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.

(Yahoo)   Iran is installing 3,000 centrifuges at a uranium enrichment site. EVERYBODY PANIC   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 703
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

2936 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Jan 2007 at 4:48 PM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



703 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-01-27 08:04:28 PM
untrustworthy: They (Israel) are defending themselves, and everyone has the right to do that.

Yeah, lets not forget. The guys with these. They are the victims
www.israeli-weapons.com
www.israeli-weapons.com

www.israeli-weapons.com
www.israeli-weapons.com
www.israeli-weapons.com
www.aeroflight.co.uk
www1.idf.il
airpower.callihan.cc


and these guys?, they are the aggressors.
www.turkishdailynews.com.tr

Israel as an aggressive expanisionist Nation?...unpossible!

/sorry for threadjack but that had to be answered.
 
2007-01-27 08:05:19 PM
untrustworthy: If you throw away the old bazooka that recklessly kill scores of people and replace it with a new pistol designed to increase accuracy and reduce collateral damage, I would hesitate to label that as proliferation.


Hesitate all you like.

You are building a new type of weapon. This is not to replace other weapons, it is to complement them.

It is a perfect example of proliferation.
 
2007-01-27 08:05:56 PM
consdubya: You claimed it was because they have the backing of a UN vote that allows them to act the way they do.

They have a right to act the way they do because they are a country. A country that was given legitimity by the UN.

See, that's why you don't make sense with your other reply

Israel being able to act like pigs

How do they act like pigs? Or you mean "pigs" as "cops"?
 
2007-01-27 08:06:43 PM
Tatsuma: US: doesn't fund terrorism

heh....only freedom fighters right?
 
2007-01-27 08:06:46 PM
Murder is murder
And removal is removal.
The truth is these eastern euro Jews
were given this as a reward not so much
out of benevolence than as a punishment to
the Arabs who openly supported Nazi Germany.
That and it would be a very simple wedge for an
overly emotional people to pre-occupy themselves
with while the very critical job of extracting oil
continued.
 
2007-01-27 08:07:09 PM
Executive Monkey: Okay first off, I know nothing of him calling you a pretend Jew, so I can't say anything about that.

And yes, I don't believe he's a real Jew. I'm not trying to be a dick, but no, he's not genuine. I've given my reasons, but at the core is this, if I've decided that what he says contradicts what scores and scores of Jewish people say their faith is really about and more specifically, what an Orthodox Jew is all about(of any stripe, Zionist or not, American, Israeli) then yes, I feel I am being quite logical in not viewing him as genuine.

One thing though, I don't pretend for one second what's in his heart, so maybe he's trying his best to be Jewish, but trying isn't doing per se, right?
 
2007-01-27 08:08:02 PM
Lard_Baron: Yeah, lets not forget. The guys with these. They are the victims

What the fark does that have to do with anything? Yeah, Israel has some pretty good weapons. Most of which don't help much against terrorism.

How does this have any relevance in the discussion of who the aggressor is?

Or did you just want to post more of your archived pictures?
 
2007-01-27 08:08:16 PM
Tatsuma: Iran: Violent theocracy, repress it's citizens

Who has Iran attacked recently? Also, I hear that Iran is one of the more progressive ME countries.

US: Peaceful democray, doesn't repress it's citizens

Peaceful? WTF? The US is peaceful? Are you high?

Iran: funds terrorism

Yes.

US: doesn't fund terrorism

Yes it does. Only you call them "Freedom Fighters" when you are funding them.
 
2007-01-27 08:08:18 PM
Tatsuma: Hey, equating something that can't be stopped with something else that can't be stopped ISN'T retarded!

Could someone point out to Tatsuma (he can't read my posts) that just because it's proper to take *some* action to stop nuclear proliferation, it does not follow that it's proper to take *any* action to preventnooclear proliferation?

Just because we should fight organized crime and pedophilia doesn't mean we should become a police state to accomplish those goals.

