Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NY Sun)   Nobel Peace Prize winner actually does something useful: Elie Wiesel moves to have Iran thrown out of the UN   (nysun.com) divider line 301
    More: Hero  
•       •       •

13503 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Sep 2006 at 11:26 PM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



301 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-09-14 12:52:42 AM  
mrexcess

Gaza, The West Bank, East Jerusalem, Golan, Lebanon...all accidentally fell off a truck, doncha know.

The jews were attacked. They fought back and won.
 
2006-09-14 12:53:08 AM  
mrexcess wrote: If we leave the UN, how will we prevent wars between great powers? How will we exercise our own voice without seeming to be imperialists who use the force of their arms to achieve their ends?

It doesn't matter what we do, how we do it, or the platform from which we announce it. The US will always be seen as an imperialist nation using the force of arms to achieve shady goals. And someone will always blame the Jews. And someone will always biatch and moan and cry about how we're either 1) not doing enough, or 2) doing too much, or 3) somehow accomplishing both at the same time.

In short, I am an isolationist. Less entangling foreign alliances (and less entangling foreign conflicts such as the clusterfark in Iraq) would make me a happy woman.
 
2006-09-14 12:53:20 AM  
Badassador
This notion of "mutually assured destruction," worked fine with the Soviets because they weren't, well, crazy;

It had nothing to do with them being crazy or not. It works because the Soviet state wasn't suicidal (at least, directly). Are you trying to argue that Iran is? Otherwise you have no point. And I don't envy someone trying to support a point like that logically.

Besides, if Iran were willing to destroy themselves in a suicidal attack that destroys Israel, they already would have done so with the WMDs they presently have.

Pretty clearly, the Iranian regime is as deterred by MAD as anyone.
 
2006-09-14 12:54:54 AM  
futurepastnow
Then I imagine myself in their place, shooting Nazis. It's therapeutic.

It is therapeutic, isn't it.

Thanks! I'll count dead Nazis as I dose off to sleep tongiht...
 
2006-09-14 12:55:07 AM  
mrexcess wrote: Gaza, The West Bank, East Jerusalem, Golan, Lebanon...all accidentally fell off a truck, doncha know.

Yes, they fell off a truck being driven by dumb-as-fark morons who picked a fight with Israel and lost. QQ
 
2006-09-14 12:55:16 AM  
echoucha

I know. I'm arguing against what ericjohnson0 believes they said.

Badassador

This notion of "mutually assured destruction," worked fine with the Soviets because they weren't, well, crazy; I'm not sure if one can honestly say the same for Iran.

What gives you the indication that the Iranian leadership is particularly interested in a mass suicide attempt?

Remember it's not the leadership of Iran strapping explosives to their chests.
 
2006-09-14 12:56:13 AM  
ericjohnson0The Jewish state, in 50+ years has never made a habit of invading its neighbors...

Wow. So there are two options here. Either you're too lazy to have known that Israel invaded and occupied southern Lebanon illegally for 24 years(the reason for the formation of Hezbollah), or you have somehow managed to convince yourself that this action was a defensive measure. If it's the second option, these arguments are a waste of my time.

....I won't even get into Palestine....but read a book, seriously.
 
2006-09-14 12:56:30 AM  
Tatsuma
It's against the charter of the UN to threaten another member with destruction.

Please cite how it is official Iranian policy that Israel should be destroyed.
 
2006-09-14 12:56:45 AM  
ericjohnson0
The jews were attacked. They fought back and won.

Not historically accurate in any way, shape, or form, but hey...that's what I would expect.

Also, Israel != "the jews".

Cry_Blue_Murder
The US will always be seen as an imperialist nation using the force of arms to achieve shady goals.

Why weren't we seen that way 10 years ago nearly to the degree we are now?

And someone will always blame the Jews.

What are we blaming the Jews for, again? I missed that part.

In short, I am an isolationist. Less entangling foreign alliances (and less entangling foreign conflicts such as the clusterfark in Iraq) would make me a happy woman.

You really didn't answer my question, by the way. And this is where it comes into play -- how does isolationism work out in a world of nuclear proliferation, and even worse technologies of destruction? Especially when previous administrations have painted such a bright red target on your back?
 
