What? Newsmax being dishonest in it's headline? Inconceivable!

Something about Im in ur base, lolcats and persian cats is trying to forment in my mind, but I drank too much last night.

An article headline didn't match the article content? On Newsmax, even? Why not a newsflash tab, subby?

Someone should write a book about this kind of stuff.

Link (new window)

"Iran's top military commander said Saturday that his forces would retaliate against American military bases in the Persian Gulf if they are involved in any possible future attack on Iran."

This very statement should make it clear to all the libtards why it is so imperative to destroy Iran ASAP. They apparently won't aknowledge that the planet Earth is the sole God-given domain and property of the USA. Every other nation has resigned itself to this fact, and if Iran refuses to get in line with world opinion, it will face the consequences.

Headline: US says it might attack Iran. For the hell of it.

"Iran's top military commander said Saturday that his forces would retaliate against American military bases in the Persian Gulf if they are involved in any possible future attack on Iran."

This very statement should make it clear to all the libtards why it is so imperative to destroy Iran ASAP. They apparently won't aknowledge that the planet Earth is the sole God-given domain and property of the USA. Every other nation has resigned itself to this fact, and if Iran refuses to get in line with world opinion, it will face the consequences.



This.

/feel the need to state that I don't actually agree with the above statement but thought it would be strange if someone this'd a sarcastic statement to begin with.

Remember - self defense is sinful. If someone holds a gun to your head, you have a moral obligation to comply with them.

1) The best defense is a good offense.
2) The key to offense is the element of surprise.
Therefore,
3a) The key to self-defense is attacking your opponent before he attacks you...
or better yet...
3b) before the thought of doing so has EVEN OCCURRED TO HIM!!

/Llap-Goch

Sadly, Iran is right. How disgusting is it to think that we might attack a country before they attack us. Iran DOES have the right to fight back if they are attacked. Just like WE have the right to fight back if we are attacked.

More GOP propaganda.

/baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

glaurunge: "Iran's top military commander said Saturday that his forces would retaliate against American military bases in the Persian Gulf if they are involved in any possible future attack on Iran."

This very statement should make it clear to all the libtards why it is so imperative to destroy Iran ASAP. They apparently won't aknowledge that the planet Earth is the sole God-given domain and property of the USA. Every other nation has resigned itself to this fact, and if Iran refuses to get in line with world opinion, it will face the consequences.

You aren't even good at trolling. What was your previous nic?

If I was Iranian, I'd be saying the exact same thing. The US poses a clear and present danger to them.

9/11

Is my understanding correct that Ahmadinejad isn't even the top dog in Iran? Doesn't the Supreme Leader outrank him on everything? Didn't Ahmadinejad just get overruled on a number of things by his own parliament? Did you know he just got his PhD in 1997 in like transportation technology? Am I correct in thinking he still lives in the same little apartment as before he was elected? Does this sound like a guy who can/wants to start a nuclear war? Is it not disturbing as hell we don't hear much about this stuff? I'm no expert on Iran, so correct me if I'm mistaken.

Here's an article describing how Ahmadinejad is losing credibility in Iran over what he is doing. AP article (new window)

He's not doing what his country elected him to do and his power is less for it. There is a parliament and another leader above him. He's not going to start any nuclear war. Please don't waste my tax dollars obliterating that nation.

agrees with Iran.

We're the terrorists, not Iran.

So how about in pre-emptive self defense? I mean if it is okay for America to do it, presumably everyone gets to do it?

"Iran Says It Could Attack In Self-Defense" where's that part in the article?

I assumed you meant pre-emptive self defense too. Don't see that in the article though.

/And why Newsmax? Why not get it from Rueters or AP or something?

Self-defense, including pre-emption, is lawful and moral unless Israel does it. Note that pre-emption means disrupting a real and imminent threat, not a vague future threat like that Saddam Hussein posed in 2003.

There is no big story here.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: Is my understanding correct that Ahmadinejad isn't even the top dog in Iran? Doesn't the Supreme Leader outrank him on everything? Didn't Ahmadinejad just get overruled on a number of things by his own parliament? Did you know he just got his PhD in 1997 in like transportation technology? Am I correct in thinking he still lives in the same little apartment as before he was elected? Does this sound like a guy who can/wants to start a nuclear war? Is it not disturbing as hell we don't hear much about this stuff? I'm no expert on Iran, so correct me if I'm mistaken.