And just because we should try to preventnooclear proliferation it doesn't necessarily follow that Israel should launch a nuclear bunker-buster attack on multiple Iranian targets while Iran is still at least 3 years away from a bomb.
 
2007-01-27 08:08:46 PM
consdubya: Hesitate all you like.

You are building a new type of weapon. This is not to replace other weapons, it is to complement them.

It is a perfect example of proliferation.


Are you still ignoring the fact that we've gotten rid of a large number of nukes?
 
2007-01-27 08:10:47 PM
Tatsuma: They have a right to act the way they do because they are a country. A country that was given legitimity by the UN.

Ok. Are you aware of the UN resolutions against Israel? The ones the US vetoed? There are plenty of them. Just answer that question. Are you aware of this?
 
2007-01-27 08:10:59 PM
boomaze: who am I kidding! This is America! We can just draft a bunch of poor kids and you guys can keep wrapping your worthless asses in the flag! WHAT A COUNTRY!

I love when people keep pulling out the draft red herring. There is no draft. There will not be a draft in the foreseeable future. What the f*ck does this have to do with opposing Iran's possible development of nuclear weapons?

I've been following this thread and several people have come up with excellent points, such as Party Boy, who pasted some articles about how stupid it was to start upping the rhetoric against Iran 5 years ago. I honestly had no idea that Iran had been helping us with the whole Afghanistan thing, and it was pretty stupid for us to start pissing them off. It's one thing to put a solid effort into pushing them towards democracy, but upping the rhetoric to epic proportions just pisses people off. They've also upped the rhetoric to ridiculous levels and the idea of them having nuclear weapons is a little scary.

I think it would be ridiculously stupid of us to attack them, and it would be best left to Israel to do anything of the sort as they are actually in the region and have a history of (rightfully) not giving a f*ck. We should have used what inroads we were making with the Afghanistan operation to try to get some pull with them in order to keep them fighting against our common enemies while trying to get them to stop funding the people fighting our allies. Maybe this is painting too rosy a picture, but it's pretty basic that when you call someone "evil" they're not going to want to work with you.
 
2007-01-27 08:11:22 PM
untrustworthy: How does this have any relevance in the discussion of who the aggressor is?

Or did you just want to post more of your archived pictures?


I don't like the spin you use that reverses the truth.,
The Strong are the victims.
The weak the aggressors.
We defend.
They attack.
 
2007-01-27 08:12:00 PM
Eerr that should have read: "I don't pretend to know for one second what's in his heart..."

Oh, and this: Tatsuma: You still don't make sense when you say "fake jew". You're the first person who ever posted this from my profile and said "it's impossible, man, lol you pretentious git".

I never said that supposed last quote, in fact, I've never called anyone a git in my life seeing as how I'm an American from the west coast, but maybe he was being facetious or trying to be funny. *shrugs*
 
2007-01-27 08:12:12 PM
consdubya: Yes it does. Only you call them "Freedom Fighters" when you are funding them.

Exactly. You probably know about these examples, consdubya, but for those who don't, consider:

1) The Kosovo Liberation Army
2) The Northern Alliance (Afghanistan)
3) The Contras (Nicaragua)

All three of these groups were/are terrorist groups in the classic sense - e.g., they blew up bombs in marketplaces to kill civilians for political objectives, etc.

And that's not even counting things like US support for IDF carpet-bombing of Lebanon.

But of course, when they're on our side they're freedom fighters, as consdubya pointed out.
 
2007-01-27 08:12:44 PM
Lard_Baron: I don't like the spin you use that reverses the truth.,

What spin? It doesn't matter how much weaponry you have. If you attack someone then you are the aggressor. If you are attacked by someone, you are the defender. The firepower of each party is irrelevant.
 
2007-01-27 08:13:16 PM
untrustworthy: Are you still ignoring the fact that we've gotten rid of a large number of nukes?

