Those people always threaten to leave, but they never do (Alex Baldwin, Sean Penn etc.)
Preparations to Attack Iran???
- Thread starter Ocean Breeze
- Start date
Those people always threaten to leave, but they never do (Alex Baldwin, Sean Penn etc.)
Obviously you didn't recognize this as sarcasm.
Here are some headlines for you to consider IS:
Iran flies armed drones into American airspace.
Iran assassinates leading American nuclear scientists and their families
Iranian cyber attack against American nuclear facilities causes millions in damage and risked causing a serious nuclear accident..
Iran sabotages facility for testing American "nuclear" rockets: killing 18 Americans.
Before and after.
Damage to American testing site for nuclear rockets. Iranian sabotage suspected
Iran invades Mexico, after Mexican government refuses to extradite people Iran alleges they were involved in a terrorist attack against Iran. (Iran offers Mexican authorities no proof supporting their allegations)
Iran invades and occupies Canada based on false allegations regarding Canada's WMD program and links to a major terrorist attack against Iran.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Would you be outraged if Iran did these things? Obviously you are not outraged that the US has done these things. Why does your outrage depend on who does these things? Should the heinous acts themselves be the more important factor regarding your outrage rather than who does them?
When George Orwell wrote this:
All nationalists have the power of not seeing resemblances between similar sets of facts. A British Tory will defend self-determination in Europe and oppose it in India with no feeling of inconsistency. Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits, but according to who does them, and there is almost no kind of outrage — torture, the use of hostages, forced labour, mass deportations, imprisonment without trial, forgery, assassination, the bombing of civilians — which does not change its moral colour when it is committed by ‘our’ side. . . . The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.
...I believe he was referring to you and millions of other people just like you. I refer to you and them as the manipulated masses.
But if you believe that you aren't manipulated, and that the US and Israel are peace loving, while Iran is a menacing threat to peace, then perhaps you can list all the countries Iran attacked since 1979. How do you think that list would compare with a list of all the countries the US and Israel have attacked during the same time period?
Last edited:
Yes EO, we all can see how the empire of the world is picking on peace loving Iran. When people die, there can be no sarcasm. By the way, the U.S. did not fly a armed drone into Iran, if it happened at all it was a recon drone. Keep waiting for you to give us a first hand report about the what is happening in the Mid-East as you said you would in the past.
Analysis: "Cold War" with Iran heats up across Mideast
LONDON (Reuters) - Worries of Israel striking Iran might or might not be overblown but across the region the largely hidden "cold war" between Tehran and its enemies is escalating fast, bringing with it wider risk of conflict.
Speculation Israel might attack Iran's nuclear program has been rife in the Israeli media and oil markets in recent weeks, with concerns that Tehran might retaliate with devastating attacks on Gulf oil shipments.
But that debate, experts say, misses large parts of the bigger picture. An increasingly isolated Iran alarms not just Israel and the West but its Gulf neighbors, especially longtime foe Saudi Arabia, and they are already fighting back - and the confrontation goes well beyond simply tightening sanctions.
From proxy wars in Iraq and Syria to computer worm attacks and unexplained explosions in Iran - to allegations of an assassination plot in Washington - a confrontation once kept behind the scenes is breaking into increasingly open view.
The storming of Britain's Tehran embassy last week - and the tit-for-tat shutdown of Iran's embassy in London - were just the latest signs that already limited dialogue is beginning to break down. That, analysts say, is inherently dangerous.
http://news.yahoo.com/analysis-cold-war-iran-heats-across-mideast-163115911.html
Analysis: "Cold War" with Iran heats up across Mideast
LONDON (Reuters) - Worries of Israel striking Iran might or might not be overblown but across the region the largely hidden "cold war" between Tehran and its enemies is escalating fast, bringing with it wider risk of conflict.
Speculation Israel might attack Iran's nuclear program has been rife in the Israeli media and oil markets in recent weeks, with concerns that Tehran might retaliate with devastating attacks on Gulf oil shipments.
