Iran

[tarkil]

What do you mean you're high ?

You're high like in "high" ? How come !?

[Variable]

ha, no I'm not actually high.  But I probably would make some pretty interesting post if I smoked pot for the first time in 6 years.

[White Pwny]

ha, no I'm not actually high.  But I probably would make some pretty interesting post if I smoked pot for the first time in 6 years.

I'll get ya high.   That would be funny!   I've seen "drunk Trey"... I wonder how "high Trey" is...

[Corleone]

your "everyone for himself"-attitude is not, what i expected from you.


someone points a gun on someone you love and threatens to pull the trigger.

you wouldnt stop him or her until the actually shot?


btw: a threat itself is an immoral action as it causes a disadvantage on the side that is threatened.


i will later write something to your total inadequate comparision between what is the idea of Minority Report and how we atually judge in political events. (i am sure if you would think about it for 5 minutes my post will not be necessary)

Hey, if you want to try to have a valid opinion, try using some fucking grammar. You write like an 8 year old with a thesaurus.

[Nailec]

i`ll do my best 

[goldpony]

it is wrong for any country to say to another country yeah we have nuclear weapons but you cant. So essentially we are saying "see this big stick, you cant have one. if you try we'll use our other big sticks to beat you down." starving a nation and causing its development to go backward is not a good foreign policy. that being said i would not want the leader of iran to have them. it amazes me that pakistan has been able to hold its arsenal so well (relatively speaking)

[Nailec]

what about the following analogy:

in the USA everyone has the right to bear arms in order to protect themselves and because every American is a free citizen.
should the same right be valid for someone who has some mental problem where you would normally say that it would be really irresponsible to give him that gun.


the ideological background makes the big difference to me.

same thing with pakistan. everything was well as long as it is secularized. but you just dont want these weapons in the hands of fundamentalists.


and please do not just make the USA responsible for Iran`s people to starve. do you think they have a good foreign policy? do you think they have good politics in any issue? (talking about crimes against human rights)

[Variable]

ha, no I'm not actually high.  But I probably would make some pretty interesting post if I smoked pot for the first time in 6 years.

I'll get ya high.   That would be funny!   I've seen "drunk Trey"... I wonder how "high Trey" is...

I laugh. A LOT.

your "everyone for himself"-attitude is not, what i expected from you.

someone points a gun on someone you love and threatens to pull the trigger.

you wouldnt stop him or her until the actually shot?

btw: a threat itself is an immoral action as it causes a disadvantage on the side that is threatened.

i will later write something to your total inadequate comparision between what is the idea of Minority Report and how we atually judge in political events. (i am sure if you would think about it for 5 minutes my post will not be necessary)

Hey, if you want to try to have a valid opinion, try using some fucking grammar. You write like an 8 year old with a thesaurus.

Ill stand up for him here.  English isn't his first language.

it is wrong for any country to say to another country yeah we have nuclear weapons but you cant. So essentially we are saying "see this big stick, you cant have one. if you try we'll use our other big sticks to beat you down." starving a nation and causing its development to go backward is not a good foreign policy. that being said i would not want the leader of iran to have them. it amazes me that pakistan has been able to hold its arsenal so well (relatively speaking)

Yeah, it is very hypocritical.  They throw all this rhetoric and propaganda at you about world stability and responsibility.  But in the end its only to ensure the empire. 

You're missing the point.  My point isn't about if it is a good idea for Iran to have nukes or not.  My point is that its not ok for one government to boss around another government.  No, mentally handicapped people should probably not have firearms.  But its not ok for my government to tell Mexico that they can't allow their mentally handicapped citizens to have weapons.  Its ok for the U.S. government to say that about U.S. citizens, not ok for any other country to say that about U.S. citizens and vice versa. 

If you try to solve all the worlds problems, you will always be at war.  As soon as you " solve " one problem, another will arise in a new place.  Then chances are you will end up having to go back and handle the blowback from the unintended consequences of solving the first problem.  Like how Hitler more than likely would have never been able to take power if it was not for the treaty of Versailles.  We would have never had to go after Saddam if we had not put him in power.  Bin Laden probably never would have been able to gain support the U.S. never took a presence in the Arabian Peninsula.  And now, speaking about this current issue.  We would probably have never had to worry about Iran if the U.S. and Britain had not ousted Mossadegh and put the Shah back into power. 

