Canada has closed its embassy in Iran and expelled all Iranian diplomats. John Baird, Canada's foreign affairs minister has labelled Iran the “most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
Even though this does not seem to be public opinion in Canada, our government has gone ahead and done it anyway.
Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
On September 08 2012 09:54 DrThorMD wrote: Canada does what the US does and the US does what Israel wants. Or something.
Canada is finally starting to do what is right for Canada and that includes supporting the only country of Western values in an area which is the center of the Jihad against us and our Western allies. For too long all of our military expeditions were self-sacrifical. Peace keeping was a worthless sham and the War in Afhganistan, while initially legitimate, turned into an altruistic nation-building mission which only helped our enemies. Unapologetically ending states who sponsor terrorism against us, attacks on our soldiers over seas and fight outright proxy wars against our allies is the most rational, selfish thing we can do. It should have been done ten years ago. It needs to be done before they aquire nuclear weapons.
On September 08 2012 09:54 DrThorMD wrote: Canada does what the US does and the US does what Israel wants. Or something.
Exactly. I feel that Canada is the US's puppet, especially with this Harper government...
Incorrect, we both do what Israel wants.
Perhaps the reason I find this so disturbing is the lack of US fingerprints. The Canadian government truly does unconditionally support Israel, which is shocking, since most Canadians can't even find it on the map.
On September 08 2012 09:54 DrThorMD wrote: Canada does what the US does and the US does what Israel wants. Or something.
Canada is finally starting to do what is right for Canada and that includes supporting the only country of Western values in an area which is the center of the Jihad against us and our Western allies. For too long all of our military expeditions were self-sacrifical. Peace keeping was a worthless sham and the War in Afhganistan, while initially legitimate, turned into an altruistic nation-building mission which only helped our enemies. Unapologetically ending states who sponsor terrorism against us, attacks on our soldiers over seas and outright proxy wars against our allies is the most rational, selfish thing we can do.
I have no problem with Canada being Selfish or cutting off diplomatic ties with Iran. It's our resources going to waste following the US into folly arrays, which is usually done with any consultation with the public, that I have a problem with.
Also, please do not call what Al Qaeda does, Jihad. Even though they call their war that themselves. It is incorrect and has nothing to do with proper Islamic Values. Wars based on Greed and Personal Gain are not Jihad.
On September 08 2012 09:53 seiferoth10 wrote: It's pretty much all of the UN against Iran at this point, barring maybe Russia as I don't know their stance on it yet.
UN Goal = Turn the middle east into a smoking crater? Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Egypt Mission accomplished.Looks like Syria and Iran are next in the crosshairs. It wouldn't surprise me if this turns into World War 3.
Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
Canada is finally starting to do what is right for Canada and that includes supporting the only country of Western values in an area which is the center of the Jihad against us and our Western allies. For too long all of our military expeditions were self-sacrifical. Peace keeping was a worthless sham and the War in Afhganistan, while initially legitimate, turned into an altruistic nation-building mission which only helped our enemies. Unapologetically ending states who sponsor terrorism against us, attacks on our soldiers over seas and outright proxy wars against our allies is the most rational, selfish thing we can do.
What are you even saying, you're obviously adding a facetious tone but I just... I just constantly facepalm, please clarify maybe?
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
Arguably the United States is the biggest funding partner to most terrorist organizations although what they define as "terrorism" and "freedom fighters" often tread a fine line such that we get things like Saddam Hussein who is at one point funded by the States and then another condemned for arguably being the same principle with the difference of charging more for oil.
On September 08 2012 09:53 seiferoth10 wrote: It's pretty much all of the UN against Iran at this point, barring maybe Russia as I don't know their stance on it yet.
UN Goal = Turn the middle east into a smoking crater? Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Egypt Mission accomplished.Looks like Syria and Iran are next in the crosshairs. It wouldn't surprise me if this turns into World War 3.
Egypt and Libya both apparently had dictators in power that were friendly to the west and Israel I hear(well, gadhafi hated the US, but was ok with Europe).
So...we screwed over dictators that were great allies because our goal is to blow up everything?
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
Arguably the United States is the biggest funding partner to most terrorist organizations although what they define as "terrorism" and "freedom fighters" often tread a fine line such that we get things like Saddam Hussein who is at one point funded by the States and then another condemned for arguably being the same principle with the difference of charging more for oil.[/QUOTE] Hah, and to make things more funny, we funded the MEK and trained them in the US, an organization on the terrorist list and they are Marxist-Leninist. And the training and funding was done by the Republican Administration under Bush.
