c6/Mohammadreza_Shah.jpg/200px-Mohammadreza_Shah.jpg

Ayatollah (current supreme ruler of Iran):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0b/Grand_Ayatollah_Ali_Khamenei%2C.jpg/225px-Grand_Ayatollah_Ali_Khamenei%2C.jpg


I stand cazorrected.

algunz
09-24-2007, 02:59 PM
well that was the idea and then we acted stupid and made him look a little bit good .. he did say the holicost sp was real ... thats a big deal ... the right always uses that for a major point against him .. canx**

"There's nothing known as absolute," said Ahmadinejad. He simply wanted more research on the Holocaust, which he said was abused as a justification for Israeli mistreatment of the Palestinians. "Why is it that the Palestinian people are paying the price for an event they had nothing to do with?" Ahmadinejad asked.

Is that a recognition of the Holocaust or yet another way to avoid an answer?

How did we make Ahmadinejad look good? I don't think it was inappropriate for the CU president to get up and ask the tough questions or even to call him an idiot. Bollinger promised his student body that he wouldn't make it easy on him and called him to the table just as he promised.

Yablonowitz
09-24-2007, 03:02 PM
His words mean very little, his presence means so much. What is he trying to accomplish? He clearly has an agenda and is the face Iran. Hence the forign policy of Iran. If he means so little the country why send him over here? Why doesn't the Shah come over and try to promote peaceful dialog?

He is the president, and an elected leader. He sends himself over there, he can do that. I don't know what degree of influence and coaching the ayatollah has over what Amenipenis says and does. Maybe none at all. I'm just saying, in reality the guy can't do anything like authorize war on Israel or ship arms to shias in Iraq. It's probably impossible to get a written statement from the supreme leader of Iran, but that doesn't mean we should flash a spotlight on what the president says and overinflate its significance.

algunz
09-24-2007, 03:06 PM
Unfortunately the majority of this country, this world hears "President of Iran" and thinks that he has some influence/power, and thus he becomes a spokesperson/a representative.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 03:11 PM
Unfortunately the majority of this country, this world hears "President of Iran" and thinks that he has some influence/power, and thus he becomes a spokesperson/a representative.

?.?

algunz
09-24-2007, 03:18 PM
Meaning to not take his presence seriously is dangerous, because a majority of the US is fucking stupid and probably thinks this guy is pulling the strings in Iran. Why do you think Bush was elected twice? Amenipenis comes over and spouts off about crap and before you know it the general public will be all for going in to Iran.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 03:20 PM
Amenipenis.

algunz
09-24-2007, 03:23 PM
That's Yablo's term I can't take credit. But I think the spelling should be adjusted to Ahminipenis.

TomAz
09-24-2007, 03:44 PM
well that was the idea and then we acted stupid and made him look a little bit good .. he did say the holicost sp was real ... thats a big deal ... the right always uses that for a major point against him .. canx**

The guy is a first rate a-hole (Ahmadebijihadistan or whatever, not CR, ha ha) but he said one thing that I've been saying for years myself: The Palestinian people are suffering as a result of the Holocaust, an event they had nothing to do with.

The establishment of the state of Israel was a continuation of (or, one might say, the logical conclusion of) Europe's historical imperialistic approach to the rest of the world, as well as Europe's intolerance of its own Jewish population. When the Germans couldn't kill all the Jews off, hard as they tried, Europe arrived at another solution: set up a place outside Europe where Jewish Europeans could move to. Conveniently, Britain already controlled Palestine and so was in a position to make this happen. Also, this played right into the earlier pre-Holocaust Zionist movement (Zionist here in the original sense of the word, not meant to be perjorative at all).

Left out of this sort of thinking, of course, were the people who already happened to live there, and who for some reason took offense at hundreds of thousands of Europeans moving to their land and claiming it as their own.

I understand that the establishment of the Jewish state in Palestine plays into their religious beliefs of the Promised Land and all that, but really, a fairer solution would have been to have set up Israel in Bavaria or something.

algunz
09-24-2007, 03:47 PM
Or Canada.

TomAz
09-24-2007, 03:48 PM
ok, but Bavaria makes more sense.

algunz
09-24-2007, 03:49 PM
True that.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 03:51 PM
They asked if they could stay at my place but I knew they would overstay their welcome. So I told them that I already had some relatives in town.

algunz
09-24-2007, 03:52 PM
"I told 'em that we already got one."

TomAz
09-24-2007, 03:54 PM
oy, you're such a schmuck!

TomAz
09-24-2007, 03:56 PM
As an aside, for those who are interested, Michael Chabon's latest book, "The Yiddish Policeman's Union" has a plot based on the premise that the Jewish homeland was set up in the Alaskan panhandle, not Palestine.

J~$$$
09-24-2007, 03:56 PM
My co-worker refers to me as a schlep.

jackstraw94086
09-24-2007, 03:59 PM
This is how the jews could have been repaid for the holocaust

2ymfs21xeDc

kroqken
11-19-2008, 09:17 PM
I guess with the Bush Administration winding down, there will be no war with Iran. I hope Obama is a wise dove and not a naive hawk.

TomAz
11-20-2008, 05:59 AM
Hope is worthless. For example, ken, I keep wishing you'd shut the fuck up.

allyjoy
11-20-2008, 06:44 AM
but you didn't hope, Tom... you didn't hope

bug on your lip
11-20-2008, 06:46 AM
uUjIA3Rt7gk

kroqken
11-20-2008, 09:35 AM
I never realized that dude from Flock of Seaguls looked like Howard Jones until just now.