But you see, the more we interfere with other countries business and try to control everything, the more it spirals out of control.  Where do you stop?  Will you take action one time but not the other?  Are you prepared to fight and die to try and prevent the inevitable?  I don't want my country to be an Empire.  I want it to be a land of solace.  No matter how fucked up the rest of the world is, my country is still good and is an example to the rest of the world.  We speak softly, but carry a big stick.  We don't bother anybody, but we will crush anyone who tries to tread on us.  But in now way do I want my country to be a symbol of a country that bombs the fuck out of other countries, killing innocent women , children, and non combatant men, all in the name of " moral foreign policy. " This game of controlling the world through foreign policy is really quite sick.  But somehow they seem to have sucked the majority of people into buying it.

Oh and the US has had a foreign policy of putting sanctions and embargos on Nations for way more countries than just Iran.  Historically all these policies do is hurt the people, not the government officials they were aimed at.  We starve millions of children while the "bad guy" ruler of the country is still sitting fat.  Then we pat ourselves on the back on CNN and in front of the UN for taking appropriate " peaceful " actions.  Give me a break.

[Nailec]

Ill stand up for him here.  English isn't his first language.

thanks you!

its a shame nonetheless.

i have been taught englisch for 9 years during school. i dont know how i managed not being able to write properly.
time by time i read some englisch articles. but that is all how i am involved in it. oh and yeah. this board here, too.



i want to go to sleep now. so i try to answer in a few words.

borders are artificial. they(boarders) shouldnt stop us from helping other people if they are surpressed, killed or whatever human right (that their rulers probablly give a shit about) is violated.

Human Rights have been declared after WW2. im not telling you anything new here. of course it is an overreaction if every crime against humanity would be answered with bombs by those defenders of human rights. i just thought about what would happen if someone decides to bomb china, russia or the usa for violating human rights. but by doing nothing, you would tolerate them and make the human rights declaration look like a total joke.

yes, sadly those sanctions hit the weakest people at first hand. all you can do is to hope that those sanctions destabilize (i hope that word exists) the country and force its rulers to stop their evil business.


now i dont know where to draw the line. but commiting genocide or announcing it and having the means to do so, would be one thing where i dont think that economic sanctions are enough. i mean seriously now.

i would call it a perverted tolerance if you just let each nation do whatever they want.

moral law> nations law

i know, this keeps the spiral, which you described, going. but we shouldnt turn our head either.

i believe the spiral can be broken if historic revisionism is fought by education.
it would really make you vomit if you hear how german neonazis make out of WW2 and the Holocaust.  it is really important that those people never dictate the discourse and become able to turn their meanings into practice.

i think this is something that military interventions should always achieve, too.

[goldpony]

nice responses! i wasnt trying to limit the US's involvement with sanctions just to Iran, but since the topis is Iran.... Anyway, i was also trying to say it is bad foreign policy for any goverment to use sanctions to pressure other goverments to do things, nukes or not. I do believe that we have to have a means to enforce things for special circumstances (in this case, a nutjob with a really big gun) but as a whole, i believe in the soveriegnty of nations to do as they please.

And when you talk of moral law, who's morals do you mean

[Variable]

Ill stand up for him here.  English isn't his first language.

thanks you!

its a shame nonetheless.

i have been taught englisch for 9 years during school. i dont know how i managed not being able to write properly.
time by time i read some englisch articles. but that is all how i am involved in it. oh and yeah. this board here, too.



i want to go to sleep now. so i try to answer in a few words.

borders are artificial. they(boarders) shouldnt stop us from helping other people if they are surpressed, killed or whatever human right (that their rulers probablly give a shit about) is violated.

Human Rights have been declared after WW2. im not telling you anything new here. of course it is an overreaction if every crime against humanity would be answered with bombs by those defenders of human rights. i just thought about what would happen if someone decides to bomb china, russia or the usa for violating human rights. but by doing nothing, you would tolerate them and make the human rights declaration look like a total joke.

yes, sadly those sanctions hit the weakest people at first hand. all you can do is to hope that those sanctions destabilize (i hope that word exists) the country and force its rulers to stop their evil business.


now i dont know where to draw the line. but commiting genocide or announcing it and having the means to do so, would be one thing where i dont think that economic sanctions are enough. i mean seriously now.

i would call it a perverted tolerance if you just let each nation do whatever they want.

moral law> nations law

i know, this keeps the spiral, which you described, going. but we shouldnt turn our head either.

i believe the spiral can be broken if historic revisionism is fought by education.
it would really make you vomit if you hear how german neonazis make out of WW2 and the Holocaust.  it is really important that those people never dictate the discourse and become able to turn their meanings into practice.

i think this is something that military interventions should always achieve, too.