Yes, because it is irrelevant. The ones that were disposed of were cold war munitions that were designed to wipe the entire earth out thousands of times over. The ones that the US has kept can still wipe the earth out hundreds of times over.

So yes, I am ignoring your stupid point because it was irrelevant.
 
2007-01-27 08:13:36 PM
rocket lawn chair: One thing though, I don't pretend for one second what's in his heart, so maybe he's trying his best to be Jewish, but trying isn't doing per se, right?

Hum. You do know that Jews form a race, right? Would you say that Larry David is a fake jew, or Woody Allen, or Robert Zimmerman (aka Bob Dylan) are fake jews because (well, I'm guessing here), they do not practice the Jewish religion?
 
2007-01-27 08:14:08 PM
Lard_Baron: Yeah, lets not forget. The guys with these.

Meh. Egypt has been provided with an export version of the M1A1, F-16s, M113s, M109A5s, M1097s, BGM-71 TOWs and even AH-64Ds. They've even got some (decommissioned) Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates.
 
2007-01-27 08:14:38 PM
Tatsuma: They have a right to act the way they do because they are a country. A country that was given legitimity by the UN.

You can't just drag the UN out to support your side of the debate when it agrees with you and then ignore it and ridicule it when it disagrees with you.
 
2007-01-27 08:14:41 PM
Executive Monkey: But of course, when they're on our side they're freedom fighters, as consdubya pointed out.


And you forgot the best example, the one that gave birth to the term "freedom fighter".

Osama Bin Laden. Reagan loved him.
 
2007-01-27 08:14:43 PM
Well. I should have used: "people" instead of race but my point stands.
 
2007-01-27 08:15:09 PM
Oh and any remaining apologists for this regime please keep in mind Saudi Arabia has lived with a nuclear enabled neighbor in Israel for the last 40 years and yet now with this pending start up of Iran's first systems Saudi Arabia is talking about the need to getnooclear knowhow. I mean how damning is that? Man. Israel and Saudi Arabia are pretty much allies in Lebanon and other places Iran is exerting greater influence. Amazing job Bushco has done to maneuver the regional alliances like this. The guy is truly underrated, or at least his team is.
 
2007-01-27 08:17:33 PM
Executive Monkey: And that's not even counting things like US support for IDF carpet-bombing of Lebanon.

Carpet bombing would imply the mass use of medium or strategic bombers to deliver unguided ordinance over a large swath of area. Pray tell, when did Uncle Sam happen to give the Israelis B-52s or B-1Bs?
 
2007-01-27 08:17:35 PM
consdubya: Osama Bin Laden. Reagan loved him.

Did the US ever give money to Osama bin Laden? The government claims that while it did fund anti-Soviet mujhadeen groups, it never funded al-Qaeda. That could be a lie, though, so I'd be interested in any sources you can provide that say otherwise.
 
2007-01-27 08:17:49 PM
untrustworthy: If you attack someone then you are the aggressor. If you are attacked by someone, you are the defender.

Those with the better weaponry are more aggressive than those without. The Palestinians are the victims, Israel the aggressor.

/end threadjack
 
2007-01-27 08:17:54 PM
Softens_hands_while_you_do_the_dishes:

Just remember: The Sauds are different to the Saudis. Sure, the house of Saud is a strong ally, but the Saudi people are not.
 
2007-01-27 08:18:34 PM
consdubya: Yes, because it is irrelevant. The ones that were disposed of were cold war munitions that were designed to wipe the entire earth out thousands of times over. The ones that the US has kept can still wipe the earth out hundreds of times over.

So yes, I am ignoring your stupid point because it was irrelevant.


Alright, retard. Take a look at these numbers. Tell me if our stockpile is growing or shrinking. Take your time so as to not to continue to make yourself look like a dumbass.