But that debate, experts say, misses large parts of the bigger picture. An increasingly isolated Iran alarms not just Israel and the West but its Gulf neighbors, especially longtime foe Saudi Arabia, and they are already fighting back - and the confrontation goes well beyond simply tightening sanctions.
From proxy wars in Iraq and Syria to computer worm attacks and unexplained explosions in Iran - to allegations of an assassination plot in Washington - a confrontation once kept behind the scenes is breaking into increasingly open view.
The storming of Britain's Tehran embassy last week - and the tit-for-tat shutdown of Iran's embassy in London - were just the latest signs that already limited dialogue is beginning to break down. That, analysts say, is inherently dangerous.
http://news.yahoo.com/analysis-cold-war-iran-heats-across-mideast-163115911.html
Let me get this straight. Peace loving Israel is considering attacking Iran, while war mongering Iran has no intention of attacking Israel except if Israel attacks them first. How are you able to reconcile the obvious contradiction in your mind?
You'll have to quote me where I claimed I was planning a trip to the Middle East. I was just in Norway/Sweden. Today I'm in Vancouver
You'll have to quote me where I claimed I was planning a trip to the Middle East. I was just in Norway/Sweden. Today I'm in Vancouver
First Israel is NOT peace loving. Not in deed let alone word. Iran is constantly under threat of one kind or another and is reactive enough to do some very silly things that are provocative. The cycle is self perpetuating. If it was arm wrestling ...niether would win .
Meanwhile the empire either on its own motivation or at the behest of its favorite child Israel, is beating the drums for another aggression on another nation. How valid these drums are ......is anyone's guess. But what is obvious is that all the parties involved have never learned that playing with matches can erupt into some nasty fires.
IF war was peace......then the empire and Israel are the most loving , humanitarian , peaceful nations on the planet. (sarcasm alert)
Poor Iran, always being picked on. This whole mess would go away if they were honest and open about their little nuke plan.
No it wouldn't.........and you know it. It is not about whether they have nukes or not. Or "planning" a nuke program. Just as the Iraq invasion and occupation was NOT about some "stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction).
How many times do folks have to be lied to before they realize that they are being duped again and again and again........and all because of the power of fear. Fear of some terrorist threat or other threat. Which is dangled over our collective noses on a daily basis.
Furthermore........are the nations with massive nukes at their disposal totally honest about how much and what kind they have?? Would they show their hand???
But there is no question that Iran is a target ......we just don't know yet what excuse they would come up with in order to use aggressive action on a nation that in reality is not a genuine threat. It is surrounded by the empires puppets and military bases.
It is critical to question the crap that comes out from the media and think about how critical some of those so called "threats" really are.
Let's face it.........if Israel and the empire did not create some threats which in turn have the possibility of turning into real ones......how could they explain all their warring and the massive megabucks spent on the military complex.??
What folks don't seem to realize.......that even if Iran was tamed to suit the empire and Israel........they would have some other nation to issue with. (particularly if said nation is strategically located and /or resource wealthy)
IF Iran has a nuke plan.........so what?? How does that compare to what the empire and other nuke states sit on??? I think Iran mismanages a lot of things.........and is too brassy in its vocalization......but the reality is......that it is being actively threatened. And it too has the right to defend itself. The THREATS to Iran a real and obvious.
This thread has been going on for a month now without Britain launching an attack. One day man will walk on Mars. Question is which will happen first?
You mean open and honest like Israel? Perhaps you can post a link to the online tours of Israel's nuclear facilities.
Here is the link to the online tours of Iran's nuclear facilties:
ISIS NuclearIran › Nuclear Sites
Please don't tell anyone about this link, as its a secret... Just between you, me and the Iranians.
The whole Iran is secretive "about their little nuke plan" fairey tale is about as accurate as the fables we were told about Iraq's WMD stockpiles. Most of Iran's nuclear facilities are open to the public.... or at least they were until someone started assassinating their scientists. I can understand why Iran might not want to list the names and addresses of their nuclear scientists and restrict access to the places where these people work. Openness has proven to be hazardous to the health or Iranian nuclear scientists and their families.
You obviously are a believer, so let me bring you up to speed.
