what else do we need to know?

[Logan13]

What else do we need to know? Are there any "sane" people here that still want to give Iran the benefit of the doubt? Is anyone still unclear as to what iran's motives are?
Friday, October 20, 2006
Associated Press

Iranian President Says Israel Will Disappear, Threatens Its Allies
TEHRAN, Iran — Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Friday called Israel's leaders a "group of terrorists" and threatened any country that supports the Jewish state.

"You imposed a group of terrorists ... on the region," Ahmadinejad said, addressing the U.S. and its allies. "It is in your own interest to distance yourself from these criminals... This is an ultimatum. Don't complain tomorrow."

"Nations will take revenge," he told a crowd of thousands gathered at a pro-Palestinian rally in the capital Tehran.

Ahmadinejad said Israel no longer had any reason to exist and would soon disappear.

"This regime, thanks to God, has lost the reason for its existence," he said.

"Efforts to stabilize this fake (Israeli) regime, by the grace of God, have completely failed... You should believe that this regime is disappearing," he said.

Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Associated Press
France to Push U.N. Resolution Calling for Sanctions on Iran
The six countries offered Iran a package of economic incentives and political rewards in June if it agreed to consider a long-term moratorium on enrichment and commit to a freeze on uranium enrichment before talks to discuss details of their package.
But Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly said his country would continue enrichment, and is not intimidated by the possibility of sanctions. Ahmadinejad's remarks suggested North Korea's claim to have tested an atomic bomb has emboldened Tehran in its own standoff with the U.N.

Sunday, October 08, 2006
Associated Press
Iran Calls Nuke Sanctions a 'Rusty' WeaponTEHRAN, Iran —
Iran's Foreign Ministry on Sunday called a threat of international sanctions a "rusty" weapon and said the country would not abandon uranium enrichment.

Friday, October 20, 2006
Fox News
Israel, meanwhile, pointed the finger at Iran Thursday charging that it was funding, along with Syria, the rearming of Hezbollah in Lebanon.

"Whether it's from Iran, through Damascus, through Syria, into Lebanon, or from Syria itself to Lebanon, the minute we'll be able to confirm this kind of information, it's going to be treated according to the [U.N. Security Council Resolution] 1701 agreement," Dichter said, "because then it demands sanctions against countries… who are supplying Hezbollah or any other organizations in Lebanon with all kinds of weapons."

[Kärnfysikern]

I support sanctions but not any military action by the EU.

[Logan13]

I support sanctions but not any military action by the EU.

You are not worried about what sanctions will do to the population? I thought that you were opposed to sanctions because they hurt the wrong people, an idea that I agree with. Is not clear what Iran wants to accomplish?

[Prada]

Let Israel deal with it's problems. There is a lot more negotiating done on equal footing rather then proxy verbal jostling

[Logan13]

Let Israel deal with it's problems. There is a lot more negotiating done on equal footing rather then proxy verbal jostling

Problem is, Iran is giving more than just rhetoric. Stating that Israel will "cease to exist" while rearming hez and hamas to be exact........
Just wait, Hez will bomb Israel, etc...and when Israel retalliates, the world will cry out for restraint. If they would restrain Iran in the first place, this would not happen.

[Kärnfysikern]

You are not worried about what sanctions will do to the population? I thought that you were opposed to sanctions because they hurt the wrong people, an idea that I agree with. Is not clear what Iran wants to accomplish?

Usualy yeah. But a war would be more hurtfull to the population and I still hold a hope that the leaders of Iran isnt as cold bloaded as kim yong ill and sadam is/was...

Iran is atleast semi democratic.

[Logan13]

Usualy yeah. But a war would be more hurtfull to the population and I still hold a hope that the leaders of Iran isnt as cold bloaded as kim yong ill and sadam is/was...

Iran is atleast semi democratic.

Ya know, I never knew until this year that they had some aspects of a democratic society. I just do not know if that is enough, but I do hope that it is........

[Kärnfysikern]

Ya know, I never knew until this year that they had some aspects of a democratic society. I just do not know if that is enough, but I do hope that it is........

yeah lets hope it is. All methods are worth trying before war.

