• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

10 outcomes on war with Iran

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
A cost far less debilitating to Israel than to sit there until Iran builds and launches it's missles at them.
You say that as though it's certain.
I judge it as most unlikely....unless Israel strikes first.
In that case Iran would fully justified in defending itself by counterattacking Israel.

The last part of your point would not be suffecient reason for Israel not to strike from their point of view nor should it be.
You may argue that they shouldn't care about American, Iranian & other lives.
I get an impression that many believe there are 2 kinds of people in the world:
1) Israelies
2) People who are disposable.
I disagree. They all matter, & a solution should be peaceful & predicated on that.
 
Last edited:

work in progress

Well-Known Member
A cost far less debilitating to Israel than to sit there until Iran builds and launches it's missles at them. The last part of your point would not be suffecient reason for Israel not to strike from their point of view nor should it be.
Anyone with an attention span longer than that of tse tse fly has seen this movie before! For at least the last five years, after each story from the CIA, Defense and State Dept. officials, and even from within the Mossad and IDF itself, keep telling us that Iran is NOT close to building a nuclear weapon; but that doesn't stop the Neocon clowns who should never be given a public platform because they were wrong about everything when they lobbied for the last war. They are given undeserved credibility and never held to account for the last mess they created because their are so many interests who can't function without new wars to fight. And that doesn't even address the issue of whether it is just to ban Iran or other nations from enriching uranium when Israel is a complete wildcard with an estimated 400 nuclear warheads that have never even been acknowledged publicly, let alone put under any kind of international inspection procedure!

And the reason why the lobbying for war is being done by the same crowd of Neocons in Washington is because Israel CAN'T do this job themselves! They have to have America do the dirty work for them. Their strategy is simply for Bebe and company to keep gladhanding Republican Neocons and televangelist fools to put pressure on Obama to start the bombing campaign.

My question for all of the American-mostly Christian Zionist supporters of Israel -- who are financing the building of illegal settlements in occupied territories and making a peace agreement even less likely -- is why bother in the first place? Is this just about getting a war going in the Middle East so WWIII and the Rapture can happen a little quicker?

The prognosis for Israel itself is getting very sketchy nowadays because they have never resolved that fundamental conflict: how do you have both a democracy and a theocratic state at the same time? Last year, one of the big, unreported stories in North American media was the large public demonstrations that occurred in cities all across Israel. The demonstrations did not involve Israeli Arabs; it was non-orthodox Jews who are getting fed up with having to pay most of the taxes, pay high rents, and do all the heavy lifting to keep the State of Israel functioning, while receiving nothing for their service. While at the same time, increasingly large numbers of freeloading Orthodox Jews get paid to do just do their religious rituals and have lots of children, and even get deferments from the mandatory military service that every other young Israeli man or woman is obligated to do. This simmering conflict was recently commented on by a former Mossad chief, originally published in the Jerusalem Post:
“I believe our system is reaching a point where the government is almost incapable of running the country,” Dagan said in an interview with the Jerusalem Post.
“We are on the edge of – I would not say a disaster because that is a bit exaggerated – but we are facing a very bad prognosis of what will happen in the future,” the former Mossad chief added.

“Anyone who is working and paying taxes and serves in the military is not receiving any support from the government, while everyone who is not working, not paying taxes and not serving in the military is receiving everything,” he said.
Ex-Mossad chief tells of ‘very bad prognosis’ for Israel | | antonyantoniouantonyantoniou

 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
Anyone with an attention span longer than that of tse tse fly has seen this movie before! For at least the last five years, after each story from the CIA, Defense and State Dept. officials, and even from within the Mossad and IDF itself, keep telling us that Iran is NOT close to building a nuclear weapon; but that doesn't stop the Neocon clowns who should never be given a public platform because they were wrong about everything when they lobbied for the last war. They are given undeserved credibility and never held to account for the last mess they created because their are so many interests who can't function without new wars to fight. And that doesn't even address the issue of whether it is just to ban Iran or other nations from enriching uranium when Israel is a complete wildcard with an estimated 400 nuclear warheads that have never even been acknowledged publicly, let alone put under any kind of international inspection procedure!