US Nuclear stockpile by year:

1973 28999
1974 28965
1975 27826
1976 25579
1977 25722
1978 24826
1979 24605
1980 24304
1981 23464
1982 23708
1983 24099
1984 24357
1985 24237
1986 24401
1987 24344
1988 23586
1989 22380
1990 21004
1991 17287
1992 14747
1993 13076
1994 12555
1995 12144
1996 11009
1997 10950
1998 10871
1999 10824
2000 10577
2001 10527
2002 10475
2003 10421
2004 10358
2005 10295
2006 10104
 
2007-01-27 08:19:11 PM
Meanwhile our stoned sandal footed crowd wanders in protest not really understanding that they too are serving a purpose in forcing our regional allies to speed up to time table to lowering the boom and creating a stability force in Iraq. Dumbasses are helping even when it's not their intent. You see Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Gulf State Council or whatever it's called convening and condemning Iranian interference in their countries. This is getting interesting. Accusing another country of using agents to stir up internal trouble has often been the pretext for waging war.
 
2007-01-27 08:20:12 PM
Lard_Baron: Those with the better weaponry are more aggressive than those without. The Palestinians are the victims, Israel the aggressor.

That's on par with being the dumbest thing I've read in this thread?

By your measure, if a 98lb weakling stabs a 250lb body builder, is he just defending himself?
 
2007-01-27 08:20:39 PM
Ayatollah Assahola.
 
2007-01-27 08:21:14 PM
Comrade438: Carpet bombing would imply the mass use of medium or strategic bombers to deliver unguided ordinance over a large swath of area. Pray tell, when did Uncle Sam happen to give the Israelis B-52s or B-1Bs?

Sorry, you are right. That was a typo on my part. I meant to refer to the cluster bombing of Lebanon, not the carpet bombing of Lebanon.

Here's what I was referring to, sorry for the confusion. Look at the headline of my source; no wonder I made that typo:

Israeli shelling left carpet of bomblets
 
2007-01-27 08:21:33 PM
consdubya: Osama Bin Laden. Reagan loved him.

Yes. Reagan loved generic disgruntled Saudi-turned-Mujahideen fighter in Afghanistan who no one had heard of as he hadn't distinguished himself until following the decline of the Soviet effort in Afghanistan (1988).
 
2007-01-27 08:23:42 PM
Lard_Baron: Those with the better weaponry are more aggressive than those without. The Palestinians are the victims, Israel the aggressor.

This makes absolutely no sense. If I rob a bank and take hostages with a pistol and a SWAT team is sent in to take me down, who is being the aggressor? It's not about how well-armed you are, it's about how *aggressive* you are. F*cking duh.

Are the Israeli troops required to use the same weapons as Palestinian militants? Do they have to throw rocks back at them so as not to appear aggressive?
 
2007-01-27 08:26:15 PM
untrustworthy: By your measure, if a 98lb weakling stabs a 250lb body builder, is he just defending himself?

If a 250lb body builder knive owning bully punches a weakling and takes his place in the food line, the weakling swings back a feeble blow, the the 250lb body builder shrieks
"lookit!!! you all saw that, he swung at me, I'm defending myself!"

250lb bodybuilder = Israel
98 lb weakling = Palestine

/really end threadjack now.
 
2007-01-27 08:26:19 PM
Nice timeline/pics Lard_Baron

/thumbs up
 
2007-01-27 08:28:06 PM
Executive Monkey: I meant to refer to the cluster bombing of Lebanon, not the carpet bombing of Lebanon.

Cluster munitions aren't (necessarily) unguided, though. The United States' newest weapon, the CBU-97, is a cluster munition designed for the purpose of destroying groups of armored vehicles or infantry. It's for when those Soviet tank columns come rumbling out of East Germany and you aren't ready to throw in the conventional warfare towel just yet. 'Cause low yield nuclear weapons turn into strategic megaton weapons sooner rather than later.
 
