01 Apr 06
so what?
really
if we want to have fun and enjoy ourselves by going on an abusive superpowered rampage and start up the new crusades let us. that is our perogative.
after all you had your chance to stop us 150 years ago.
if we iplode and collapse and destroy ourselves as we certainly will than that is our perogative also.
and who are you poor opressed muslims to tell us what is right and what is wrong in the end fate will judge what will happen
lifes much more simpler and funnier this way.
01 Apr 06
Originally posted by Rajk999Gees .. where do we start? How about the funding and proping up all manner of US interest/business friendly dictators in scores in Central and South America and various other former democracies.
What exactly was wrong with the US foreign policy prior to 9/11?
How would Iran having a couple of nukes make the US think more 'rationally' ? Youre implying that Iran will have no problem using the nukes on the US .. right ?
I'm with Red Mike on this issue ...STOP THE DOUBLE STANDARDS!! Until your Govt makes radical changes to its foreign policy. the US will always be always be dispised by the majority of the rest of the world. Your crusade for power, wealth, and global domination can only result in a lot of highly pissed of people. And as you discovered with 9/11, pissed of people do really stupid things....
01 Apr 06
Originally posted by Rajk999Um ..excuse me. Point of Order: ASk yourself many times Iran has invaded another country in its region, or anywhere for that matter Answer: Nil. (Allthough they did help Lebanon defend themselves from Isreali invasion on 1956). This does not compare well with Isreal's record on the same account. (1948 Palestine, 1956 Egypt, 1967 Egypt, Syria, 1978 Lebanon). I'd list the USs acts of unprovoked aggression since WW2 but there's a charactor limit in these forums. What is with you guys and invasions?
You refuse to say it ..... continue the sentence ..
" ... because Iran will use their nukes on the US "
Right ?
Well .. Iran will use their nukes on ayone they feel like .. US, Israel, Iraq, UK, Denmark ..etc.
Thats exactly the reason why the rest of the sensible world will not allow them to develop that technology.
02 Apr 06
2 edits
Originally posted by Red LeonAnd thats your big problem? The US furthers its business interests by supporting friendly governments ? How the hell is that a double standard. Thats pretty consistent to me. They further their interests by assisting FRIENDS and ALLIES. All countries do that. Thats not a problem with their foreign policy. You consider that a problem because you (or nations you support) are not on the receiving end of the assistance. If you want funding from the US, here's a hint - BE FRIENDS WITH THE US AND STOP THREATENING EVERYONE.
Gees .. where do we start? How about the funding and proping up all manner of US interest/business friendly dictators in scores in Central and South America and various other former democracies.
I'm with Red Mike on this issue ...STOP THE DOUBLE STANDARDS!! Until your Govt makes radical changes to its foreign policy. the US will always be always be disp ...[text shortened]... pissed of people. And as you discovered with 9/11, pissed of people do really stupid things....
I suggest you concentrate on assistance / funding Islamic states give and to whom. They fund the terrorists organisations and the criminal elements of the world .. Hezbollah, Al Queda, Hamas etc etc .
02 Apr 06
Originally posted by Red LeonThank goodness for the US and Isreal. Were it not for them most of the West might be speaking German or Russian or Arabic.
Um ..excuse me. Point of Order: ASk yourself many times Iran has invaded another country in its region, or anywhere for that matter Answer: Nil. (Allthough they did help Lebanon defend themselves from Isreali invasion on 1956). This does not compare well with Isreal's record on the same account. (1948 Palestine, 1956 Egypt, 1967 Egypt, Syria, 1978 Lebanon). ...[text shortened]... since WW2 but there's a charactor limit in these forums. What is with you guys and invasions?
02 Apr 06
Originally posted by Red LeonI believe it was the Arabs who attacked Irael first in 48, 56, 67, 78. Thats why they lost most of that land because they bit off more than they could chew.
Um ..excuse me. Point of Order: ASk yourself many times Iran has invaded another country in its region, or anywhere for that matter Answer: Nil. (Allthough they did help Lebanon defend themselves from Isreali invasion on 1956). This does not compare well with Isreal's record on the same account. (1948 Palestine, 1956 Egypt, 1967 Egypt, Syria, 1978 Lebanon). ...[text shortened]... since WW2 but there's a charactor limit in these forums. What is with you guys and invasions?
02 Apr 06
Originally posted by slimjimIf you truly believe that, then you need to read an actual history book. Only in the Yon Kippur war of 1973 did the Arab nations fire the first shot and that was to regain territory seized by Israel in 1967 (by a very successful sneak attack).
I believe it was the Arabs who attacked Irael first in 48, 56, 67, 78. Thats why they lost most of that land because they bit off more than they could chew.
02 Apr 06
Originally posted by no1marauderIf supporters of Islamic states, like you, had their way Saddam would have had nukes since the mid 80s. What do you think he was going to do with those nukes ? But ... Thanks to Israel their Osirak nuclear facility was bombed.
There's really no way to respond to such an irrational, ridiculous statement but with a LMAO.
By the way , where were you during the Danish cartoon controversy? Why did'nt speak on their behalf when they were behaving like a**holes over a cartoon ?
Laugh all you like, Criminals are not allowed to have WMDs .
02 Apr 06
1 edit
Originally posted by Rajk999You're last statement is flat out wrong (like most of your statements); the international criminal state Israel has nuclear weapons. One of its crimes against international law was the bombing of the Osirak nuclear reactor; an attack which was condemned by the UN Security Council including the government of the US during the Reagan administration. If Iraq had gotten nukes I suppose they would have done the same thing that every country with nukes does; use them as a deterrent against attack. I've been in favor of the abolition of all nuclear weapons for many years; the policy that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was based on. The nuclear powers have been violating its terms for many years.
If supporters of Islamic states, like you, had their way Saddam would have had nukes since the mid 80s. What do you think he was going to do with those nukes ? But ... Thanks to Israel their Osirak nuclear facility was bombed.
By the way , where were you during the Danish cartoon controversy? Why did'nt speak on their behalf when they were behaving like a**holes over a cartoon ?
Laugh all you like, Criminals are not allowed to have WMDs .
I realize that right wing idiots like you divide the world into an "us v. them", but the idea that I support "Islamic states" is truly laughable. As is the idea that Saddam's state was "Islamic" in any way, shape or form.
02 Apr 06
Originally posted by no1marauderYoure an F'ing DUNCE if you seriously believe that Saddam would not have used his nukes on Israel in 1991. Who cares about International Law or the UN. All nations have the right to take whatever action it deems fit (preemptive and otherwise) to protect itself. Take your law and your incompetent UN a**holes and shove it.
You're last statement is flat out wrong (like most of your statements); the international criminal state Israel has nuclear weapons. One of its crimes against international law was the bombing of the Osirak nuclear reactor; an attack which was condemned by the UN Security Council including the government of the US during the Reagan administration. If Ira ...[text shortened]... laughable. As is the idea that Saddam's state was "Islamic" in any way, shape or form.