Iran Test-Fires 9 Missiles to Show 'Might'

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Quote

There is nothing more hypocritical then us telling another country they should not have nuclear energy, or even nuclear weapons.

How about signing a treaty promising not to develop them, and then proceed directly to doing so?

I guess that's not so much hypocrisy as outright
lying.

By them I am assuming you mean nuclear weapons and not energy.
Anyone is allowed to use nuclear technology to make energy, and unless you have some secret documents that no one else has there is no proof that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.

The rockets that were lunched were lunched and designed for conventional one ton warheads. Again your assuming Iran has nuclear weapons. Same people who assumed Iraq had WMD and nuclear weapons and were an eminent threat.

I’ll stick to history to decide who is the biggest hypocrite.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

Apparently some other variants were rejected: see attachments.

LOL
Thanks.

We are all engines of karma

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Quote

There is nothing more hypocritical then us telling another country they should not have nuclear energy, or even nuclear weapons.

How about signing a treaty promising not to develop them, and then proceed directly to doing so?

I guess that's not so much hypocrisy as outright lying.

I'm confused, are you referring to Iran's previous program or the Bushie bunker busters?

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Quote

There is nothing more hypocritical then us telling another country they should not have nuclear energy, or even nuclear weapons.

How about signing a treaty promising not to develop them, and then proceed directly to doing so?

I guess that's not so much hypocrisy as outright lying.

Just show us the treaty signed by Iran in which they pledged to not develop nuclear energy.

Or how about showing us evidence that their nuclear programs are weapons oriented rather than energy oriented.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Or how about showing us evidence that their nuclear programs are weapons oriented rather than energy oriented.

The proof is seen in the sanctions and international pressure applied due to their attempts to block inspections.

Nevermind common sense - we know they are attempting a nuclear program, for the obvious reasons spelled out by Darius just a few posts ago.

and odds are that soon Israel will enforce the NPT the same way they did with Syria.

[billvon 3,111]

>The proof is seen in the sanctions and international pressure applied
>due to their attempts to block inspections.

We heard the same assumptions about Hussein. Funny how that worked out . . .

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

The proof is seen in the sanctions and international pressure applied due to their attempts to block inspections.

In other words, we have no proof. We are merely trying to give the perception that Iran are the bad guys.

Quote

Nevermind common sense

That was abandoned from US foreign policy long ago.

Quote

we know they are attempting a nuclear program, for the obvious reasons spelled out by Darius just a few posts ago.

How do we know without evidence?

Quote

… odds are that soon Israel will enforce the NPT the same way they did with Syria.

And once again, we will continue to turn a blind eye to Israel's violation of international law UNSC resolutions.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

… odds are that soon Israel will enforce the NPT the same way they did with Syria.

And once again, we will continue to turn a blind eye to Israel's violation of international law UNSC resolutions.

Nothing blind about these eyes - nothing in international law says you have to wait to be nuked before launching a preemptive attack. The only crime in the Syrian attack is the lack of penalty for their illegal weapons development.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>The proof is seen in the sanctions and international pressure applied
>due to their attempts to block inspections.

We heard the same assumptions about Hussein. Funny how that worked out . . .

in the context of self preservation, quite well. Iraq did not use any such weapons on us or our allies. As I've said, if we left in 2004, we would have avoided the vast majority of the US losses, and esp in highsight, couldn't have left the Iraqis in a worse position than what they've experienced anyway in the past 4 years. You wanted us to stay and fix the mess, Bill.

There was never a question of these weapons existing, only as to whether or not they still did. If Hussein had cooperated with inspectors as required by his 1991 surrender, there wouldn't have been doubt, and Bush could not have used this as a premise for the second war. His own damn fault.

In a US court, a defendant's refusal to testify is not to be used against him in the verdict, but on the international scene, a nation that tries to hide evidence is always going to look suspicious.

[billvon 3,111]

>in the context of self preservation, quite well.

Ah. So in your mind, Saddam Hussein DID have the massive WMD arsenals that the administration described? If you believe that, then I can better understand where you are coming from.