And the reason why the lobbying for war is being done by the same crowd of Neocons in Washington is because Israel CAN'T do this job themselves! They have to have America do the dirty work for them. Their strategy is simply for Bebe and company to keep gladhanding Republican Neocons and televangelist fools to put pressure on Obama to start the bombing campaign.

My question for all of the American-mostly Christian Zionist supporters of Israel -- who are financing the building of illegal settlements in occupied territories and making a peace agreement even less likely -- is why bother in the first place? Is this just about getting a war going in the Middle East so WWIII and the Rapture can happen a little quicker?

The prognosis for Israel itself is getting very sketchy nowadays because they have never resolved that fundamental conflict: how do you have both a democracy and a theocratic state at the same time? Last year, one of the big, unreported stories in North American media was the large public demonstrations that occurred in cities all across Israel. The demonstrations did not involve Israeli Arabs; it was non-orthodox Jews who are getting fed up with having to pay most of the taxes, pay high rents, and do all the heavy lifting to keep the State of Israel functioning, while receiving nothing for their service. While at the same time, increasingly large numbers of freeloading Orthodox Jews get paid to do just do their religious rituals and have lots of children, and even get deferments from the mandatory military service that every other young Israeli man or woman is obligated to do. This simmering conflict was recently commented on by a former Mossad chief, originally published in the Jerusalem Post:
“I believe our system is reaching a point where the government is almost incapable of running the country,” Dagan said in an interview with the Jerusalem Post.
“We are on the edge of – I would not say a disaster because that is a bit exaggerated – but we are facing a very bad prognosis of what will happen in the future,” the former Mossad chief added.

“Anyone who is working and paying taxes and serves in the military is not receiving any support from the government, while everyone who is not working, not paying taxes and not serving in the military is receiving everything,” he said.
Ex-Mossad chief tells of ‘very bad prognosis’ for Israel | | antonyantoniouantonyantoniou


I am not sure what point you were trying to make but whatever it was everything you used to support it was conjecture. Despite what you say Iran/hamas/egypt/muslim brotherhood etc... have an obvious intention to attack Israel for the sole crime of being Israel. Being that they loose to an extent that almost seems supernatural every time they attack would seem to deter them. Despite that rant above I support Israel because they are the most honorable nation in the area by a wide margin in my opinion and that of historie's. What you wrote sounds more like an insufficiently supported personal attack rather than an intellectual discussion or point.
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
You say that as though it's certain.
I judge it as most unlikely....unless Israel strikes first.
In that case Iran would fully justified in defending itself by counterattacking Israel.

You may argue that they shouldn't care about American, Iranian & other lives.
I get an impression that many believe there are 2 kinds of people in the world:
1) Israelies
2) People who are disposable.
I disagree. They all matter, & a solution should be peaceful & predicated on that.

If history is any judge Israel will come out of thus just fine. Irans worst mistake would be to stop using cowardly proxy wars to attack Israel and openly attack. Israel has looked far worse at times of war in the past (in 1948 they had 3 tanks) than she does now and has so far won all engagements in many of the most lopsided battles over apparently some of the most inept troops in history. The absolute worse thing that Israel could do is bow to some type of politically correct international pressure: Allow Iran to build a bomb and take massive cassualties for their trouble, before melting Iran and any other parts of the middle east that helped. I know that sounds a bit aggressive but compare what would have been different if people would have taken Churchhil'ls advise in 37 instead of Chamberlain's.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
If history is any judge Israel will come out of thus just fine. Irans worst mistake would be to stop using cowardly proxy wars to attack Israel and openly attack. Israel has looked far worse at times of war in the past (in 1948 they had 3 tanks) than she does now and has so far won all engagements in many of the most lopsided battles over apparently some of the most inept troops in history. The absolute worse thing that Israel could do is bow to some type of politically correct international pressure: Allow Iran to build a bomb and take massive cassualties for their trouble, before melting Iran and any other parts of the middle east that helped. I know that sounds a bit aggressive but compare what would have been different if people would have taken Churchhil'ls advise in 37 instead of Chamberlain's.
It sounds so simple when you put it that way. But war has potential to be so much messier.