Yes I know that borders are man made.  But the reign of a governments power is very real.  I'm all for civil right and human rights.  But once again, starting a war to prevent a war, that may or may not every happen, is a bit ridiculous.  Yeah sure, hopefully those sanctions destabilized the governments.  But the fact is that in most cases they didn't.  They just starved the lower and middle class of that country while guys like Saddam and Castro were  not effected one bit.  Is the life of an Israeli or American really that much more valuable than that of an Iranian or Cuban to you?  What about their human rights?  Should they be punished because their totalitarian leaders are ass holes?  If we take military action over this, the men of Iran will be forced to fight whether they agree with their crazy ass leader or not.  Fight and die for what? 

And don't forget that you are also not just asking the U.S. to wave a magic wand and make it go away.  You are asking guys like me to up and leave their homes, families, and lives to go and possibly die, or at the very least sacrifice some of their mental sanity, for a country that is not their home.  That is a BIG request, and why is it exactly that Israel can't step up to the plate on their own here? 

And where does it stop?  Fucked up foreign policy got us here in the first place.  Then we tried to fix that with more government interaction, fucked it up even worse, and worse, and worse as time went on.  What makes you think that government is going to fix it this time?  Albert Einstein's famous quote "the definition of insanity is to try the same thing over and over and expect different results." Maybe we should think about that and try nonintervention for a change.  What if we just left everything alone?  What if we stopped starving the people of nations, stopped bombing their homes, stopped sending in massive ground forces that if nothing else at least give the perceptions of occupying invaders?  Do you think that possibly, just maybe, there is a chance that people might stop hating us if we quit trying to control their lives and killing their children?  So far to me, that seems to be the only thing we haven't tried.

I'm not saying tolerate genocide or gross human rights violations.  But you can be a great example to the world and inspire nations to rise up against their oppressive regimes just as the U.S. revolution did for the French revolution.   Americans speak a big game about freedoms and how all nations should be like us.  But everyone is just rolling their eyes at us while we have more and more government control over our lives, and our government oppresses more and more people every day.  You aren't even allowed to carry a pocket knife in New Jersy, but people should emulate our freedom?  We  oppress other countries by destroying their economies and throwing in puppet regimes to rule as we see fit.  Suspend Habeas Corpus where we see fit.  Torture anyone who tries to defend their home or nation.  "But oh, we are spreading freedom and democracy to the world.  You're welcome."  Do you not see the ridiculousness behind that?  No fucking shit that some dude from Iran is going to take the bit of power that he has and try to go against the US and its empire states.


So what if we look inward and fixed our own problems?  Quit oppressing and killing other nations, and made a truly free republic.  Perhaps maybe then people would listen when we spoke out about international issues.  Maybe if we just accept that their is no way to control the entire world, and we just check ourselves, we will also realize that we could inspire the world to be better rather than inspire the world into fear though the barrel of a M4 and the under belly of a F22.  War is war and death is death.  If you really are all about throwing borders aside and having one great human love fest, you would be thinking about the lives of the Iranians and American troops before you started beating the war drum.

[Variable]

i believe in the soveriegnty of nations to do as they please.

As do I.  As long as they aren't fucking around on our soil.  So be it.  I mean, nothing wrong with saying that you condemn a nations actions and refuse to trade with them anymore when some dude like Hitler comes along.  But to invade a nation because they may or may not have something that may or may not hurt us if they decide, or maybe don't decide, to get real mad and start some shit with us.......did we not learn our lesson from Bush?  I mean obviously that was rhetorical because you guys voted in Obama and all this horse shit is just going to get repeated.  But still......how the fuck did no one learn their lesson?

[tarkil]

Damn Trey, that's some enlightened talk you're spilling... If only more people from the US were like you, things would be much better....
Thanks for showing that not all of you are ignorant arrogant pricks... And you're in the Army...

If only more were like you my friend...
But is it me or you did change your mind a little bit on this kind of issue ?

[Variable]

Ill take that as a very big compliment.