>Iraq did not use any such weapons on us or our allies.

True; neither did Venezuela, Madagascar or Haiti.

>There was never a question of these weapons existing, only as to whether
>or not they still did. If Hussein had cooperated with inspectors as required
>by his 1991 surrender . . . .

He did. The last report by the UNSCOM before we invaded said that Hussein was cooperating, progress was being made, and the inspections would be completed shortly.

Of course, had we waited for the inspections to complete, the false justification for war would have collapsed, and the administration would not have gotten the war they so desperately wanted. So we invaded before the truth could come out.

Quote

In a US court, a defendant's refusal to testify is not to be used against him in the verdict, but on the international scene, a nation that tries to hide evidence is always going to look suspicious.

By those standards, we must be the most suspicious nation on the planet.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>The proof is seen in the sanctions and international pressure applied
>due to their attempts to block inspections.

We heard the same assumptions about Hussein. Funny how that worked out . . .

Hmmm, do you recall how many metric tons of yellow cake were just delivered to Canada from Iraq?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Amazon 7]

Quote

The one Iranian threat that has some relevance is terrorism. Iran has invested billions of dollars in developing a terrorist infrastructure throughout the region, and the world. Many major intelligence agencies have detected this network, which has rarely been put to work carrying out attacks. If the Iranian terror network were ordered to make an all-out effort, it's uncertain how dangerous they would be. This, of course, is another reason most of the World does not want Iran to develop nuclear power plants (a source of radioactive material for terrorists) or nuclear weapons.

Want to take odds on when this will become a reality???

You can bet your bottom dollar the Iranians are already here and just waiting to show all of us here in the Great Satan how we really SHOULD be worshipping.

Basically it boils down to fundamentalism and how fanatical our fundamentalists are as opposed to their fundamentalists. How willing are we to absorb attacks on our soil from their jihadi's till we are willing to take the fight home to them.

[billvon 3,111]

>Hmmm, do you recall how many metric tons of yellow cake were just
>delivered to Canada from Iraq?

About 500 as I recall. Do you recall what it was doing in Iraq?

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

… odds are that soon Israel will enforce the NPT the same way they did with Syria.

And once again, we will continue to turn a blind eye to Israel's violation of international law UNSC resolutions.

Nothing blind about these eyes - nothing in international law says you have to wait to be nuked before launching a preemptive attack. The only crime in the Syrian attack is the lack of penalty for their illegal weapons development.

So you believe we can legally use force against sovereign countries without evidence of them posing any danger?

What evidence do you have that Syria's was a weapons program and not an energy program? BTW, nice job changing the subject to Syria.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Darius11 12]

Quote

You can bet your bottom dollar the Iranians are already here and just waiting to show all of us here in the Great Satan how we really SHOULD be worshipping.

Yes they are about 1.6 million in CA alone. They are considered one of the most educated and financially secure minorities in the US. If you want I can give you the list of who works at NASA,IBM, Ect.


That must be some good shit you smoke but try something different it is making you way to paranoid.

I wouldn’t judge Iranians by what the government does. First it is not a democracy so if you stand against the government you die.

What’s our excuse for our wonderful leader who not only talks the talk but there is at least 100,000 people he has indirectly killed for no reason?
This is a democracy and we elected the same idiot twice.


It’s funny how so many people are so frightened of the evil Iranians who are thousands of miles away yet can not understand that the Iranians feel threatened by being surrounded by 90% of the US armed forces and being told daily that they will be attacked.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

If Hussein had cooperated with inspectors as required by his 1991 surrender Bush had allowed inspectors to complete their inspections, there wouldn't have been doubt, and Bush could not have used this as a premise for the second war. His own damn fault.

I fixed that for you to reflect historical reality.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Hmmm, do you recall how many metric tons of yellow cake were just delivered to Canada from Iraq?

