US planning air strikes on Iran

B_MAN said:
bottom line is
if the USA would cease being so aggressive, then people, particularly in the middle east, would have no reason to hate them
I completely agree that we need to stop being so aggressive, but even an end to this wouldn't stop fanatics from hating us. There are plenty of other reasons, both real and imagined, to hate us. There are also lots of reasons to love us as fellow human beings that are all on this same trip to the grave!
 
Eating a baby (not really - it was an extreme exaggeration like, "Iraq has WMD!") although they really do! they hid it in Iran! :devil:
Actually it's the other way around, see G Bush devour an entire baby: (not really, it's sort of like a joke in politics)
http://www.wonkette.com/politics/democrats/baby-eating-strengthens-social-security-035805.php


Raeven0 said:
But everyone knows the United States of America is the world's policeman, judge, jury, and executioner!

Speaking of execution, Iran has been executing people lately (that's generally reserved for terrorists isn't it?):
The Bahá'í Faith, the largest religious minority in Iran, is not officially recognized, and has been persecuted during its existence in Iran. Since the 1979 revolution the persecution has increased with executions and the denial of access to higher education. More recent persecution towards Bahá'ís has led to the United Nations Special Rapporteur of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights stating on March 20, 2006 that "this latest development indicates that the situation with regard to religious minorities in Iran is, in fact, deteriorating." [17]
uhh deteriorating? uhh ya think? Boy thats a nice way to say totally ****ing gone. The UN is ****ing worthless.

I guess maybe if the US government was executing our citizens because they weren't quite the right type of extreme Christians, then the media would really have something to talk about.
 
VirusType2 said:
Speaking of execution, Iran has been executing people lately (that's generally reserved for terrorists isn't it?):
And because we're the sole PJJE (policeman, judge, jury, and executioner) of the world, it's our manifest destiny to stop these heinous attacks on our views of morality as soon as possible. Deploy the nukes! Bomb those heathens to kingdom come! YEEEEEEHAWWWW!

Seriously, though--I may not like what they're doing, but that doesn't give me the right to invade a sovereign nation.
 
Raeven0 said:
And because we're the sole PJJE (policeman, judge, jury, and executioner) of the world, it's our manifest destiny to stop these heinous attacks on our views of morality as soon as possible. Deploy the nukes! Bomb those heathens to kingdom come! YEEEEEEHAWWWW!

Seriously, though--I may not like what they're doing, but that doesn't give me the right to invade a sovereign nation.
What we need my friends:

Democratic World Government.

The world has changed to much to rely on conventional government. We need world government, where every nation has a say in what is right and wrong, and if its the popular vote that what one particular country is doing something wrong, then everyone must join to change it.

The UN needs to be fixed.
 
VirusType2 said:
What we need my friends.

Democratic World Government.

The UN needs to be fixed.
I will fight to the death any NWO one world government.
 
I think there are like 191 nations who have a say in what goes on with the UN so why isn't it working? It was designed to increase peaceful communication that can prevent wars.

If countries don't want to get involved then they don't get a say in what goes on, this should make every nation want to get involved. The problem seems to be that only like 9 nations have been willing to pay - hell, it's financed on a curve depending on how much money a country has. It should work - in theory.

here you can skim through this if you want to educate yourselves

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN

LOL BTW Rakurai ;)
 
VirusType2 said:

" * A six-fold increase in the number of UN missions mounted to prevent wars, from 1990 to 2002
* A four-fold increase in efforts to stop existing conflicts, from 1990 to 2002
* A seven-fold increase in the number of ‘Friends of the Secretary-General’, ‘Contact Groups’ and other government-initiated mechanisms to support peacemaking and peacebuilding missions, from 1990 to 2003
* An eleven-fold increase in the number of economic sanctions against regimes around the world, from 1989 to 2001
* A four-fold increase in the number of UN peacekeeping operations, from 1987, to 1999
"

i wouldnt call that worthless
 
A lot of people seem to be really nervous about Iran having a nuclear weapon.

If Iran does get their nuke, the only thing that will happen is the ayatollah's will never fall from power. Iran will always be a hardcore islamic nation (or at least will be throughout our time period.) and women there will still continue their unfortunate persian lives covering their hair and wearing a lot of clothing.