I've not heard any cogent argument that Iran would launch an unprovoked nuclear strike against Israel.
Were they to do so, retaliation by the US & Israel would be overwhelming. I blame religious paranoia.
It's beginning to look pretty reasonable for Iran to have nukes. They've been threatened by Israel, Saudi
Arabia & the US, & even attacked by Iraq. The bomb would give these foes pause, & could even serve
the cause of peace in the region.
 
Last edited:
Some can say those are just words but Germans didn't make a decision in one night. If history teaches us anything then Jews can't really take chances and can't really trust when the world tells them to wait for sanctions.

The allies flew over concentration camps on daily bases and had plenty of bombs for Germany but couldn't spare a few for gas chambers so I personally see no difference between that and a request to wait since it can bring down the world economy. So should we really sacrifice Jews for a world economy that is on the way down anyways? and what right does Iran have to threaten Israel?

Unfortunately I can't post links yet but a month ago there was a letter from Iran provides a strategy to annihilate Israel in 9 minutes and a religious ruling to kill Jews. Anybody interested can search for it online.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Some can say those are just words but Germans didn't make a decision in one night. If history teaches us anything then Jews can't really take chances and can't really trust when the world tells them to wait for sanctions.
The allies flew over concentration camps on daily bases and had plenty of bombs for Germany but couldn't spare a few for gas chambers so I personally see no difference between that and a request to wait since it can bring down the world economy. So should we really sacrifice Jews for a world economy that is on the way down anyways? and what right does Iran have to threaten Israel?
Unfortunately I can't post links yet but a month ago there was a letter from Iran provides a strategy to annihilate Israel in 9 minutes and a religious ruling to kill Jews. Anybody interested can search for it online.
If one's primary focus in life is that Israel is the most important country & Jews are the most important people, then your reasoning holds more water.
But if one favors Iran & Muslims, the same reasoning yields a different result. Iran suffered a coup imposed by the US, & an earlier preemptive war
supported by the US (Iraq v Iran), complete with horrific chemical weapons on our side, so they certainly have a great need for self defense from the
US & its agent, Israel. A nuclear bomb could make them invulnerable to such adventurism, which the US & Israel very much appear to continue.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...rrorist-team/2012/04/10/gIQA8I3I8S_story.html
Instead of certainly going to war now to avoid the chance of going to war later, I suggest an alternative to risking WW3 with the Islamic world - we
should stop acting like meddling thugs, thereby boosting our credibility, & negotiate a peaceful relationship. But with religious fervor & hatred involved,
I don't have high hopes that this will be pursued.
Btw, Iran need not suffer or feel guilt for actions of Nazis in Germany.
 
Last edited:
If one's primary focus in life is that Israel is the most important country & Jews are the most important people, then your reasoning holds more water.
But if one favors Iran & Muslims, the same reasoning yields a different result. Iran suffered a coup imposed by the US, & an earlier preemptive war
supported by the US (Iraq v Iran), complete with horrific chemical weapons on our side, so they certainly have a great need for self defense from the
US & its agent, Israel. A nuclear bomb could make them invulnerable to such adventurism, which the US & Israel very much appear to continue.
Iran says it captured Israel-backed ‘terrorist team’ - The Washington Post
Instead of certainly going to war now to avoid the chance of going to war later, I suggest an alternative to risking WW3 with the Islamic world - we
should stop acting like meddling thugs, thereby boosting our credibility, & negotiate a peaceful relationship. But with religious fervor & hatred involved,
I don't have high hopes that this will be pursued.
Btw, Iran need not suffer or feel guilt for actions of Nazis in Germany.


