muff528

"Your country has a system free enough to let its heroes work at their trade. It should last a long time — unless its looseness is destroyed from inside." ~ Robert A. Heinlein, Glory Road, 1963.

The US is now Sweden's Mexico. ...and not too much longer until we're Mexico's Mexico.

Looks like some businesses in Sweden are outsourcing some manufacturing jobs overseas to the US for cheap labor.

Are you perchance suggesting that enforced union membership is a good idea? WOW uh, they voted for the union... Not ALL of them. Hey! that's democracy! It's gonna get even better with "card check". That way we will all know who the anti-demokratische scumbags are that vote against the union.

The Taliban fired the proverbial "Golden BB" and happened to strike an aircraft full of US SEALs. It was bound to eventually happen if the war went on long enough, but it's not exactly like it was testimony to elite fighting skill. Just like the US elite forces have a preponderance for striking children, weddings in progress, etc... Very elite! "Georgette Gagnon, Director of Human Rights, UNAMA: Good morning. The human cost of the Afghan conflict for Afghan civilians rose in the first six months of 2011. Afghan civilians experienced a 15 per cent increase in conflict-related civilian deaths over the past first six months compared to the same period in 2010. This dramatic growth was mainly due to the use of landmine-like pressure plate improvised explosive devices or IEDs by Anti-Government Elements. We at UNAMA documented 1,462 civilian deaths for this period, with 80 per cent attributed to Anti-Government Elements, an increase of 28 per cent in civilian deaths from the same period in 2010." Looks like it's YOUR 'elite fighters' that are causing the great majority of the deaths. I'm for just going ahead and ending US presence there and going with the nintendo-type push-button style of warfare. Do future generations a favor and just light the place up. Make sure Pakistan and Iran have front row seats for the show. That place has been a thorn in the civilized world's ass for thousands of years. Just an off-topic observation - When the "thousands" (cough-bullshit) of "civilians" were killed in Iraq during GWB's administration the UN (and presumably Georgette) laid the blame directly on Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. Now Georgette sees that the rise in civilian deaths in Afghanistan during O's administration is only because of collateral damage by the Taliban fighters. ....end of thought . Carry on.

He probably forgot all about his ramen noodles while he was down in the basement trying to get a reaction. He probably should stick to vinegar and baking soda volcanoes.

Start a forum about them and maybe I will. Um, this one is about Israel I think. Bizarre idea sticking on topic I know but someone has to try. It seems you are the one having trouble staying on topic. My "cavalier" response to your post about US meddling in Iran's affairs in the 50s was only because I try to provide some response to all points made by someone ....no matter how irrelevant that point may be to the discussion, particularly when a poster is responding to me. You and dream like to pick and choose which points are worthy of your response ...and which you choose to ignore. Maybe you could start another thread with the topic of post-war US involvement in Iran and you might get some agreement from me. Meanwhile, Iran's shadow war against Israel is relevant to the topic. Iran really has no dog in this fight and has inserted itself in a show of religious solidarity with the Arabs' stated mission to end the State of Israel. And they are sponsoring terrorist groups who have stated that they only exist to drive Israel from the region. Showing some video that has been doctored to demonize someone is only bad journalism. It certainly does not disprove (nor prove, for that matter) whether Ahm. has made threats against Israel. To ignore other evidence and focus on the exposure of a couple of propaganda videos leads me to believe you have an agenda other than learning the truth. But, to paraphrase what you have said, "facts are facts". ...and that video, which you provided, is a great example of how "facts" can be manipulated. You keep listing all the "facts" and sooner or later you will get to the truth. Then again, you may be one of those who only sees the truth you want to see. Israel remains in a state of war whether you like it or not. They must be constantly vigilant against the threat of attack at any time ...a threat that has materialized into various aggressive acts against them throughout their history. They tolerate it because "the world" depends on their ability to meter their responses to aggression without escalation to full scale counter strikes which is well within their ability. Hardly a "rogue" state. Sadly, this is seen as a weakness by their enemies who are further emboldened by Israel's acquiescence to outside whining and hand-wringing. That game can only be played for so long before the Israeli dog gets tired of being constantly poked. Israel does not need the US or the UN or anyone else to "OK" a response against any nation who has participated in the 63-year war against them. Millions of Arabs and Persians owe their existence to Israel's restraint.