Oil prices will also go up like a mother ****er. Too bad for all the retards out there that own hummers. i laugh at you.

End of story. They won't nuke israel, and they won't nuke america.

oh but if we do strike, then the goddamn ayatollah's will go back to supporting global terrorism (as i believe cpt stern already stated.)

i feel bad for our marines - as their lives right now keep depending on bush/cheney's actions.

**Now the thing that's been bugging me - ***

I was a cadet at virginia tech going through Air Force ROTC. we had a 3 star general come in and speak to us about our future careers. he literally said to be prepared for Iran, because most of us would spend our careers dealing with that nation. Now I could be wrong (he could've just been speculating,) but I highly doubt he'd give a speech to a thousand cadets about spending our careers with Iran if he was just speculating. He seemed pretty certain we're gonna strike. :-P

So that's why we're pulling all our troops from Iraq/Afghanistan, to prepare for Iran... Personally, I think we'll be striking within the next few years.
 
Sheikah42 said:
I was a cadet at virginia tech going through Air Force ROTC. we had a 3 star general come in and speak to us about our future careers. he literally said to be prepared for Iran, because most of us would spend our careers dealing with that nation. Now I could be wrong (he could've just been speculating,) but I highly doubt he'd give a speech to a thousand cadets about spending our careers with Iran if he was just speculating. He seemed pretty certain we're gonna strike. :-P

So that's why we're pulling all our troops from Iraq/Afghanistan, to prepare for Iran... Personally, I think we'll be striking within the next few years.
intriguing
when was this?
 
VirusType2 said:
What we need my friends:

Democratic World Government.

The world has changed to much to rely on conventional government. We need world government, where every nation has a say in what is right and wrong, and if its the popular vote that what one particular country is doing something wrong, then everyone must join to change it.

The UN needs to be fixed.

Ok, so we need a bully organization with military might?

With mostly-western influenced culture on righteousness?


That sounds bad..... The UN really shouldn't have a armed forces, btw.
 
15357 said:
Ok, so we need a bully organization with military might?

With mostly-western influenced culture on righteousness?


That sounds bad..... The UN really shouldn't have a armed forces, btw.
A bully organization? Every single nation is a part of it. 191 nations are members.

If it's mostly western influenced, then thats because there are more western nations, but I don't think their are. with 191 nations everyone gets a say in what happens. And really, are our western ideals really that extreme?

It just doesn't seem to be effective enough in keeping peace and stopping heinous acts like genocide and apartheid.

I think the world needs to realize there is some serious shit going on in the world and everyone needs to stop ignoring it. Is it too much to ask for members of each nation to meet once or twice a year and talk?

I don't think the UN really has a military.
 
15357 said:
The UN really shouldn't have a armed forces, btw.

it doesnt ..member nations send their troops whenever they're needed
 
Sheikah42 said:
Oil prices will also go up like a mother ****er. Too bad for all the retards out there that own hummers. i laugh at you.
Our economy is dependent on oil much for much more than just cars. I mean, if everyone had cars that could use minimum gasoline that'd be great, but that's not even going to stop the devastating effect super high oil prices would have. We use oil for so much more than daily car commuting. Virtually all machinery and produced items. All petrolium based products, etc. Films, various substances. Everything modern has oil involved at some point in production or maintenance.

Even if we had cars that ran off water instead and we no longer used gasoline, we'd need to try our damndest to keep oil prices to a minimum.
 
that's why securing oil reserves is so important ..the US has 25 years tops in reserves, the middle east has hubdreds of years worth ..you do the math
 
wasn't that one of the original reasons for helping the ayatollah's get to power in iran? shah was charging too much for oil?
 
If it's mostly western influenced, then thats because there are more western nations, but I don't think their are. with 191 nations everyone gets a say in what happens. And really, are our western ideals really that extreme?

No, I don't think those were 15357 beliefs. Read who he quoted, and see if you agree with their perspective.
 
I would love it if all of went back into the stone age, which might happen if we lost our precious oil. No more supermarkets, no more cars, no more pollution, and a whole heap of do-it-yourselfness. Anarchy would ensue, as well as the survival of the fittest. But that is an unrealistic view. Realistically our economy would go to shit and most of us would end up living in shanty town.
 
Back
Top