2007-01-27 08:29:22 PM
Executive Monkey: Yes, I knew that they form a race, and no, I wouldn't say they're not Jewish. (plus I happen to like Bob Dylan, and never have thought about his religion so it'd be hard for me to dislike em, just FYI) I see your point.

Take what I'm saying in context to Tatsuma. Look, I understand that just because one lives in Israel and that they are an Israeli citizen it does not make them Jewish.

The only logical thing I can argue in my defense of using the word "Jew" in the context I used, I refer that religiously, it was the Torah or if you believe "God" laid down a bunch of rules to show how to be Jewish.

So I stand by what I say, but I will admit that it's easy for me to forget that at least for Jewish people with Jewish ancestry (or at least their mother was Jewish), that they are, technically, a Jew.

Seems like a technicality to me, but I completely see what you're saying.
 
2007-01-27 08:29:38 PM
Babooshka: Nice timeline/pics Lard_Baron

/thumbs up


You're aware it's nearly all bullshiat or inaccuracies and omissions, right?
 
2007-01-27 08:30:48 PM
Comrade438: You're aware it's nearly all bullshiat or inaccuracies and omissions, right?

Post the inaccuracies please
 
2007-01-27 08:31:22 PM
Aw geez, I blame my tiredness. I meant The Duke of Carrot Flowers, NOT Executive Monkey.


Wow.
 
2007-01-27 08:31:39 PM
Comrade438: You're aware it's nearly all bullshiat or inaccuracies and omissions, right?


then post the ommissions
 
2007-01-27 08:31:53 PM
Lard_Baron: Post the inaccuracies please

Uhh... you quoted part of it?
 
2007-01-27 08:32:44 PM
Lard_Baron: If a 250lb body builder knive owning bully punches a weakling and takes his place in the food line, the weakling swings back a feeble blow, the the 250lb body builder shrieks. "lookit!!! you all saw that, he swung at me, I'm defending myself!"

The problem is that the terrorists aren't attacking the military of Israel as much as they are attacking the innocent civilians. So, by your analogy, since the terrorists are better armed than the civilians, then they are obviously the aggressors.
 
2007-01-27 08:33:01 PM
Executive Monkey: Did the US ever give money to Osama bin Laden? The government claims that while it did fund anti-Soviet mujhadeen groups, it never funded al-Qaeda. That could be a lie, though, so I'd be interested in any sources you can provide that say otherwise.


I have no direct proof that CIA funds ended up with Osama specifically, but the amount of weapons and cash flowing into afgahnistan makes it very very unlikely that same did not end up with Osama.

Also, the CIA knew who the weapons and cash ended up with, its not like they didnt know that they were fundamentalist jihadis.
 
2007-01-27 08:33:09 PM
Comrade438: You're aware it's nearly all bullshiat or inaccuracies and omissions, right?

Which parts are Bullshiat?
 
2007-01-27 08:35:14 PM
untrustworthy: Alright, retard. Take a look at these numbers. Tell me if our stockpile is growing or shrinking. Take your time so as to not to continue to make yourself look like a dumbass.

Dude.....

Tell me where I said that your stockpile was not being reduced.

Take your time to read what I wrote, and then comment.
 
2007-01-27 08:35:21 PM
consdubya: Also, the CIA knew who the weapons and cash ended up with, its not like they didnt know that they were fundamentalist jihadis.

Who happened to be fighting against our then enemy, the USSR.
 
2007-01-27 08:36:20 PM
Lard_Baron: then post the ommissions

Post the inaccuracies please

Which parts are Bullshiat?


See: 2007-01-27 06:45:50 Comrade438
 
2007-01-27 08:37:05 PM
Comrade438: Yes. Reagan loved generic disgruntled Saudi-turned-Mujahideen fighter in Afghanistan who no one had heard of as he hadn't distinguished himself until following the decline of the Soviet effort in Afghanistan (1988).


Funding mujahideen? What could go wrong?
 
Displayed 50 of 703 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report