2006-09-14 12:56:47 AM  
kingflathead

Thanks for ruining the thread.

/hates scrolling across to read comments.
//douchebag
 
2006-09-14 12:57:49 AM  
This is madness. And situation normal for humanity. We just have bigger sticks and rocks to throw at each other now.
 
2006-09-14 12:58:00 AM  
Cry_Blue_Murder
Yes, they fell off a truck being driven by dumb-as-fark morons who picked a fight with Israel and lost.

Capturing territory in warfare is illegal according to the UN Charter and UNSC Resolution 242, incidentally.
 
2006-09-14 12:59:38 AM  
mrexcess
How very Christlike of you!

One of my heroes was a fellow named Dick Winters who was Mennonite; they are like the Amish except they believe in using modern conveniences.

Sometimes pacifism works, sometimes it doesn't. I don't think Jesus would want me to stand idly by while zealots and freaks murdered innocents.
 
2006-09-14 01:01:02 AM  
My 1680x1050 resolution surrenders under kingflathead's asshatness.
 
2006-09-14 01:01:58 AM  
mrexcess
Gaza, The West Bank, East Jerusalem, Golan, Lebanon...all accidentally fell off a truck, doncha know.


oh, come the fark on. lands won during a time of war, and kept as a buffer zone against aggressive neighbors.

they didn't just decide one day that they wanted more piles of rocks and invaded those areas. if that's what you're trying to say, your misinformed at best, a farking liar at worst.

unless your lebanon mention is about this most recent development, in which israel is so far into the wrong that i can't put it into words.
 
2006-09-14 01:02:02 AM  
ericjohnson0I don't think Jesus would want me to stand idly by while zealots and freaks murdered innocents.

If I had a nickel for every double-standard you've posted...
 
2006-09-14 01:02:11 AM  
Occulto: But it's the leadership of Iran supplying the materiel and funds for said explosives, and training of said "martyrs."
 
2006-09-14 01:02:17 AM  
When will this ZIONIST Elie WEASEL stop perpetrating the MYTH of the HOLOCAUST?

We all know that HITLER was a VEGETARIAN and would never do anything remotely like what is described. He treated civilians in all nations that he conquered in a manner consistent with the laws of war throughout history.

/ And if you think I'm being SERIOUS, I'm NOT.
// I read NIGHT when I was about 10 and it still haunts me, although I don't remember ALL OF THE DETAILS.
 
2006-09-14 01:02:52 AM  
ericjohnson0
I don't think Jesus would want me to stand idly by while zealots and freaks murdered innocents.

Right. You think he would encourage you to cut their heads off and put them on poles, like I said.

Which pretty much speaks for itself.
 
2006-09-14 01:03:44 AM  
Mother Theresa is a scam artist. There's some nobel prize winners who totally deserve it (Gobechev, anyone?) but Mother Theresa isn't one of them.
 
2006-09-14 01:04:43 AM  
mrexcess

Capturing territory in warfare is illegal according to the UN Charter and UNSC Resolution 242, incidentally.


Sure, anyone can prove anything with facts.
 
2006-09-14 01:05:38 AM  
mrexcess
Right. You think he would encourage you to cut their heads off and put them on poles, like I said.

It sends a message of what we're willing to do to those who would commit such heinous crimes. That sort 'barbarism' serves a useful purpose, as distasteful as it may be.
 
2006-09-14 01:06:08 AM  
effhead
lands won during a time of war

Again, wholly illegal and illegitimate according to the UN Charter and UNSC Resolutions.

and kept as a buffer zone against aggressive neighbors.

They're building civilian settlements on it...that ain't no buffer zone. That's colonization.

they didn't just decide one day that they wanted more piles of rocks and invaded those areas.

Depends on who you listen to. Ask a settler why they're living in occupied territory and I'll bet you dollars to donuts the answer is closer to "because god gave us this land thousands of years ago" than "because we're providing a buffer zone of human shields".
 
2006-09-14 01:06:45 AM  
elchip
Our favorite center-left bomb thrower... nice post.
 