>>>
In 1992, following media allegations about undeclared nuclear activities in Iran, Iran invited IAEA inspectors to the country and permitted those inspectors to visit all the sites and facilities they asked to see. Director General Blix reported that all activities observed were consistent with the peaceful use of atomic energy.[73][74] The IAEA visits included undeclared facilities and Iran's nascent uranium mining project at Saghand. In the same year, Argentine officials disclosed that their country had canceled a sale to Iran of civilian nuclear equipment worth $18 million, under US pressure.[75]
In 1995, Iran signed a contract with Russia to resume work on the partially complete Bushehr plant,[76] installing into the existing Bushehr I building a 915 MWe VVER-1000 pressurized water reactor, with completion expected in 2009. There are no current plans to complete the Bushehr II reactor.
In 1996, the U.S. convinced the People's Republic of China to pull out of a contract to construct a uranium conversion plant. However, the Chinese provided blueprints for the facility to the Iranians, who advised the IAEA that they would continue work on the program, and IAEA Director Mohammad El Baradei even visited the construction site.[77]
According to a report by the Argentine justice in 2006, late 1980s and early 1990s the US pressured Argentina to terminate its nuclear cooperation with Iran, and from early 1992 to 1994 negotiations between Argentina and Iran took place with the aim of re-establishing the three agreements made in 1987–88.[63]
2002–2006
Seen here in this ISNA footage is Gholam Reza Aghazadeh and AEOI officials with a sample of Yellowcake during a public announcement on 11 April 2006, in Mashad that Iran had managed to successfully complete the fuel cycle by itself.
On 14 August 2002, Alireza Jafarzadeh, a spokesman for an Iranian dissident group National Council of Resistance of Iran, publicly revealed the existence of two nuclear sites under-construction: a uranium enrichment facility in Natanz (part of which is underground), and a heavy water facility in Arak. It has been strongly suggested that intelligence agencies already knew about these facilities but the reports had been classified.[78]
The IAEA immediately sought access to these facilities and further information and co-operation from Iran regarding its nuclear program.[79] According to arrangements in force at the time for implementation of Iran's safeguards agreement with the IAEA,[80] Iran was not required to allow IAEA inspections of a new nuclear facility until six months before nuclear material is introduced into that facility. At the time, Iran was not even required to inform the IAEA of the existence of the facility. This 'six months' clause was standard for implementation of all IAEA safeguards agreements until 1992, when the IAEA Board of Governors decided that facilities should be reported during the planning phase, even before construction began. Iran was the last country to accept that decision, and only did so 26 February 2003, after the IAEA investigation began.[81]
France, Germany and the United Kingdom (the EU-3) undertook a diplomatic initiative with Iran to resolve questions about its nuclear program. On 21 October 2003, in Tehran, the Iranian government and EU-3 Foreign Ministers issued a statement known as the Tehran Declaration[82] in which Iran agreed to co-operate with the IAEA, to sign and implement an Additional Protocol as a voluntary, confidence-building measure, and to suspend its enrichment and reprocessing activities during the course of the negotiations. The EU-3 in return explicitly agreed to recognize Iran's nuclear rights and to discuss ways Iran could provide "satisfactory assurances" regarding its nuclear power program, after which Iran would gain easier access to modern technology. Iran signed an Additional Protocol on 18 December 2003, and agreed to act as if the protocol were in force, making the required reports to the IAEA and allowing the required access by IAEA inspectors, pending Iran's ratification of the Additional Protocol.
The IAEA reported 10 November 2003,[83] that "it is clear that Iran has failed in a number of instances over an extended period of time to meet its obligations under its Safeguards Agreement with respect to the reporting of nuclear material and its processing and use, as well as the declaration of facilities where such material has been processed and stored." Iran was obligated to inform the IAEA of its importation of uranium from China and subsequent use of that material in uranium conversion and enrichment activities. It was also obligated to report to the IAEA experiments with the separation of plutonium. A comprehensive list of Iran's specific "breaches" of its IAEA safeguards agreement, which the IAEA described as part of a "pattern of concealment," can be found in the 15 November 2004, report of the IAEA on Iran's nuclear program.[84] Iran attributes its failure to report certain acquisitions and activities on US obstructionism, which reportedly included pressuring the IAEA to cease providing technical assistance to Iran's uranium conversion program in 1983.[85][86] On the question of whether Iran had a hidden nuclear weapons program, the IAEA's November 2003 report states that it found "no evidence" that the previously undeclared activities were related to a nuclear weapons program, but also that it was unable to conclude that Iran's nuclear program was exclusively peaceful.