[gixxerboy1]

Problem is, Iran is giving more than just rhetoric. Stating that Israel will "cease to exist" while rearming hez and hamas to be exact........
Just wait, Hez will bomb Israel, etc...and when Israel retalliates, the world will cry out for restraint. If they would restrain Iran in the first place, this would not happen.

If that happens i think Israel will retaliate against Iran.

Johan I understand nobody wants war. But really what tare the alternatives since sanctions don't seem to work. And Iran says sanctions won't stop them.

[Kärnfysikern]

If that happens i think Israel will retaliate against Iran.

Johan I understand nobody wants war. But really what tare the alternatives since sanctions don't seem to work. And Iran says sanctions won't stop them.

Well they might claim sanctions wont stop them but who knows if that is just talk.

Either way they are not close to having a bomb so like I have said before there is no need to take a descision right now. They wont have a bomb tomorrow or the next month.

[zodiac666]

Well they might claim sanctions wont stop them but who knows if that is just talk.

Either way they are not close to having a bomb so like I have said before there is no need to take a descision right now. They wont have a bomb tomorrow or the next month.

but i dont think anyone will argue that they are trying to get the bomb so it is only a matter of time before they do. also no one can say for sure when that time will come, and i think it would be better to deal with it before they actually become a nuclear power.

i honestly hope israel destroys the entire middle east with nukes. the only reason i say that is because the only way there will be peace in the middle east is if israel is destroyed or if israel destroys all the countries that want to destroy it. i really think some serious shit is going to hit the fan in the next 5 years or so.

[gixxerboy1]

but i dont think anyone will argue that they are trying to get the bomb so it is only a matter of time before they do. also no one can say for sure when that time will come, and i think it would be better to deal with it before they actually become a nuclear power.

i honestly hope israel destroys the entire middle east with nukes. the only reason i say that is because the only way there will be peace in the middle east is if israel is destroyed or if israel destroys all the countries that want to destroy it. i really think some serious shit is going to hit the fan in the next 5 years or so.

i agree with you. I bet its sooner then 5 years. I honestly believe the next time there is a big thing in Israel caused my Hamas or Hesbula (sp) Israel is going to go after Iran

[Teabagger]

Johan and the other pacifists say sanctions don't work, they only hurt the population, not the regime....I agree with that....except in this case...gotta have sanctions, even though they won't work, gotta have'em? Johan and the others say the intelligence agencies are worthless and don't have a clue what is really going on...except in this case they choose to believe the estimates regarding Iran and its nuke progress? They "hope" the Iranian leadership is not a blood thirsty and ruthless as Korea and Saddamm?? You're kidding right? Kim Jung Il and Saddam's only purpose were to stay in power...these Iranian loonies are "true believers", kool aid drinkers, and they will use nukes....guaranteed. But so will Israel....she will make the middle east glow before being "wiped off the map"

[juicejunkie2]

Johan and the other pacifists say sanctions don't work, they only hurt the population, not the regime....I agree with that....except in this case...gotta have sanctions, even though they won't work, gotta have'em? Johan and the others say the intelligence agencies are worthless and don't have a clue what is really going on...except in this case they choose to believe the estimates regarding Iran and its nuke progress? They "hope" the Iranian leadership is not a blood thirsty and ruthless as Korea and Saddamm?? You're kidding right? Kim Jung Il and Saddam's only purpose were to stay in power...these Iranian loonies are "true believers", kool aid drinkers, and they will use nukes....guaranteed. But so will Israel....she will make the middle east glow before being "wiped off the map"

FU@K EM ALL .. it'll make for great TV!!














joking

[mcpeepants]

UN sanctions on Iraq led to the death of around half a million children. So sanctions can kill as well as war, only slower. Iran can be solved with using sanctions or war. All Bush needs to do is hold a press conferance and tell Ahmadinejad that the US wants face to face talks with no preconditions. The same could be done with North Korea. Since both nations want direct talks with the US.

[spywizard]

the un is powerless, it is corrupt, and without honor.... it always has been, always will be..