I fully agree with the first part of your post, if people have the right to choose either side let them do so but they should be honest about it and not call the opposite side nazis and just be honest about it. negotiate peaceful relationship? isn't 60 years not enough? how can you negotiate with people who's hate comes from a believe system? a perfect example is Gaza but yet rockets are still flying, so how much longer can I tell my kids who go to sleep and wake up with a siren of an incoming rocket to live with it until the other side might sometime in the future decide to make peace? what if they don't?

Iran does not need to suffer for action of nazis but what is it Irans business with what is happening between Israel and arabs who call them self's Palestinians? Persians do not border with Israel, they are neither Jews nor Arabs so what give them the right to threaten Jews? I am sick and tired to constantly keep hearing for the last 30 years of my life that someone somewhere wants to kill me because I was born a Jew, I want to live a normal and a peaceful life, to have kids and grand kids but yet someone believes I don't have the right to live and I should listen to you about being peaceful about it? am I any worse then you that you have the right to have a peaceful life and I don't?

You threaten me, I will beet you down until you stop threatening me and I will guarantee safety and freedom for my kids and grand kids. Some fool takes the world stage and declares to a world that Jews are satans and have no right to live and rather then following common sense and shutting him up the world asks us to be peaceful or worst case calls us nazis? who do you all think you are?
 
Instead of certainly going to war now to avoid the chance of going to war later, I suggest an alternative to risking WW3 with the Islamic world.

Buddy, I got news for you, WWIII is already here and not because you did something wrong to the other part of the world but because certain people in the Muslim world want it. Lat's be honest about it, there are people in power in the Muslim world who want the entire world to embrace Islam and there is nothing you can do to make them change their mind.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Buddy, I got news for you, WWIII is already here and not because you did something wrong to the other part of the world...

It wasn't wrong to invade Iraq? Let alone Afghanistan?

...but because certain people in the Muslim world want it.
Names?

Lat's be honest about it...
Good. You start!

...there are people in power in the Muslim world who want the entire world to embrace Islam and there is nothing you can do to make them change their mind.
If so, is the best way to deal with these people to bomb and/or invade Iran? Why or why not?
 
Last edited:

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
Someone should ask Obama what is going on. We just sent a second aircraft carrier into the region. This is not a normal situation by a long shot, it looks akin to a cocked gun to me.
 

kai

ragamuffin
Someone should ask Obama what is going on. We just sent a second aircraft carrier into the region. This is not a normal situation by a long shot, it looks akin to a cocked gun to me.


Its a cocked gun alright, Iran has threatened to cut of the Gulf's strategic oil routes in retaliation for economic sanctions. In reality that scenario is more likely to produce military action than anything else.

i believe the US has had two aircraft carriers in the gulf on four occasions over the past decade.


U.S Navy deploys 2nd aircraft to Gulf amid rising tensions with Iran | Mail Online


Iran official: Only faint chance of war breaking in the Middle East - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
negotiate peaceful relationship? isn't 60 years not enough?
There is no time limit on seeking peace, since conflicts continually arise.
I expect it to be an ongoing process until we replace ourselves with peacebots.

how can you negotiate with people who's hate comes from a believe system?
Beliefs systems are flexible, & change with culture. Continually attack & threaten a people, & the culture will hate.
Recognize this cycle, & seek opportunity for change. To be resigned to intransigence of one's enemies leaves you 2 choices:
1) Destroy them all.
2) Continual war.
#1 is impossible, so if attempted then it leads to #2.

a perfect example is Gaza but yet rockets are still flying, so how much longer can I tell my kids who go to sleep and wake up with a siren of an incoming rocket to live with it until the other side might sometime in the future decide to make peace? what if they don't?
Ask them to become the peacemakers, if the current leaders are unable.