Nuclear program of Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
>>>
BTW, have you read the NPT? I have. The original 1970 treaty is fairly straight forward and only 5 pages
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/Others/infcirc140.pdf
The additional voluntary confidence building protocols are a little more complex, but the key word there is "VOLUNTARY". Those protocols don't apply until after a country agrees to them, but Iran's critics would have you believe they are retroactive and mandatory...
The IAEA has never found any evidence which proves Iran has a nuclear weapon program. All the IAEA has said is that they only found evidence in Iran of a peaceful nuclear program, but cannot conclude that Iran's nuclear program was "exclusively peaceful." What a ridiculous statement. Of course they can't. They could prove any country's nuclear program is exclusively peaceful, nor is that part of their mandate. Its impossible to prove a negative. That's the same requirement the manipulated masses believed Iraq had to meet regarding their WMD stockpiles. Until Iraq proved the non-existence of WMD stockpiles, the manipulated masses just assumed Iraq had them. The manipulated masses believed that not finding WMDs in Iraq proved they were hiding them.
Not finding WMDs is inconclusive. They could exist or they might not exist. Finding WMDs is conclusive.
Now the same game is being played with Iran and their non-existent nuclear weapons program. The onus is on Iran the accused to prove innocence, rather than the accusers (the US, Israel and their minions at the IAEA) to prove guilt. Our court systems recognize that innocent people can't always prove their innocence, but proof of guilt is always conclusive. Unfortunately the same logic seems lost on the manipulated masses when applied to regimes the US and Israel don't like very much.
Tell you what D. Until you can prove a negative, any negative, like their is no God for example, then I'll believe that Iran should not have to prove they don't have a nuclear weapons program. The onus is on the US, Israel and the IAEA to prove its existance. So far they've proved that Iran doesn't declare their facilities until six months before the building is complete and before the first equipment is installed. That would make them compliant with the mandatory parts of the NPT and the voluntary protocols that they signed, but in violation of a voluntary NPT protocol that Iran did not sign. Yeah? so what? Iran doesn't have to abide by agreements they didn't sign.
Recently the US revealed the existence of a laptop that a US spy allegedly stole from a Iranian nuclear scientist which the kept secret for years. On this computer which the US held for years is evidence that the Iranian scientist played with a really low quality nuclear weapon simulator. (software) Even if true... (and you'd have to trust the US to be telling the truth regarding Iran and this evidence isn't total BS) ...it still doesn't prove Iran secretly has secret industrial scale factories enriching uranium to weapons grade and testing facilities required to design and build a prototype nuclear weapon.
So far I have yet to see any evidence which conclusively proves that Iran has a nuclear weapons program or has violated any NPT agreements. If anyone had proof it would be all over the news and all we have are allegations.
As per the NPT and the additional protocols that Iran signed, Iran has a right to peaceful nuclear technology including enrichment to 20% HEU.
As per the NPT and the additional protocols that Iran signed, the IAEA has an obligation to assist Iran's peaceful nuclear program. The IAEA and the UNSC actions regarding Iran violate the NPT.
As per the NPT and the additional protocols that Iran signed, Iran only has to declare the existence of a facility six months before the first equipment is installed and allow IAEA inspections. So far, Iran has complied with its obligations in this respect.
Iran doesn't involve the IAEA in the planning stages of nuclear facilities, because they never signed that additional protocol.
Israel never signed the NPT or any additional protocol. As per the NPT, no countries are allowed to assist Israel's nuclear program, yet the US, France, the UK, South Africa and probably many other nations have violated the NPT to assist Israel.