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
If a nation initiates force against you by sponsoring terrorist attacks against your citizens, military attacks on your soldiers and outright proxy war against your allies, you don't just hit them back eye for an eye, you have a moral obligation to utterly and completely obliterate them if you have the means. You don't have to openly invade a country in order to be an initiator of force. We have embaroged Iran, killed their scientists and infected their computers. The only thing wrong with this is how pathetically minor these responses have been. We and Iran are not moral equals. The concern of our foreign policy should not be the well being of the citizens of a hostile slave nation. The proper role of government is to protect the rights of it's own citizens and if war is going to occur, it damn well better be on the soil of the slave nation and not our own.
Doesn't this sort of thing happen quite often? Belarus recently shut down all diplomatic contacts with Sweden because of Swedish ambassadors pushing too much for democracy. I doubt it was ever more than local news. Probably because no one actually cares about either country, but still. It seems like it's fairly frequent.
On September 08 2012 09:49 StyLeD wrote: Probably were pushed and heavily rewarded by the US government. They are our biggest trade partner.
Harper is a shill for Israeli interests, and I'm sure the only reward Canada got for this was a thank you call from Netanyahu.
was going to quote exactly that, this is just proof that Israel has infiltrated Canada as badly as it has the united states. John Bhaird is thee worst foriegn relations minister Canada has ever had, it is painfully obvious where his allegences lie.
make no mistake, the assault on Iran is nothing more than the states protecting their petro dollar and the international bankers destroying the last government controlled central bank in the world. After which all central banks will be in the hands of private interests...
On September 08 2012 09:53 seiferoth10 wrote: It's pretty much all of the UN against Iran at this point, barring maybe Russia as I don't know their stance on it yet.
UN Goal = Turn the middle east into a smoking crater? Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Egypt Mission accomplished.Looks like Syria and Iran are next in the crosshairs. It wouldn't surprise me if this turns into World War 3.
it will be world war three because China (hopefully) is doing some serious posturing to prevent an Israel led US invasion of Iran, which is their main supplier of oil. Hard to know how Russia plays into this but we could only hope that someone can rise up to oppose the Israeli's and US attack dogs, which right now are freely pilaging, looting, and killing people all over the middle east.
On September 08 2012 09:54 DrThorMD wrote: Canada does what the US does and the US does what Israel wants. Or something.
Exactly. I feel that Canada is the US's puppet, especially with this Harper government...
Incorrect, we both do what Israel wants.
Perhaps the reason I find this so disturbing is the lack of US fingerprints. The Canadian government truly does unconditionally support Israel, which is shocking, since most Canadians can't even find it on the map.
Painfully the same thing can be said for Americans lol
On September 08 2012 09:49 StyLeD wrote: Probably were pushed and heavily rewarded by the US government. They are our biggest trade partner.
Harper is a shill for Israeli interests, and I'm sure the only reward Canada got for this was a thank you call from Netanyahu.
was going to quote exactly that, this is just proof that Israel has infiltrated Canada as badly as it has the united states. John Bhaird is thee worst foriegn relations minister Canada has ever had, it is painfully obvious where his allegences lie.
make no mistake, the assault on Iran is nothing more than the states protecting their petro dollar and the international bankers destroying the last government controlled central bank in the world. After which all central banks will be in the hands of private interests...
Believe it or not, Canada, the United States and Israel are democracies and your conspircy theories are the most anti-intellectual ideas possible. You blame small groups of conspirators who have the magic ability to hijack democracies when it has alwyas been the popular ideas of the people that has decided the fate of countries. Central banks exist because people think they work and even if they are technically private, it is undeniable that they are controlled by government. The USD is doomed (which you probably don't realize) because of the actions of the Federal Reserve and which is controlled by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas. It is those ideas that matter, not your imaginary conspiracy theories.
Were going to war soon with Iran no doubt in my mind. Someone I know who works in the aerospace and defense development(aka smart airbourne weapons)they are one of the biggest contractors for the U.S. government, had their productions increased last few months. Last time that happen was few months before the Iraq war. Were definitely not stocking up for the hell of it. Something big is about to happen within the next few months.
On September 08 2012 09:49 StyLeD wrote: Probably were pushed and heavily rewarded by the US government. They are our biggest trade partner.
Harper is a shill for Israeli interests, and I'm sure the only reward Canada got for this was a thank you call from Netanyahu.
was going to quote exactly that, this is just proof that Israel has infiltrated Canada as badly as it has the united states. John Bhaird is thee worst foriegn relations minister Canada has ever had, it is painfully obvious where his allegences lie.
make no mistake, the assault on Iran is nothing more than the states protecting their petro dollar and the international bankers destroying the last government controlled central bank in the world. After which all central banks will be in the hands of private interests...