[Logan13]

the un is powerless, it is corrupt, and without honor.... it always has been, always will be..

AMEN!

[Kärnfysikern]

Johan and the other pacifists say sanctions don't work, they only hurt the population, not the regime....I agree with that....except in this case...gotta have sanctions, even though they won't work, gotta have'em? Johan and the others say the intelligence agencies are worthless and don't have a clue what is really going on...except in this case they choose to believe the estimates regarding Iran and its nuke progress? They "hope" the Iranian leadership is not a blood thirsty and ruthless as Korea and Saddamm?? You're kidding right? Kim Jung Il and Saddam's only purpose were to stay in power...these Iranian loonies are "true believers", kool aid drinkers, and they will use nukes....guaranteed. But so will Israel....she will make the middle east glow before being "wiped off the map"

Thanks for putting words in my mouth

Iran is a semi democracy, so the situation is better than in N.Korea. I dont know how crazy amhajinead or whatever the **** his name is, but he doesnt have permanent dictorial powers. I have no clue what the ayatholla wants.

Sanctions can work if the leaders care for the people, the people voted for the ****er and if he runs the country into sanctions I bet the people will react. food on the table weights heavier than religious mumbo jumbo for 99% of people.

Also yeah I trust the IAEA more than I trust israeli intelligence when it comes to this. ALL nuclear experts claim that Iran is many years from a nuclear weapon. They dont have any capacity to enrichen uranium to the needed %. They have no source of plutonium. There is no need to rush. Not when rushing will mean hundrads of thousands of deaths.

[Kärnfysikern]

the un is powerless, it is corrupt, and without honor.... it always has been, always will be..

The NPT and IAEA has been very effective so far despite the small budget they have. They are the biggest reason we only have a few and not 30+ nuclear nations...

[Kärnfysikern]

but i dont think anyone will argue that they are trying to get the bomb so it is only a matter of time before they do. also no one can say for sure when that time will come, and i think it would be better to deal with it before they actually become a nuclear power.

Well I dont se why we should invande someone because we suspect they intend to build nukes. Proof is needed. We dont sentance murderers without proof and we sure should not start wars without proof. That has already happened once..

[singern]

UN sanctions on Iraq led to the death of around half a million children. .

Credible source please.......

[biglouie250]

how come bush doesnt want to debate him? he issued a challenge to debate bush........

[mcpeepants]

Credible source please.......

http://www.lshtm.ac.uk/cps/public/ex...0in%20Iraq.pdf

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0807-01.htm

http://www.casi.org.uk/info/reiff.html

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1084

[singern]

http://www.lshtm.ac.uk/cps/public/ex...0in%20Iraq.pdf

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0807-01.htm

http://www.casi.org.uk/info/reiff.html

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1084

Thanks, interesting read.

[Phreak101]

how come bush doesnt want to debate him? he issued a challenge to debate bush........

I don't think he wants to lower himself to a rhetorical argument, especially since the issue he wants to debate on is the Middle East. Who in the ME is going to support Bush? He could make it rain diamonds in Iran and they would still hate the US, so why bother?

[Logan13]

UN sanctions on Iraq led to the death of around half a million children. So sanctions can kill as well as war, only slower. Iran can be solved with using sanctions or war. All Bush needs to do is hold a press conferance and tell Ahmadinejad that the US wants face to face talks with no preconditions. The same could be done with North Korea. Since both nations want direct talks with the US.