I don't care for Iran's theocracy or the oppressive government. But I also don't like double standards, nor do I just belive every lie and deception made by world leaders and the talking heads on the idiot box. What people believe and think they know about Iran's nuclear program tells me if they are just one of the millions of idiots who belong to the legions of the manipulated masses or someone capable of independent critical thought.
Here is the link to the online tours of Iran's nuclear facilties:
ISIS NuclearIran › Nuclear Sites
Please don't tell anyone about this link, as its a secret... Just between you, me and the Iranians.
The whole Iran is secretive "about their little nuke plan" fairey tale is about as accurate as the fables we were told about Iraq's WMD stockpiles. Most of Iran's nuclear facilities are open to the public.... or at least they were until someone started assassinating their scientists. I can understand why Iran might not want to list the names and addresses of their nuclear scientists and restrict access to the places where these people work. Openness has proven to be hazardous to the health or Iranian nuclear scientists and their families.
You obviously are a believer, so let me bring you up to speed.
>>>
In 1992, following media allegations about undeclared nuclear activities in Iran, Iran invited IAEA inspectors to the country and permitted those inspectors to visit all the sites and facilities they asked to see. Director General Blix reported that all activities observed were consistent with the peaceful use of atomic energy.[73][74] The IAEA visits included undeclared facilities and Iran's nascent uranium mining project at Saghand. In the same year, Argentine officials disclosed that their country had canceled a sale to Iran of civilian nuclear equipment worth $18 million, under US pressure.[75]
In 1995, Iran signed a contract with Russia to resume work on the partially complete Bushehr plant,[76] installing into the existing Bushehr I building a 915 MWe VVER-1000 pressurized water reactor, with completion expected in 2009. There are no current plans to complete the Bushehr II reactor.
In 1996, the U.S. convinced the People's Republic of China to pull out of a contract to construct a uranium conversion plant. However, the Chinese provided blueprints for the facility to the Iranians, who advised the IAEA that they would continue work on the program, and IAEA Director Mohammad El Baradei even visited the construction site.[77]
According to a report by the Argentine justice in 2006, late 1980s and early 1990s the US pressured Argentina to terminate its nuclear cooperation with Iran, and from early 1992 to 1994 negotiations between Argentina and Iran took place with the aim of re-establishing the three agreements made in 1987–88.[63]
2002–2006
Seen here in this ISNA footage is Gholam Reza Aghazadeh and AEOI officials with a sample of Yellowcake during a public announcement on 11 April 2006, in Mashad that Iran had managed to successfully complete the fuel cycle by itself.
On 14 August 2002, Alireza Jafarzadeh, a spokesman for an Iranian dissident group National Council of Resistance of Iran, publicly revealed the existence of two nuclear sites under-construction: a uranium enrichment facility in Natanz (part of which is underground), and a heavy water facility in Arak. It has been strongly suggested that intelligence agencies already knew about these facilities but the reports had been classified.[78]
The IAEA immediately sought access to these facilities and further information and co-operation from Iran regarding its nuclear program.[79] According to arrangements in force at the time for implementation of Iran's safeguards agreement with the IAEA,[80] Iran was not required to allow IAEA inspections of a new nuclear facility until six months before nuclear material is introduced into that facility. At the time, Iran was not even required to inform the IAEA of the existence of the facility. This 'six months' clause was standard for implementation of all IAEA safeguards agreements until 1992, when the IAEA Board of Governors decided that facilities should be reported during the planning phase, even before construction began. Iran was the last country to accept that decision, and only did so 26 February 2003, after the IAEA investigation began.[81]
France, Germany and the United Kingdom (the EU-3) undertook a diplomatic initiative with Iran to resolve questions about its nuclear program. On 21 October 2003, in Tehran, the Iranian government and EU-3 Foreign Ministers issued a statement known as the Tehran Declaration[82] in which Iran agreed to co-operate with the IAEA, to sign and implement an Additional Protocol as a voluntary, confidence-building measure, and to suspend its enrichment and reprocessing activities during the course of the negotiations. The EU-3 in return explicitly agreed to recognize Iran's nuclear rights and to discuss ways Iran could provide "satisfactory assurances" regarding its nuclear power program, after which Iran would gain easier access to modern technology. Iran signed an Additional Protocol on 18 December 2003, and agreed to act as if the protocol were in force, making the required reports to the IAEA and allowing the required access by IAEA inspectors, pending Iran's ratification of the Additional Protocol.