2006-09-14 01:06:52 AM  
To Quote Kinky Friedman...

They sure don't make Jews like Jesus anymore.
 
2006-09-14 01:07:02 AM  
IRAN IS NOT A THREAT.....WAKE UP

THE FORMER SOVIET UNION PUPPET COUNTRY IS NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING THAT WILL END UP IN HAVING IT'S LAND INVADED AND "LIBERATED"

IF A NUKE GOES OFF ANYWHERE IN THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE --- IRAN WILL BE TO BLAME, AND WILL SUBSEQUENTLY BE TAKEN OVER AND THE GOVERNMENT WILL BE REDUCED TO A WONDERING TRIBE....

WAKE UP== IRAN DOES NOT WANT TO LOSE THEIR OIL LADEN LAND!!!

THEY WILL NOT RISK DOING ANYTHING@!!!!

THEY ARE PROBABLY DOING EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER TO MAKE SURE A NUKE DOES NOT GO OFF SINCE THEY KNOW THEY WILL BE TO BLAME!!

WAKE UP

WHY WOULD IRAN WANT TO LOSE ITS OWN LAND AND RISK INVASION!???

DO NOT ALLOW YOURSELF TO FEAR SOMETHING THAT IS NOT REAL!!!

IRAN IS NOT A THREAT!!! THEY HAVE A COUNTRY TO LOSE, AND IF THEY USE A NUKE, THEY WILL LOSE IT....AND THEY KNOW THAT.

NO, THEY ARE NOT CRAZY...

YES, THEY ARE PLAYING OUR FEARS AND OUR MEDIA LIKE A STRATOVARIOUS!!!
 
2006-09-14 01:07:18 AM  
ericjohnson0
It sends a message of what we're willing to do to those who would commit such heinous crimes.

That it does. That. It. Does.

That sort 'barbarism' serves a useful purpose

It would not appear that Jesus thought so. But hey, why should that matter to you, you're just one of his supposed followers.
 
2006-09-14 01:07:51 AM  
mrexcess: While you're still here, I'd like to know your thoughts on my last comment from a thread a few days back. :D

Link: Venezualan president Hugo Chavez says he has uncovered the Boobies this month by the United States to overthrow his government
 
2006-09-14 01:08:01 AM  
effhead

Buffer zone? These are strategic territories. There is a huge issue of fresh water sources in the region. Look at the Lebanese territories occupied by Israel for nearly a quarter century. Or should we discuss the "sharing" of fresh water source between Israeli's and Palestinians in cantoned regions.
 
2006-09-14 01:08:33 AM  
ericjohnson0: Thanks! I'll count dead Nazis as I dose off to sleep tongiht...

For a more direct experience, you might also try playing that old classic, Wolfenstein 3D. I spent so much of 1992 and '93 playing that game, I started to dream it.
 
2006-09-14 01:08:34 AM  
Badassador

But it's the leadership of Iran supplying the materiel and funds for said explosives, and training of said "martyrs."

Not disputing that.

Now I ask again: What gives you the indication that the Iranian leadership is particularly interested in a mass suicide attempt?

Paying someone else to do the dirtywork doesn't make you suicidal. In fact it indicates pretty much the opposite - that you don't want to risk your own neck.
 
2006-09-14 01:08:46 AM  
SO, youre saying Iran wants to give up their country?

That would be the outcome if Iran used any WMD.

IRAN IS NOT A THREAT!
 
2006-09-14 01:08:49 AM  
NukeEuropeNow
Mother Theresa is a scam artist. There's some nobel prize winners who totally deserve it (Gobechev, anyone?) but Mother Theresa isn't one of them.

The amount of stupid in this thread is starting to multiply like an Ebola virus...
 
2006-09-14 01:08:49 AM  
Badassador: Missed the thread, and kinda off-topic for this one. Feel free to e-mail me, though.
 
2006-09-14 01:09:06 AM  
Malum you cock. Put the keyboard down and go and find a street corner to stand on.
 
2006-09-14 01:09:07 AM  
elchip

you coulda got some mileage outta that if you hadn't explained it in the slashes.
 