In regards to north Korea, why should one-on-one talks between the US and north korea trump talks that involve those countries who are actually affected by kimjongils actions? (russia, china, japan, south korea) This is their back yard, they should be involved and they should be the ones spear-heading this situation. North korea wants the US involved for one reason, they want us to give them something. We should give that country ONE thing, a new leader.
In regards to Iran, why would we give this lunatic another platform from which to spew his garbage? What could we possibly give Iran that would appease them enough to not pursue nuclear weapons as well as change their mind about Israel. You go into negotiations with an objective, what objective can you think of that Iran would want? They want nuclear weapons, they want to rid the world of Israel either directly or through the arming of hamas and hezbollah, and they want to rid the world of everyone who supports Israel. England, France, and the US appeased Hitler for many years, the only thing that this accomplished was to make him more aggressive and confident that he could fulfil his world view with very little consequences. What north korea, Iran, and venezuella want is to be recognized, to be put in the arena of legitimacy. If we give this to them, thru the opportunity to have one-on-one talks with the US, it will set a precedent worldwide. You do not reward bad behavior plain and simple. Bad behavior should not become the road that leads to legitimacy. What Iran's leader wants, we can not and will not give him. Appeasement will never thwart radical ideology.....
We need long-term results, not just a band-aid to the current situations. Touchy-feely theory will not produce any results and it is a fact that not everyone was born to make the tough decisions. I am looking for a logical debate to topics such as this.

[mcpeepants]

In regards to north Korea, why should one-on-one talks between the US and north korea trump talks that involve those countries who are actually affected by kimjongils actions? (russia, china, japan, south korea) This is their back yard, they should be involved and they should be the ones spear-heading this situation. North korea wants the US involved for one reason, they want us to give them something. We should give that country ONE thing, a new leader.
In regards to Iran, why would we give this lunatic another platform from which to spew his garbage? What could we possibly give Iran that would appease them enough to not pursue nuclear weapons as well as change their mind about Israel. You go into negotiations with an objective, what objective can you think of that Iran would want? They want nuclear weapons, they want to rid the world of Israel either directly or through the arming of hamas and hezbollah, and they want to rid the world of everyone who supports Israel. England, France, and the US appeased Hitler for many years, the only thing that this accomplished was to make him more aggressive and confident that he could fulfil his world view with very little consequences. What north korea, Iran, and venezuella want is to be recognized, to be put in the arena of legitimacy. If we give this to them, thru the opportunity to have one-on-one talks with the US, it will set a precedent worldwide. You do not reward bad behavior plain and simple. Bad behavior should not become the road that leads to legitimacy. What Iran's leader wants, we can not and will not give him. Appeasement will never thwart radical ideology.....
We need long-term results, not just a band-aid to the current situations. Touchy-feely theory will not produce any results and it is a fact that not everyone was born to make the tough decisions. I am looking for a logical debate to topics such as this.

North Korea and Iran both feel threatened by the US, particularly since they were mentioned along with Iraq as the axis of evil. They saw what happened to the Iraq. They both don't want to be attacked and that hasn't been ruled out by the US since they keep saying military options are on the table and the fact the US has troops in South Korea and Japan and in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the gulf.

Iran's oil industry is in disrepair and they actually need to import oil despite there oil reservoir because their oil refinaries are so run down because they can't buy parts due to sanctions. They need to parts for repair the airplanes (they had a plane this summer because there using old russian planes). They need nuclear technology so they can sell more of their oil and reduce pollution. They need this technology and the only way there going to get it if the US lifts sanctions. This is where you negotiate. North Korea on the other hand needs food, energy resources, and wants a non-aggression pact with the US. The only thing they have to negotiate with is there nuclear weapons.

You shouldn't mix diplomacy with appeasement. The White House acts like negotiating makes them less of man or something. It's seems like there'd rather be stubborn than look for solutions.

[Logan13]

North Korea and Iran both feel threatened by the US, particularly since they were mentioned along with Iraq as the axis of evil. They saw what happened to the Iraq. They both don't want to be attacked and that hasn't been ruled out by the US since they keep saying military options are on the table and the fact the US has troops in South Korea and Japan and in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the gulf.

Iran's oil industry is in disrepair and they actually need to import oil despite there oil reservoir because their oil refinaries are so run down because they can't buy parts due to sanctions. They need to parts for repair the airplanes (they had a plane this summer because there using old russian planes). They need nuclear technology so they can sell more of their oil and reduce pollution. They need this technology and the only way there going to get it if the US lifts sanctions. This is where you negotiate. North Korea on the other hand needs food, energy resources, and wants a non-aggression pact with the US. The only thing they have to negotiate with is there nuclear weapons.

You shouldn't mix diplomacy with appeasement. The White House acts like negotiating makes them less of man or something. It's seems like there'd rather be stubborn than look for solutions.