Iran does not need to suffer for action of nazis but what is it Irans business with what is happening between Israel and arabs who call them self's Palestinians? Persians do not border with Israel, they are neither Jews nor Arabs so what give them the right to threaten Jews?
Israel, US, Iraq & Saudi Arabia all either threaten &/or attack Iran. That Jews & Xians of western powers together frame these
conflicts in a religious context would explain why Iran would also focus upon religious groups. Muslims have clearly been treated
by western powers as a mere dirty inconvenience over the last century. To see this from Iran's perspective would be illuminating.

I am sick and tired to constantly keep hearing for the last 30 years of my life that someone somewhere wants to kill me because I was born a Jew, I want to live a normal and a peaceful life, to have kids and grand kids but yet someone believes I don't have the right to live and I should listen to you about being peaceful about it? am I any worse then you that you have the right to have a peaceful life and I don't?
Your concerns are real & difficult, so I don't dismiss them. But neither do I dismiss the rights to peace
of your foes. We each have the opportunity to let our humanity triumph over anger & revenge.

You threaten me, I will beet you down until you stop threatening me and I will guarantee safety and freedom for my kids and grand kids.
Would you grant that right to destroy those who threaten you to the Palestinians or Iranians? America has
already directly attacked Iran by coup & by proxy (Iran). We now threaten them directly & by proxy (Israel).

Some fool takes the world stage and declares to a world that Jews are satans and have no right to live and rather then following common sense and shutting him up the world asks us to be peaceful or worst case calls us nazis?
It would be a mistake to think that one's foe is a fool. If anything, I find Iran's conduct of late to be smarter than Israel's,
but neither should be underestimated. As for those who call each other such vile names, I cannot speak for them.

who do you all think you are?
Again, I cannot speak for others, but I am a taxpayer in a country which spends money & life to wage continual & fruitless
war on the other side of the world. I'm tired of paying to fuel war with goals of political & religious hegemony. It ain't right.
So as a minor player in this travesty, I have a right, nay the obligation to comment & try to effect change.
 
Last edited:

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Buddy, I got news for you, WWIII is already here and not because you did something wrong to the other part of the world but because certain people in the Muslim world want it.
This is a rather dysfunctional perspective.
1) War could easily escalate to something far far larger than what we now see. To say that we're already there, would suggest
to many that it couldn't get much worse. That would blind them to possible terrible consequences of decisions today.
2) To demonize the enemy by saying they want WW3, fuels the hysteria & clamoring for war, increasing its likelihood.

Lat's be honest about it....
Always.

....there are people in power in the Muslim world who want the entire world to embrace Islam and there is nothing you can do to make them change their mind.
There are always people out there who embrace dangerous beliefs. This is not limited to Islam, so it isn't an argument
to war with an entire religion. Besides, they have about a billion followers too many to make that strategy effective.
To find a way to see them as friends has much greater potential for success.
 
Last edited:

1robin

Christian/Baptist
It wasn't wrong to invade Iraq? Let alone Afghanistan?

Names?

Good. You start!

If so, is the best way to deal with these people to bomb and/or invade Iran? Why or why not?

It is not the best way and I would suggest any other method that would be effective. In the case of these particular middle eastern countries who are completely committed to a policy of religous compulsion, reckless malice, self destructive hate, lying, and fighting by cowardly proxy methods I am afraid it is the only way. No-one wants to reason with cancer or allow cancer time to develope new capabilities and this mindset will have to be employed or we might as well give up and live under sharia law (or oppression and injustice masqurading as law) because they are more committed to error than we seem to be rightousness.

We love death. The U.S. loves life. That is the difference between us two.
Osama bin Laden
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
You say that as though it's certain.
I judge it as most unlikely....unless Israel strikes first.
In that case Iran would fully justified in defending itself by counterattacking Israel.

You may argue that they shouldn't care about American, Iranian & other lives.
I get an impression that many believe there are 2 kinds of people in the world:
1) Israelies
2) People who are disposable.
I disagree. They all matter, & a solution should be peaceful & predicated on that.