The IAEA reported 10 November 2003,[83] that "it is clear that Iran has failed in a number of instances over an extended period of time to meet its obligations under its Safeguards Agreement with respect to the reporting of nuclear material and its processing and use, as well as the declaration of facilities where such material has been processed and stored." Iran was obligated to inform the IAEA of its importation of uranium from China and subsequent use of that material in uranium conversion and enrichment activities. It was also obligated to report to the IAEA experiments with the separation of plutonium. A comprehensive list of Iran's specific "breaches" of its IAEA safeguards agreement, which the IAEA described as part of a "pattern of concealment," can be found in the 15 November 2004, report of the IAEA on Iran's nuclear program.[84] Iran attributes its failure to report certain acquisitions and activities on US obstructionism, which reportedly included pressuring the IAEA to cease providing technical assistance to Iran's uranium conversion program in 1983.[85][86] On the question of whether Iran had a hidden nuclear weapons program, the IAEA's November 2003 report states that it found "no evidence" that the previously undeclared activities were related to a nuclear weapons program, but also that it was unable to conclude that Iran's nuclear program was exclusively peaceful.
Nuclear program of Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
>>>
BTW, have you read the NPT? I have. The original 1970 treaty is fairly straight forward and only 5 pages
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/Others/infcirc140.pdf
The additional voluntary confidence building protocols are a little more complex, but the key word there is "VOLUNTARY". Those protocols don't apply until after a country agrees to them, but Iran's critics would have you believe they are retroactive and mandatory...
The IAEA has never found any evidence which proves Iran has a nuclear weapon program. All the IAEA has said is that they only found evidence in Iran of a peaceful nuclear program, but cannot conclude that Iran's nuclear program was "exclusively peaceful." What a ridiculous statement. Of course they can't. They could prove any country's nuclear program is exclusively peaceful, nor is that part of their mandate. Its impossible to prove a negative. That's the same requirement the manipulated masses believed Iraq had to meet regarding their WMD stockpiles. Until Iraq proved the non-existence of WMD stockpiles, the manipulated masses just assumed Iraq had them. The manipulated masses believed that not finding WMDs in Iraq proved they were hiding them.
Not finding WMDs is inconclusive. They could exist or they might not exist. Finding WMDs is conclusive.
Now the same game is being played with Iran and their non-existent nuclear weapons program. The onus is on Iran the accused to prove innocence, rather than the accusers (the US, Israel and their minions at the IAEA) to prove guilt. Our court systems recognize that innocent people can't always prove their innocence, but proof of guilt is always conclusive. Unfortunately the same logic seems lost on the manipulated masses when applied to regimes the US and Israel don't like very much.
Tell you what D. Until you can prove a negative, any negative, like their is no God for example, then I'll believe that Iran should not have to prove they don't have a nuclear weapons program. The onus is on the US, Israel and the IAEA to prove its existance. So far they've proved that Iran doesn't declare their facilities until six months before the building is complete and before the first equipment is installed. That would make them compliant with the mandatory parts of the NPT and the voluntary protocols that they signed, but in violation of a voluntary NPT protocol that Iran did not sign. Yeah? so what? Iran doesn't have to abide by agreements they didn't sign.
Recently the US revealed the existence of a laptop that a US spy allegedly stole from a Iranian nuclear scientist which the kept secret for years. On this computer which the US held for years is evidence that the Iranian scientist played with a really low quality nuclear weapon simulator. (software) Even if true... (and you'd have to trust the US to be telling the truth regarding Iran and this evidence isn't total BS) ...it still doesn't prove Iran secretly has secret industrial scale factories enriching uranium to weapons grade and testing facilities required to design and build a prototype nuclear weapon.
So far I have yet to see any evidence which conclusively proves that Iran has a nuclear weapons program or has violated any NPT agreements. If anyone had proof it would be all over the news and all we have are allegations.