And yeah, I have matured my views on the world a lot since I first came to this board.  Probably partly due to being over seas in Japan.  Then going and experiencing combat in Afghanistan.  But even more so having the amazing opportunity to embed with the Afghan National Army and make great friends with guys from a 100% different culture.  I think a lot of my experiences opened my mind, but then when I read Ron Pauls book, it filled it with great info.  Of course that was just a start.  I have kind of been trying to do more and more research since.  But still, the man really inspired me. 

[Nailec]

But still......how the fuck did no one learn their lesson?

the more important lesson in history is: when someone announces to kill the whole jewish race; he probablly will try to do that in praxis.


anyways i hope for the iranian youth that is inspired by western philosophy as Immanuel Kant and Jürgen Habermas (who probablly turns out to be my favourite philosopher allthough he is very hard to read and wrote a huge amount of books).

elections are coming in iran but they seem to be a huge fake. all candidates are nearly the same (at least Mousavi doesnt deny the Shoah), who is a candidate has been decided by the mullahs.

[Variable]

But still......how the fuck did no one learn their lesson?

the more important lesson in history is: when someone announces to kill the whole jewish race; he probablly will try to do that in praxis.

Or not?  Maybe Jews did not have a sovereign nation of their own during the Holocaust?  Maybe Jews did not have a means to defend themselves before?  They do now you know.  Israel has a very modern military.  Much more so than Iran. 

But you just want what?  To make sure that other countries bleed next to Israel for their lack of diplomacy with their neighbors?  This has nothing to do with the USA, EU, NATO, ISAF, or any other country at that.   This is between Iran and Israel.  I'm sick of the USA making enemies trying to play big daddy to all this BS.  Let Iran do something.  Then we will talk.  But preemptive war?  If Israel and the US launched a preemptive war against Iran, it would just unify the Muslim world into a giant, unwinnable war.  Thanks but no thanks. 

and I really don't agree that remembering the Holocaust is a more important lesson in history than learning to stop electing fucked up government leaders.  Especially seeing as how the Holocaust would have never happened if that lesson was learned in the early 1900s

[Nailec]

yeah right. we are absolutely not sure what iran will do, if they will do anything at all. in fact iranian leaders proclaim the destruction of israel since 1979 and all they did until know was helping some terrorists.

i guee it was Chomeini who once said that the Iran does not matter as long as the Islam prevails. Iran may burn, as long as Israel is destroyed.
this argument gets stronger when u regard that islam is a religion that supports martyrdom.

the point is: we dont have a cold-war situation here. the iranian regime isnt as rational as russia or the usa, their religious background gives them an apocalyptic mentality.

en plus: Holocaust was not rational, it was some sick shit. so all in all i really dont know ir Iran gives a shit.


as you have noticed, my hopes are in the iranian youth, so i wouldnt vote for a preventive war, just for means that weaken the actual regime. i know that such a war could bring more islamic nations to the front and would create more ressentiment against western civilization. plz dont think that i want to see all persians dead

so we can either make harder sanctions in order to weaken their regim, or vice versa, make more trade in order to make them more peaceful. of all things its germany that drives the second way and is all about making money with holocaust deniers :/

(http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/sanctions-what-sanctions-german-iranian-trade-booms/2/)
(http://www.mideastfreedomforum.org/node/74)

[alvarezbassist17]

number 1: trey has already expressed what would be my position on this whole thing and if i kept going it would just be more rehashing of ron paul haha
number 2: i do really think this has been blown wayyyy out of proportion.  i think iran probably has a pretty good idea of how much better israel's army is than theirs.
number 3: nailec, you really do let emotions weigh too heavily on your political ideals.  i mean i clearly can't tell you what to think, but maybe try calming down a bit and taking a step back from things.  and this is not meant to be an insult, but holy god you're liberal haha.

[rock_n_frost]

wow, you guys are pretty good..

i thought everyone is just sitting and supporting what they heard from news.
you know im in the zone and a muslim guy.
i ll never defend iran's management and life style.
but about that nuclear thing iran is completly right.

almost every country has it.
but israel,u.k. and usa will never want iran to improve that.

cuz if they let them ;
- iran will be stronger on army
- iran will develop more techonolgy
and ;
- these countries will have not enough power to take iran under their protection
- so they will not have their god damn patrol stocks

actually iran never thinks to use that power for attack or something.
but after that iraq war and usa's politics, they absoloutely think like''if usa or israel attack us or something we will make the same thing what they would have done to us''

[Corleone]

I hope they can gain something out of this.

Whats up with north korea...