then only a dumbass would suggest that he said "wipe israel off the map". Semantics I know, but that is not what he said. do I agree with him...No! Do i agree with israel...No! I want peace, and from what I can see Iran is much more Peacful than Israel... Hey, I only responded to a link that YOU provided. The writer obviously felt that he needed to clarify that point. "Translation controversy Many news sources repeated the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting statement by Ahmadinejad that "Israel must be wiped off the map",[5][6] an English idiom which means to "cause a place to stop existing",[7] or to "obliterate totally",[8] or "destroy completely".[9] Ahmadinejad's phrase was "(Farsi characters)" according to the text published on the President's Office's website.[10] The translation presented by the official Islamic Republic News Agency has been challenged by Arash Norouzi, who says the statement 'wiped off the map' was never made and that Ahmadinejad did not refer to the nation or land mass of Israel, but to the 'regime occupying Jerusalem'. Norouzi translated the original Persian to English, with the result, 'the Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time.'" The easiest path to peace would be if the Jews in Israel just gave up and walked into the sea. But it's unreasonable to expect that and it's not going to happen. Obviously, as has been demonstrated throughout the past 63 years, if their neighbors try to make that happen they are going to meet with some resistance." Also, as I pointed out earlier ...Iran can sit back and pretend to be peaceful and rational while financing and supplying surrogates to do their fighting.

They were talking about the Zionist regime when they specifically said "the Zionist regime". Not Israel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel#Translation_controversy They went on to say that the Zionist regime will eventually collapse anyway. Well, only a dumbass would think that Ahmadinejad was talking about wiping the actual land mass off of the map. He obviously doesn't tolerate a country under "Jewish rule" in the region but, shazam! ...he does tolerate states under Islamic rule. His democracy is showing. He is perfectly OK with an "Israeli" state ....as long as it is run by Muslims. He also condemns "...all Muslim leaders who accept the existence of Israel as 'acknowledging a surrender and defeat of the Islamic world.'"

> ....... > I don't recall Iran threatening Israel with nuclear > annihilation either for that matter. Here's an > example used in another post that seems useful > here also. Disinformation is a bitch. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onNzrNEFs1E I didn't say that Iran threatened Israel with nukes. For all I know (or care) he is talking about underwear bombers and the new boob bombs. Doesn't matter. One sure thing, though, is that if Israel does go down (and it may well happen) it will go down swinging. One youtube video showing Ahmadinejad calling for "elections" does not prove or disprove his (already stated) intent to bring the State of Israel to an end. ...no more than your claims that Israel is a rogue nuclear state make it so. Besides, Iran should have no political interest in Israel, a country that is separated from them by 2 intervening nations and had never posed a threat to them prior to Iran's joining the Arab nations in their hatred of Israel. But, it seems that Iran is already militarily antagonizing Israel through their surrogates, Hamas and Hezbollah while Ahm. is pontificating on western TV shows about how "democratic" and rational he is. Israel has shown great restraint by not having already turned Iran into a smoking hole. > I agree a revolution is different then an election. > I'm not a big fan of Iran but I am a fan of reality, > history and understanding the "why's". Americans > act as if our tensions with the Iranians started in 79 > during the hostage situation. A bit off topic. But > should bring a better understanding. > > Are you familiar with Operation Ajax? > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état > > https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol48no2/article10.html Iran may or may not have legitimate beefs with the US. History. Time to move on if you're really interested in peace in the region. Israel has formally existed in the region for 63 years. Time for the Arabs to repatriate their exiled Palestinian friends. Release them from their prison encampments and let them become citizens ...just as Israel has offered them citizenship. (of course not to the Pals who took up arms against Israel during their multiple wars of aggression and were banished from Israel.)