As per the NPT and the additional protocols that Iran signed, Iran has a right to peaceful nuclear technology including enrichment to 20% HEU.
As per the NPT and the additional protocols that Iran signed, the IAEA has an obligation to assist Iran's peaceful nuclear program. The IAEA and the UNSC actions regarding Iran violate the NPT.
As per the NPT and the additional protocols that Iran signed, Iran only has to declare the existence of a facility six months before the first equipment is installed and allow IAEA inspections. So far, Iran has complied with its obligations in this respect.
Iran doesn't involve the IAEA in the planning stages of nuclear facilities, because they never signed that additional protocol.
Israel never signed the NPT or any additional protocol. As per the NPT, no countries are allowed to assist Israel's nuclear program, yet the US, France, the UK, South Africa and probably many other nations have violated the NPT to assist Israel.
I don't care for Iran's theocracy or the oppressive government. But I also don't like double standards, nor do I just belive every lie and deception made by world leaders and the talking heads on the idiot box. What people believe and think they know about Iran's nuclear program tells me if they are just one of the millions of idiots who belong to the legions of the manipulated masses or someone capable of independent critical thought.
What people believe and think they know about Iran's nuclear program tells me if they are just one of the millions of idiots who belong to the legions of the manipulated masses or someone capable of independent critical thought.
_____
Wow. That sounds just like you and Breezy.
_____
Wow. That sounds just like you and Breezy.
No this logic problem is a fair litmus test of the ability of people to think critically. The same people who believe Iran has a proven clandestine nuclear weapon program aren't capable of critical thought. they are the same idiots who also believed Iraq was hiding stockpiles of WMDs because the UN weapon inspectors could not find any proof that Iraq WMD stockpiles existed.
exactly, earth. This is not about taking sides or anything else as biased. It is trying to evaluate the info we are fed for any true validity.
When it comes to secrecy......each nation has it. Not even the issue. The accusers of Iran have what they don't want Iran to have. as in their arrogant minds........they think they are more responsible when handling deadly weapons of mass destruction. When recent history shows they are not.
All one has to do is look at the track records of each nation when it comes to wars and threats.
Have folks learned a total of ZERO from the WMD big lie??? Are they so gullible that they will follow each lie they are told as if it were fact. Ever really LISTEN to a politician speak??? Lots of words with very little substance and even less that can be taken to the bank. IF that WMD lie was not an eye opener for many......not sure their eyes can be opened. ANd the lie of WMD was only the first one of many about the "rationale" to invade Iraq. They still keep coming up with new "justifications" and "rationalizations" for that insanity. which only verifies that none of the "reasons" were valid . and that other motives were afoot.
One has NOTHING to do with another. Not sure it will be the UK doing the attacking either. More important....we have no idea what form this aggression would take......as things are a lot more complicated now. even if aggression has become the "norm" for the few of the worlds aggressors. We can't say for certain that some of the aggressors have not begun some war activity.
about Mars walks. With most of the money going to the military and wars.... one can expect to wait quite a bit longer for this scientific adventure.
the reality is that for the most part , when it comes to international political information........what we get fed is infotainment that is designed to instill certain attitudes .......depending on who the target is that day.
Like trying to prove a negative??? Like saying that doG does not exist??
Makes for a clever little loophole that politicians have used since man created politics.
Makes for an empty arguement.
Any word on that drone being a trojan horse, one that is sent to deliver STUXNET II . Having one 'escape' and run out of fuel is 'suspect' compared to you actually downing it by some combination of force that leaves the craft relatively unharmed. Wasn't the rumor that there was one that was going to target military specific software, forget the real name. If it has the same flaw as it's big brother then moistire on the wings gives away it's stealth and drones fly in the clouds.
These people that keep predicting an attack on Iran have been doing it for years. They are simply aching for another war. I guess Iraq and Afghanistan weren't enough.
You know it is true. They obsess with the idea of somebody... ANYBODY attacking Iran. They wan't this war SOOOOOO bad!
Yup... you're right, it's a trojan horse. They hid the U.S First Armored Division in the drone and they are waiting for the Iranians to go to sleep. Then they'll pop out and open the gates!