Do you realize that (yellow cake != WMD)?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Amazon 7]

Nice attempt at misdirection... but as an "American" I dont suppose you would care to point out the sleepers.. and not those who came here to escape the Mullahs now would you???

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Quote

There is nothing more hypocritical then us telling another country they should not have nuclear energy, or even nuclear weapons.

How about signing a treaty promising not to develop them, and then proceed directly to doing so?

I guess that's not so much hypocrisy as outright lying.

And how do YOU know they're developing them? Got some insider info? And if they do big fuckin deal. AND the US doesn't lie. Gimme a break.

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

There is nothing more hypocritical then us telling another country they should not have nuclear energy, or even nuclear weapons.

How about signing a treaty promising not to develop them, and then proceed directly to doing so?

I guess that's not so much hypocrisy as outright lying.

And how do YOU know they're developing them? Got some insider info? And if they do big fuckin deal.

If the subject is hypocrisy or lying and someone is lying, yes, it is exactly the fucking deal.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

If Hussein had cooperated with inspectors as required by his 1991 surrender Bush had allowed inspectors to complete their inspections, there wouldn't have been doubt, and Bush could not have used this as a premise for the second war. His own damn fault.

I fixed that for you to reflect historical reality.

So how does your historical whitewash explain the Clinton directed bombings in 1998?

Hussein's compliance was on par with a convicted murdered who ditched half his meetings with his parole officer. If he was so cooperative, why did nearly all Congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle point to his non compliance as a threat?

The only people content with Iraq's behavior in 2002 were those who were opposed to all war, and those who had financial interests in the status quo.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

So you believe we can legally use force against sovereign countries without evidence of them posing any danger?

What evidence do you have that Syria's was a weapons program and not an energy program? BTW, nice job changing the subject to Syria.

Well, since it actually did happen, it's much more useful to talk about wrt legality. With Iran we have only a lot of hot air coming from a lot of national leaders.

And if you don't think the evidence of Syria's actions was compelling, you'll need to define 'evidence' for me before I can answer your first question.

The generic answer, however - every nation has the right to self defense, and that includes preemptive attacks, particularly against those that do not acknowledge your right to exist.

If Iran wants to assure the world it's only pursuing an energy program, it can allow the nuclear inspections. If it wants to pursue a weapons program, it can withdrawl from the NPT and face the consequences. If it wants to try to do it secretly, well anything can happen. But it shouldn't be shocked if Israel overreacts to protect themselves.

[billvon 3,111]

>So how does your historical whitewash explain the Clinton
>directed bombings in 1998?

Ignoring the CDIF for now . .

>Hussein's compliance was on par with a convicted murdered who ditched
>half his meetings with his parole officer.

I am glad you are agreeing he was complying, at least.

>The only people content with Iraq's behavior in 2002 were those who were
>opposed to all war, and those who had financial interests in the status
>quo.

You are confusing "containment" with "being content with Iraq's behavior."

If you were on a jury that put a wife abuser in jail for 10 years, would that mean you "were content with his behavior?" After all, you didn't kill him.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Ignoring the CDIF for now . .

This isn't a Clinton did it first. This is evidence that Hussein badly failed to meet his requirements, as this attack came after repeated violations, and the attack was anticipated for most of 1998.

Quote

>Hussein's compliance was on par with a convicted murdered who ditched
>half his meetings with his parole officer.

I am glad you are agreeing he was complying, at least.

In what fantasy do you read me as agreeing he complied? You miss one or two meetings with your PO and you're back in jail. Commit a minor offense - back in jail.

Hussein betrayed his country for personal gain, and they paid dearly for it.

[billvon 3,111]

>This is evidence that Hussein badly failed to meet his requirements,
>as this attack came after repeated violations, and the attack was
>anticipated for most of 1998.

Yep, and it was part of a show of force to get him to meet his requirements. It worked. He did.

>Hussein betrayed his country for personal gain, and they paid dearly for it.

There is no doubt about that. But to go back to your example, that's like throwing a paroled criminal back in prison because he went to a casino, gambled and lost a lot of money.