Are you suggesting that Israel should let them build a few bombs and drop them, loosing a quarter million people then reply evaporating a few million Iranians very possibly triggering an armaggedon, rather than hit their reactors now killing a few thousand and whatever they would loose as Iran stepped up their ineffective proxy wars.

I believe that in that area of the world that Israel is by far the most honorable, U.S. freindly, democratic, and benevolent nation by far. Thats means in a conflict which wouldn't even exist except for the agression of their neiboors I favor whatever results in their best interest. It is Iran and it's idealogic commitments that has put Israel in this position not the other way around.


WHO IS IT THAT OPPOSES THIS TINY INDUSTRIOUS NATION, ISRAEL


  • Morocco, Mauritania, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Sudan, Djibouti, Somalia, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, UAE, Oman, Yemen. These are just the ones that are overtly hostile to Israel and in close proximity.
  • They control 13.5 million square km to Israel’s 20 thousand Km.
  • They have 292 million people to Israel’s 5 million.
  • Groups of these countries have started a total of 4 major wars and countless violent actions. To which they lost 100%. After each war Israel returned the vast majority of any land they had conquered. This is unparalleled in history except for the U.S.
  • A famous Arab is quoted as saying “If the Moslems laid down there arms today there would be peace tomorrow”. “If the Israelis laid down their weapons today there would be no Israel tomorrow”
  • Jews have inhabited Israel continuously for 3,000 plus years. They are the only nation on earth that still speaks the same language, occupies the same land, and worships the same God that it did 3000 years ago.
  • There has never been a Palestinian nation, a distinct Palestinian language or culture.
  • The Jews have welcomed and incorporated Arabian refugees, but the Jewish refugees in Arabian countries are the only group of refugees in history that have not been accepted in countries which they exist even after three generations.
  • Under Jordanian rule Jewish holy sites were systematically destroyed and they were denied access. Under Jewish control all Jewish, Christian, and Muslim sites are preserved and open to anyone to visit.
On a graph plotting Jewish concessions vs. Arabic violence. After every instance of Israel giving land or concessions there is a spike of Arabic violence. Now the world is telling them to give more of the 1/6 of 1% only to get attacked for the effort.
 

work in progress

Well-Known Member
If you see an argument about international affairs, where one side is 100% right, and the other side is 100% wrong, the argument is ********! Especially so when it consists of fabricated, unsourced material. Real life is much more complicated than simple-minded propaganda.
 

work in progress

Well-Known Member
Someone should ask Obama what is going on. We just sent a second aircraft carrier into the region. This is not a normal situation by a long shot, it looks akin to a cocked gun to me.
I am continually surprised that Republicans don't just cut the pageantry and waste of money, and concede the Presidential Election, by giving Obama an affirmation at some sort of bipartisan convention. Seriously! Looking on from the outside, there is not a lot of daylight between the two parties on real important issues dealing from economics to civil rights and freedoms to foreign policy!

On this particular issue -- if we step into the Way Back Machine to almost two years ago, we can recall how the still relatively new Obama Administration blew up any chance of considering a deal based on the negotiations that Brazil and Turkey had been working on with Iran. From a recent post on this discarded opportunity to avoid a Persian Gulf War: How Neocons Sank Iran Nuke Deal
In recent comments, key Iranians have signaled flexibility along the lines of the earlier swap arrangement, but the reason why such a deal might leave Tehran “in a stronger position” than in 2009-2010 is that then the Post’s editors, along with other neocon pundits and allies inside the Obama administration, sank the earlier plan for Iran to surrender much of its low-enriched uranium for isotopes needed by an Iranian medical research reactor.


Iran had yet to overcome the technical obstacles to refine uranium to the 20 percent level to produce those isotopes. Now, Iran’s 20 percent level is only a few steps short of bringing uranium to the 90 percent refinement for a nuclear bomb. So, the earlier deal would have left Iran much further from the threshold of a nuclear-bomb capability.