Well, these countries were labeled as the Axis of Evil for a reason. Too bad if they do not like it, they have earned it. What sanctions does Iran have imposed on it? Are you referring to the fact that the US will not buy oil from Iran, tough shit? Are we the only country through which they can get these parts? As for pollution, you are truely mistaken if you believe that Iran gives a shit about reducing pollution. That is just more wishy-washy B.S.! Anyway, so it is your belief that these countries are doing what they are doing in an attempt to get the US to sit down and speak with them? If so, it all goes back to "you do not reward bad behavior". We will not be blackmailed by their threats of obtaining nuclear weapons. They could get the US to sit down with them if they went the other direction with their actions. The reason that they will not go that direction all comes down to their agenda, what they wish to accomplish....Israel wiped off the map as well as any country who opposes this. There is no negotiating with such radical idealogy as this. Quit making this the US's fault. These countries have put themselves in this situation. It is time that you hold them responsible for their actions.

[Logan13]

.

North Korea on the other hand needs food, energy resources, and wants a non-aggression pact with the US. The only thing they have to negotiate with is there nuclear weapons.
You shouldn't mix diplomacy with appeasement. The White House acts like negotiating makes them less of man or something. It's seems like there'd rather be stubborn than look for solutions.

By using your logic, every time that north korea wants something they will start up their nuclear ambitions again. This is a bad precendent to set and they will not be treated to more talks whenever their coffers run dry. These countries need to change from the inside out, until they do so, they will get and deserve NOTHING. I ask you again, since you did not give any direct response to my previous posts. Why do you believe that the US should take up the lead instead of the countries whose day-to-day lives are affected by north korea? Again I say, if kimjongil did not pursue nuclear weapons, he might be able to feed his own people with this money. Responsibily lies with kimjongil, not the US.

[mcpeepants]

By using your logic, every time that north korea wants something they will start up their nuclear ambitions again. This is a bad precendent to set and they will not be treated to more talks whenever their coffers run dry. These countries need to change from the inside out, until they do so, they will get and deserve NOTHING. I ask you again, since you did not give any direct response to my previous posts. Why do you believe that the US should take up the lead instead of the countries whose day-to-day lives are affected by north korea? Again I say, if kimjongil did not pursue nuclear weapons, he might be able to feed his own people with this money. Responsibily lies with kimjongil, not the US.

I personally think the US should be not be involved in North Korea or Iran. These countries are not in our backyard but the administration in making us involved. I also don't see any reason for troops in South Korea or Japan except for us using them to piss off the Russians and Chinese. I only say the US should be the lead because there the lead voice in calling for sanctions and one's most likely to lead any attack on the two countries.

[Logan13]

I personally think the US should be not be involved in North Korea or Iran. These countries are not in our backyard but the administration in making us involved. I also don't see any reason for troops in South Korea or Japan except for us using them to piss off the Russians and Chinese. I only say the US should be the lead because there the lead voice in calling for sanctions and one's most likely to lead any attack on the two countries.

That is where you are wrong. France is leading the call for sanctions against Iran. China is the front-runner in regards to north korea. This is the UN that the US is working on through, let's not forget that. We aren't just being "mean", we are where we are because of the actions of these 2 countries over the past decade+.

[mcpeepants]

That is where you are wrong. France is leading the call for sanctions against Iran. China is the front-runner in regards to north korea. This is the UN that the US is working on through, let's not forget that. We aren't just being "mean", we are where we are because of the actions of these 2 countries over the past decade+.

France is one minute calling for sanctions and the next negotiations with Iran. I definitely know Bolton, our UN ambassador, is calling for tough sanctions.The US is the lead voice pushing for sanctions and has threatened military action on Iran. I wouldn't take US threats lightly after seeing what happened to Afghanistan and Iraq. The US is putting it selfs into situations where we don't need to be. Oil will continue to flow without our military presence in the gulf and South Korea and Japan are more than capable protecting themselves. The sanctions are being talked about in the UN security council which is run by world power, with the US being the strongest of them.