Tell ya what, to be fair I'll address any accusation or "fact" you claim that I feel is incorrect or pointless. But only after you do the same You are implying that because a nuclear rogue nation is verbally attacked by a nation that works within the confines of international nuclear scrutiny, the rouge nation has the right to insist a signer and participant of the NPT be stripped of any nuclear energy capabilities? Is that your reasoning? I haven't stated my views about nuclear proliferation in the Middle East in these forums. However, any country that signs the NPT should be bound by that promise. Personally, my opinion is that the country of Iran that signed the treaty in 1968 is not the same country of Iran that exists today and is not bound by that treaty. They are free to pursue that technology and should be prepared to accept any consequences of that pursuit when taken in context of making existential threats against another country. Well, using that logic, the NPT is worthless to all countries that "change" (administrations, parties, flags, boundaries etc) - I disagree. The world should be petrified of a nuclear rogue (israel) threatening a nation fully engaged with the IEAE. Here we have a nuclear rogue nation that currently uses collective punishment of an innocent civilian population as policy pointing fingers at another nation involved in the IEAE. Sorry, but it seems Israel has exhibited 100 times more aggression in the last few decades then Iran has. And Israel is the nuclear rogue. Scary stuff. A revolution that not only deposes an administration but also a form of government is a bit different than an election or other lawful change of leadership. But, as I said, I agree that Iran should honor the Treaty. It's only my opinion that they, as a new country, should be allowed to either reaffirm or abandon their participation. Also, Israel has not threatened Iran with nuclear annihilation ...only a promise that they will not permit Iran to carry out direct threats that Iran's leadership has made against them.

Tell ya what, to be fair I'll address any accusation or "fact" you claim that I feel is incorrect or pointless. But only after you do the same You are implying that because a nuclear rogue nation is verbally attacked by a nation that works within the confines of international nuclear scrutiny, the rouge nation has the right to insist a signer and participant of the NPT be stripped of any nuclear energy capabilities? Is that your reasoning? I haven't stated my views about nuclear proliferation in the Middle East in these forums. However, any country that signs the NPT should be bound by that promise. Personally, my opinion is that the country of Iran that signed the treaty in 1968 is not the same country of Iran that exists today and is not bound by that treaty. They are free to pursue that technology and should be prepared to accept any consequences of that pursuit when taken in context of making existential threats against another country.

It seems that there is a break in the ranks over whether an independent Palestine should be created.

Now if you could just prove that I'd ever even heard of this manual or dictionary or whatever prior to our interaction, you might even have a point - as it is, YOU are the one doing the derailing. As for "countless debates" - do you use the same bogus tactics in all the rest of them, too, or is it restricted to this one? So, you think my fact of Israel being the record holder of Human Rights violations with the UN to be an opinion? Why is that? Can you not address the question in a non insulting, non derailing fashion? Wiki lists 224 UN resolutions "concerning" Israel (up until January 2009). I can't find any such list of resolutions against the Palestinians ...or any UN-cited Human Rights violations against them despite repeated wars, missile attacks and terrorist bombings against Israel. It's probably just me, but I think this says more about the UN than it does about either Israel or the Palestinians. Their credibility is in the toilet as far as I'm concerned. So, yes ...Israel is the record holder at the UN. Go figure!

I assume you're talking about Rwanda there -- no other genocide of such wretched efficiency happened in modern times. That genocide had nothing to do with Israel, and if anyone is to blame for that, it is 1. the very useless and impotent UN and 2. America, whose State department stood by and played semantics with the word "genocide" as hundreds of thousands died. The fact that humans do nothing as others go to the slaughter, so long as it's not "their" group of people being killed (WWI Anatolia; WWII Europe; 1990s Rwanda, as brought up in this thread), is why Israel's existence shouldn't even be a subject of discussion. Israel has every reason to act zealously in its own self-defense when attacked time and time again as the world continues to watch. Once again -- a bit of empathy. The premise of this whole thread "right to exist" (in quotes, mind you) is a farce. If you crunch the numbers, Mao actually killed more people per day (and total as well) Well, when it came to purges and mass killings the commies (Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc.) made the National Socialist fascists and the religion-based killers look like pikers. But the League of Nations, and later the UN, didn't do much more than issue "resolutions" or do a little gum-flapping over any of it. Israel is just an easy target for them to condemn because they know there will be absolutely no retribution from Israel or the US. It makes them feel good in their pompous grandiosity and they can go home and sleep at night believing that by raising their finger into the air and spouting platitudes they have made meaningful, important contributions to peace on earth. ...well, that and most of the members of these UN councils are agenda-driven against Israel and the US anyway.