However, in 2009 – and again in 2010 – Washington’s neocon voices ridiculed the proposed uranium swap on the grounds that Iran would have kept enough low-enriched uranium (at the much lower 3.5 percent level) that it could theoretically, sometime in the future, be able to refine it and build one nuclear bomb.
Today, Iran has much more enriched uranium at a much higher level, enough for at least several theoretical nuclear bombs (though Iran says it doesn’t want any).
So, one could agree with the Post’s assessment that Iran’s nuclear position today is stronger than it was in 2009 and 2010. But whose fault was that? It would seem to rest more with the Post editorialists and other neocons who demanded the heightened confrontation with Iran in place of the uranium swap.


For instance, even before the revived swap deal was unveiled on May 17, 2010, the Washington Post’s editors were mocking the leaders of Brazil and Turkey who had spearheaded the initiative. The Post called the plan “yet another effort to ‘engage’ the extremist clique of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.”
After the Iran-Brazil-Turkey deal was announced in Tehran, the rhetorical abuse escalated with Washington pundits and administration hardliners, like Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, treating the leaders of Brazil and Turkey as unwelcome interlopers who were intruding on America’s diplomatic turf in an effort to grandstand.


How Neocons Sank Iran Nuke Deal | Consortiumnews

Let's just say that if the world price for crude oil shoots up to 300 or $400 per barrel because of a Gulf War, it won't be because an unnecessary war could not have been avoided!
 

beenie

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I fully agree with the first part of your post, if people have the right to choose either side let them do so but they should be honest about it and not call the opposite side nazis and just be honest about it. negotiate peaceful relationship? isn't 60 years not enough? how can you negotiate with people who's hate comes from a believe system? a perfect example is Gaza but yet rockets are still flying, so how much longer can I tell my kids who go to sleep and wake up with a siren of an incoming rocket to live with it until the other side might sometime in the future decide to make peace? what if they don't?

Iran does not need to suffer for action of nazis but what is it Irans business with what is happening between Israel and arabs who call them self's Palestinians? Persians do not border with Israel, they are neither Jews nor Arabs so what give them the right to threaten Jews? I am sick and tired to constantly keep hearing for the last 30 years of my life that someone somewhere wants to kill me because I was born a Jew, I want to live a normal and a peaceful life, to have kids and grand kids but yet someone believes I don't have the right to live and I should listen to you about being peaceful about it? am I any worse then you that you have the right to have a peaceful life and I don't?

You threaten me, I will beet you down until you stop threatening me and I will guarantee safety and freedom for my kids and grand kids. Some fool takes the world stage and declares to a world that Jews are satans and have no right to live and rather then following common sense and shutting him up the world asks us to be peaceful or worst case calls us nazis? who do you all think you are?

Buddy, I got news for you, WWIII is already here and not because you did something wrong to the other part of the world but because certain people in the Muslim world want it. Lat's be honest about it, there are people in power in the Muslim world who want the entire world to embrace Islam and there is nothing you can do to make them change their mind.

Your posts don't seem much different than those you are criticizing.
 

Godobeyer

the word "Islam" means "submission" to God
Premium Member
  • A famous Arab is quoted as saying “If the Moslems laid down there arms today there would be peace tomorrow”. “If the Israelis laid down their weapons today there would be no Israel tomorrow”
i ignore it ,
good claim from that arabic .

any way from my opinion , the peace will come when Israel realise that it's around by nuclear weapon countries , until now it's seem that it's not happening .

and for my opinion the peace with israelis , is gain, not deserve .

for exemple we the Algerians get the independant from the France because we gain it , not deserve it in the view of the French people .

anyway my ancle was hight level in Algerian Army , we discuss this issue , he told me that Iran may have the neclear weapon , and syria , Hizballah too .

and he told me too that Algeria ,Egypt and Turky could have it too .
 
Top