Here's an article describing how Ahmadinejad is losing credibility in Iran over what he is doing. AP article (new window)

He's not doing what his country elected him to do and his power is less for it. There is a parliament and another leader above him. He's not going to start any nuclear war. Please don't waste my tax dollars obliterating that nation.

He doesn't control the army, police, security forces or even the infamous al-Quds force.

But he's dark skinned with a big nose and kind of ulgy looking, so he makes a good candidate to represent "The Enemy"

I'm a Ron Paul supporter. It really sucks to know that you'll only have your opinion vindicated when the douchebag that wins the election starts a war with Iran.

Hell they can take a page from America's play book. Go ahead right now, preemptive defense. America actually has WMDs so at least you have more justification than America does in Iraq..

Dinki: What? Newsmax being dishonest in it's headline? Inconceivable!

Hey dumbass, it is an Associated Press story. Newsmax has nothing to do with its content.

m2313: Hell they can take a page from America's play book. Go ahead right now, preemptive defense. America actually has WMDs so at least you have more justification than America does in Iraq..

Hey now, America has shown it's the only country that can be trusted with nukes, everyone else might do something insane like bomb a city or something.

JQPublic: Dinki: What? Newsmax being dishonest in it's headline? Inconceivable!

Hey dumbass, it is an Associated Press story. Newsmax has nothing to do with its content.

I think he is referring to the misleading headline. Not the content.

That is the point of the thread.

Bah bah bah bah...

You all are a bunch of sheep that let others tell them what to think because you are too lazy to do any research yourself. If my liberal and communist comrads tell me that it must be true because I don't want to form an opinion based on honest research. Move to Iran because any country is better than the "bad" and "terrible" U.S.

Really? shiat, this could be serio- oh, NEWSMAX.

/nevermind

WHTTTBSE: Is my understanding correct that Ahmadinejad isn't even the top dog in Iran? Doesn't the Supreme Leader outrank him on everything?

Khamenei.

You are correct, sir!

At any time the real Iranian power structure can say "Ayatollah you not to do that!"

Reality: Iran couldn't attack a fly.

We threaten other countries with the use of nuclear force, PRE-EMPTIVE NUCLEAR ATTACK, to:
try to halt the "imminent" spread of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction
Political fanaticism and religious fundamentalism
The "dark side" of globalisation, meaning international terrorism, organized crime and the spread of weapons of mass destruction
Climate change and energy security, entailing a contest for resources and potential "environmental" migration on a mass scale.

We plan to use the weapons first, so others won't have the chance...even if they don't actually have them.

That is one radical plan there Lou.

quatchi: At any time the real Iranian power structure can say "Ayatollah you not to do that!"


win

They aren't going to stop trying to start wars until the farking day that bastard leaves office.

More posturing for political points.

The U.S. isn't going to attack Iran and the Iranians know it. And the Iranians are too smart to give the U.S. justification for shellacking them so they're not about to openly attack U.S. forces either.

It's just something for the Iranian gov't to say in order to keep the natives occupied until conditions become more favorable for more open action against their neighbors.

67 Beetle: The U.S. isn't going to attack Iran and the Iranians know it

It's cooled down a little now, but a few months ago when I talked to my cousins, they said they left the house everyday expecting to see American bombers in the sky.

Then again you weren't talking about the citizens, but the government, So there you go.

VictoryCabal: An article headline didn't match the article content? On FARK?.

Look out guys, their T72's might uhh...well their infantry will be able to...screw that, their air force is gonna...at least they're experienced from the Iraq/Iran war that they lo...uhh...they have good dental?

shinji3i: "Look out guys, their T72's might uhh...well their infantry will be able to...screw that, their air force is gonna...at least they're experienced from the Iraq/Iran war that they lo...uhh...they have good dental?"


------------

Yeah. But how many Shahab-3s do they have and how quickly can they launch them all?

But that question aside, they don't need T-72s or MiG-29s to kill a bunch of U.S. soldiers. The war in Iraq has shown that road-side bombs and RPGs shot from holy sites are enough to do that quite effectively.

I still stand by my prediction that an attack will happen in April.

/America - Home of the free as long as you're not brown.

shinji3i: Look out guys, their T72's might uhh...well their infantry will be able to...screw that, their air force is gonna...at least they're experienced from the Iraq/Iran war that they lo...uhh...they have good dental?

Pride before the fall.