Quoting you: "...how long did it take for israel to get un recognition and come into existence..." Just clearing up the facts. BTW - Florida became a state waaaay before the UN was hemorrhaged into existence. The only thing the UN "grants" are meaningless decrees and "unequivocal condemnations" of Isreal ...Oh, and the occasional verbal smackdown "in the strongest possible terms" if any of their butt-buddy countries gets a little deserved heat from the responsible adult nations.

and as i said 'step by step'. now how long did it take for israel to get un recognition and come into existence - only 2000 odd years... 2 years, 7 months. UN charter became effective October 24, 1945 and the State of Israel became independent on May 14, 1948. Israel was invaded by the Arab states on May 15, 1948. Of course the UN mythomaniacs didn't care since their motive in the creation of Israel was to come up with some answer to "the Jewish Question" that would finally allow them to wash their hands of the whole matter. ...just the beginnings of pathological idiocy from the UN.

Good movie ..and a great soundtrack! It's bona fide!

I'm torn between "skydi ving" and skydivi-ng"

Hey! It's Saturday night! ...let's all get 'toasted'. (That's 'pissed' for our UK friends ...it loses a little in translation, though)

Maybe Cliff at Skydive Tampa Bay can help. They operated one in the 1990s. Contact info is at the "Dropzone" button at the top of the page. Kinda cramped and small door but as a jumper I liked it well enough.

Interesting paragraph from your first link (let's change a few words): Turkey's Nazi Germany's defeat in World War I World War II, and the consequent collapse of the Ottoman Empire their Arab allies, offered surviving Armenians Jews an opportunity for national self-realization. In 1918 1948, an independent Republic of Armenia Israel was declared. U.S. President Woodrow Wilson was granted the right to draw The UN drew up the boundaries of a new Armenian Jewish nation, formalized at the Treaty of Sèvres in 1920 in 1948. However, the Turkish government, under nationalist leader Kemal Ataturk, Arab nations rapidly renounced the Treaty creation of Israel. In collusion with the newly-created Soviet Union, the Turks Arab League invaded Armenia Israel and reconquered six of the former western were repeatedly repelled by Israel leading to the eventual condemnation of Israel by the world's appeasers and whiners.

Let alone the Armenian Genocide, lets not forget those guys... or did we ever get told about them at all? Whoe wites History... his-story. http://www.gendercide.org/case_armenia.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide..... "Our strength is our quickness and our brutality. Genghis Khan had millions of women and children hunted down and killed, deliberately and with a gay heart. History sees in him only the great founder of States. What the weak Western European civilization alleges about me, does not matter. I have given the order—and will have everyone shot who utters but one word of criticism—that the aim of this war does not consist in reaching certain designated [geographical] lines, but in the enemies' physical elimination. Thus, for the time being only in the east, I put ready my Death's Head units, with the order to kill without pity or mercy all men, women, and children of the Polish race or language. Only thus will we gain the living space that we need. Who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?" ~A. Hitler The Turks deny Hitler ever referred to the Armenian genocide. They also deny these atrocities, and they have re-written history in the spirit of fascism and similar tyranny. They seem to claim that it was the Armenians who acted against the Turks. http://www.nationofturks.com/archives/35

I don't mean to come across as ignorant but could you spell it out for me, please? Chuck http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=SIUCC (I had to look it up, too )

Maybe not, but Martha White did give him a "hot rize". BTW - all y'all are half-baked.