2006-09-14 01:10:30 AM  
IRAN IS A REAL COUNTRY, NOT A TERRORIST CELL...THEY WILL NOT HANDOVER THEIR OIL RICH LAND JUST TO USE WMD ON US....

WE ARENT WORTH IT....

IRAN IS NOT A THREAT.
 
2006-09-14 01:11:01 AM  
effhead: you coulda got some mileage outta that if you hadn't explained it in the slashes.

Yeah, but I'm not in the mood to get a time out today.
 
2006-09-14 01:11:25 AM  
how would the powers in Iran get RICHER by nuking the USA?

They WOULDNT...THEY ARE NOT A THREAT!.
 
2006-09-14 01:11:33 AM  
How's this, we throw Iran out and allow Taiwan back in? Taiwan isn't in because of China. Time to make things a bit more equitable. There is no excuse for Taiwan not beng allowed membership. And Iran, may want to start acting like it deserves it.
 
2006-09-14 01:12:39 AM  
FuturePastNow
...I just think of my generation's grandfathers, shooting Nazis. Then I imagine myself in their place, shooting Nazis. It's therapeutic.

Oh, now, the rank-and-file of the German military were just poor fools who thought they were doing the right thing but just believed their leaders' many lies. There's little difference between a German soldier in France in 1941 and an American soldier in Iraq today- Would you advocate the murder of our poor fools?
 
2006-09-14 01:13:13 AM  
How would Iran benefit by attacking the USA?

How would it lose?

the whole western hemisphere would OUST THEM!!

THEY KNOW THAT...

They are not a threat.
 
2006-09-14 01:13:34 AM  
Malum: Yeesh, we get it already.

WhyteRaven74: We wouldn't have support for throwing Iran out of the UN, and that would be extraordinarily stupid anyway. What's the point of throwing someone you have differences with out of the negotiating body meant to resolve differences between great powers? We would just be increasing the likelyhood of war between our peoples.

Oh, wait, now I see why people are arguing for it. Nevermind.
 
2006-09-14 01:16:19 AM  
Malum: You're forgetting that Iranians are mostly Muslims, and as such they're completely crazy and cannot be trusted, not even to exhibit the most basic of human behaviors, self-preservation. Since all muslims wish nothing more than to destroy the West and reap their reward of 72 virgins in the process, we cannot be sure Iran isn't divising some dastardly way to achieve this as we speak. Thus, we must kill them all.

Or something like that. Emulating the neoconservative mindset gives me a headache.
 
2006-09-14 01:16:47 AM  
His books were good.
 
2006-09-14 01:17:27 AM  
mrexcess
Again, wholly illegal and illegitimate according to the UN Charter and UNSC Resolutions.


they don't abide by current resolutions now, why would they then?

They're building civilian settlements on it...that ain't no buffer zone. That's colonization.

i thought that they were knocking down settlements, and having their police firebombed by their own citizens in the process? seems that they only started letting them rebuild after palestinians effed the agreement in place by starting up suicide bombings again.

your "depends on who you ask" statement isn't worth treating.

echoucha
you're saying that israel wanted to get attacked so that they could move to take control of water resources?
 
2006-09-14 01:17:34 AM  
Malum: They are not a threat.

Ragnaros wasn't a threat, but a pre-emptive strike was necessary.

Nefarian wasn't much of a threat, but a pre-emptive site was necessary.

C'Thun wasn't much of a threat, but a pre-emptive site was necessary.
 
2006-09-14 01:17:57 AM  
mrexcess

Emulating the neoconservative mindset gives me a headache.

Neocons think they can handle democracy.. palecons know better...
 
2006-09-14 01:18:47 AM  
mrexcess: Yeah not really that big of a deal; feel free to reply though if you get the chance. :D
 
2006-09-14 01:20:08 AM  
elchip
Ragnaros wasn't a threat, but a pre-emptive strike was necessary.

Nefarian wasn't much of a threat, but a pre-emptive site was necessary.

C'Thun wasn't much of a threat, but a pre-emptive site was necessary.


elchip, you shouldn't 'booze and blog' at the same time... gets a wee bit dangerous...
 
Displayed 50 of 301 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report