When one side is prepared to accept casualties in the last line of defense of the homeland, and the other side is pressing a massively unpopular ground assault, a 3:1 loss/kill ratio for Iran would still be a sweeping victory.

Remember: the "Total Air War" concept that the US Armed Forces have been redesigned around has proven to be an absolute failure at everything except decimating civilian populations.

SlowTimedRapid: 1) The best defense is a good offense.
2) The key to offense is the element of surprise.
Therefore,
3a) The key to self-defense is attacking your opponent before he attacks you...
or better yet...
3b) before the thought of doing so has EVEN OCCURRED TO HIM!!

/Llap-Goch

The best date to do this is December 7th.

Iran to Dubya: "You and what army?"

---only time I've heard that expression used literally!

//gratuitous slashies

67 Beetle: shinji3i: "Look out guys, their T72's might uhh...well their infantry will be able to...screw that, their air force is gonna...at least they're experienced from the Iraq/Iran war that they lo...uhh...they have good dental?"


------------

Yeah. But how many Shahab-3s do they have and how quickly can they launch them all?

But that question aside, they don't need T-72s or MiG-29s to kill a bunch of U.S. soldiers. The war in Iraq has shown that road-side bombs and RPGs shot from holy sites are enough to do that quite effectively.

Who said anything about an occupation?

shinji3i: Who said anything about an occupation?

Iraq: We can't just blow them up and leave!

Iran: We can just blow them up and leave!

Persepolis: It's cooled down a little now, but a few months ago when I talked to my cousins, they said they left the house everyday expecting to see American bombers in the sky.

We're still not out of the woods yet:

Former Bush appointee and neocon power bottom John Bolton trying to get Israel to attack Iran.

Necon godfather Norman Podhoretz still clamoring desperately for someone, anyone, to bomb Iran.

Israel launches new spy satellite out of India to spy on Iran.

Iran is beefing up its surface to air missile defenses.

BTW- I ended up seeing Persepolis today and it was outstanding. I was worried that after reading all of the glowing reviews I would be a little let down, but I was definitely not.

shinji3i: "Who said anything about an occupation?"

-----------

Yeah. We could just lob some Tomahawks in or drop JDAMs on their "WMD sites", but when they start broadcasting the footage of dead children being pulled from the rubble on al-Jazeera, what are the people of the world going to believe? The newspaper articles in Reuters or the press releases out of the DoD?

After the missing all the terror attacks during the last 15 years plus the Iraq WMD debacle, does anyone believe our intel any more?

It doesn't matter what the CIA or MI-6 or the IAEA says. If Iran gets around to building a nuke no one is going to trust the intel reports enough to take military action until Tel Aviv is a smoking hole in the ground.

Jon Snow: We're still not out of the woods yet:

I'm just going by what my cousin's tell me their circle of friends feel like. I'm a little worried myself, but I'm in the US. I have to go by what they say for the average Iranian POV.

Jon Snow: BTW- I ended up seeing Persepolis today and it was outstanding. I was worried that after reading all of the glowing reviews I would be a little let down, but I was definitely not.

Cool. I forgot, I had the Graphic Novel 1 and 2 in GIF form I can email if you like. (Or anyone else for that matter)

I should have rememembered when you said you wanted to read them. The movie is better I feel though. It feels like the graphic novel is just story boards and it was always intended to be a movie. (Though Ms. Satrapi says it wasn't)

quatchi: WHTTTBSE: Is my understanding correct that Ahmadinejad isn't even the top dog in Iran? Doesn't the Supreme Leader outrank him on everything?

Khamenei.

You are correct, sir!

At any time the real Iranian power structure can say "Ayatollah you not to do that!"

That's it, thread's over. Move along, people.

67 Beetle: shinji3i: "Who said anything about an occupation?"

-----------

Yeah. We could just lob some Tomahawks in or drop JDAMs on their "WMD sites", but when they start broadcasting the footage of dead children being pulled from the rubble on al-Jazeera, what are the people of the world going to believe? The newspaper articles in Reuters or the press releases out of the DoD?

After the missing all the terror attacks during the last 15 years plus the Iraq WMD debacle, does anyone believe our intel any more?

It doesn't matter what the CIA or MI-6 or the IAEA says. If Iran gets around to building a nuke no one is going to trust the intel reports enough to take military action until Tel Aviv is a smoking hole in the ground.

WHY WOULD IRAN LAUNCH A NUCLEAR STRIKE AGAINST A NATION WITH SECOND STRIKE CAPACITY?