[Logan13]

France is one minute calling for sanctions and the next negotiations with Iran. I definitely know Bolton, our UN ambassador, is calling for tough sanctions.The US is the lead voice pushing for sanctions and has threatened military action on Iran. I wouldn't take US threats lightly after seeing what happened to Afghanistan and Iraq. The US is putting it selfs into situations where we don't need to be. Oil will continue to flow without our military presence in the gulf and South Korea and Japan are more than capable protecting themselves. The sanctions are being talked about in the UN security council which is run by world power, with the US being the strongest of them.

I would point out many security counsel votes that have occurred over the past 5 years in which our strength resulted in nothing. Again, I have never seen where you have held Iran or north korea as responsible as you have the US. Actions, re-actions. Iran has been the way it is for decades, remember the Olympic hostages? There was no Bush presence at that time, so what excuse would you have given Iran back then? Were it not for apologists such as yourself, Iran and north korea would not have the confidence to do what they have been doing. Those like you are Iran and north korea's biggest promoters, perhaps it would be a nice place for you to live since you would fit right in.....Ideology is blinding.

[mcpeepants]

And there many that are strength resulted in a lot, like keep sanctions on Iraq in place during the 90s. I criticize Iran for lack of freedoms, death penalty, and torture. North Korea is just a military dictatorship, lack of freedoms, and there terrible human rights abuses. The olympic hostages were taken by a palestinian group not Iran and when that happened Iran was an ally of Israel and the US. I don't see how now wanting there people to be starved by sanctions or bombed amounts to supporting the regimes.

[Logan13]

And there many that are strength resulted in a lot, like keep sanctions on Iraq in place during the 90s. I criticize Iran for lack of freedoms, death penalty, and torture. North Korea is just a military dictatorship, lack of freedoms, and there terrible human rights abuses. The olympic hostages were taken by a palestinian group not Iran and when that happened Iran was an ally of Israel and the US. I don't see how now wanting there people to be starved by sanctions or bombed amounts to supporting the regimes.

My bad, I was referring to the event from 1979. "The first Islamic revolution of modern times". The old regime of Iran was our ally, not this new de-facto government that was responsible for taking these hostages because the US refused to see them as a legitimate government. This regime has been in place ever since, it is now just coming to a head.

[mcpeepants]

My bad, I was referring to the event from 1979. "The first Islamic revolution of modern times". The old regime of Iran was our ally, not this new de-facto government that was responsible for taking these hostages because the US refused to see them as a legitimate government. This regime has been in place ever since, it is now just coming to a head.

Well the US and UK overthrew there democratic government back in 1953 (mainly because he wanted to nationalize Iranian oil) to install the shah of iran. so they have reasons to be pissed off and suspicious of the motives of western powers motives.

[Logan13]

Well the US and UK overthrew there democratic government back in 1953 (mainly because he wanted to nationalize Iranian oil) to install the shah of iran. so they have reasons to be pissed off and suspicious of the motives of western powers motives.

Most every nation has a reason to pissed off about something that another country has done or not done to them. That is not the issue. Not every country is blinded enough by their faith to commit or support terrorism, regardless at how "pissed off" they might be. And again, your are the apologist for Iran. Perhaps iran is the only righteous country left.......

[mcpeepants]

Most every nation has a reason to pissed off about something that another country has done or not done to them. That is not the issue. Not every country is blinded enough by their faith to commit or support terrorism, regardless at how "pissed off" they might be. And again, your are the apologist for Iran. Perhaps iran is the only righteous country left.......

The US and UK did it before, what's stopping them from doing it again. And whose invading countries, Iran or the US?

[Logan13]

The US and UK did it before, what's stopping them from doing it again. And whose invading countries, Iran or the US?

Well since Hezbollah is the right hand of Iran, I would say that they both are. And again, you make excuses for Iran.

[mcpeepants]

Well since Hezbollah is the right hand of Iran, I would say that they both are. And again, you make excuses for Iran.

Hezballah didn't invade Israel but the US, UK etc did invade Iraq and Afghanistan. Hezballah is a lebanese organization and the amount of control Iran has is debatable.