Believe it or not, Canada, the United States and Israel are democracies and your conspircy theories are the most anti-intellectual ideas possible. You blame small groups of conspirators who have the magic ability to hijack democracies when it has alwyas been the popular ideas of the people that has decided the fate of countries. Central banks exist because people think they work and even if they are technically private, it is undeniable that they are controlled by government. The USD is doomed (which you probably don't realize) because of the actions of the Federal Reserve and which is controlled by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas. It is those ideas that matter, not your imaginary conspiracy theories.
I don't think you understand how a republic works and that throughout the years the imperfect system of voting has been abused time and time again, now to argue that a "conspiracy" exists without backing proof is about as naive and stupid as arguing that they don't exist or at least are non-likely based off personal assumptions.
To go into more detail, I would say that one could connect a few dots here and there over the years and argue that conspiracies "The action of plotting or conspiring" have not only happened on multiple occasions, but are happening frequently. If I want that promotion I may conspire to undermine my colleague in an attempt to elevate my position, a company may conspire with other companies to corner the market and remove a specific organization and a country may conspire with another country to hit an end goal that another country may find unjust or plain wrong and yet they do it everyday.
"Small groups of conspirators" When has a large group of conspirators ever existed? Do you think Stalin when he was overthrowing his superiors conspired with the public, or Hitler with his public with regards to conspiring against millions of jews?
Conspiracies are always small groups with big plans that play off the naive and they've happened since before Caesar whispered "Et tu, Brutus" (or so the lore goes)
"by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas." Arguably this is a false assumption, what if we have 2 candidates to vote for and we're forced to vote, if our candidates are Hitler and Stalin (used in a previous example, might as well carry it) then when they kill millions of people, was it the people who decided those deaths? Arguably yes yet they were elected to power because of power and propaganda... I doubt many average joes who voted for Hitler's party assumed he'd attempt to exterminate an entire race of people, so it's their fault for not having that assumption! It is the duty of the public to be informed because at any moment great evil can take stride as it has for thousands of years.
The government may be chosen by the people, but the actions of the government are not always of the people and when this occurs it is the duty of the people to either take back control of the government or overthrow it entirely but in today's world that is a near impossibility so we're stuck between choosing the white cat and the black cat (someone might get that reference ^^)
So to end, I would say that countries and organizations conspire on an everyday basis, does this "illuminati" exist? Possibly, it is not an impossibility with today's technological advances that a small group with enough resources could control the way nations shift between power but I would not place any stone into it because frankly I am not versed enough in the debate.
So to reiterate my original point, one that has been bugging me when people blankly say "trooferism" or say tin foil hat wearers, you are naive and stupid if either you believe in something with no proof or completely negate something because of common opinion.
On September 08 2012 09:53 seiferoth10 wrote: It's pretty much all of the UN against Iran at this point, barring maybe Russia as I don't know their stance on it yet.
UN Goal = Turn the middle east into a smoking crater? Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Egypt Mission accomplished.Looks like Syria and Iran are next in the crosshairs. It wouldn't surprise me if this turns into World War 3.
it will be world war three because China (hopefully) is doing some serious posturing to prevent an Israel led US invasion of Iran, which is their main supplier of oil. Hard to know how Russia plays into this but we could only hope that someone can rise up to oppose the Israeli's and US attack dogs, which right now are freely pilaging, looting, and killing people all over the middle east.
Israel does a decent job defending it's borders while America half-assedly fights to bring democracy to people who don't want it and makes excuses for the murderers of soldiers who were disarmed in front of alleged allies for the sake of political corectness. The only thing America is doing wrong is sacrificing itself to it's enemies and failing to stand up for itself. Point me towards all this unreserved pillaging and looting. All I've noticed is a huge waste of lives and money for zero material gain (as anti-Americans like to allege is the purpose of these wars).
On September 08 2012 09:53 seiferoth10 wrote: It's pretty much all of the UN against Iran at this point, barring maybe Russia as I don't know their stance on it yet.
UN Goal = Turn the middle east into a smoking crater? Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Egypt Mission accomplished.Looks like Syria and Iran are next in the crosshairs. It wouldn't surprise me if this turns into World War 3.
I think we can all agree WW3 is gonna originate from the middle east... or Germany lol jk. Just a matter of who and what starts it.
On September 08 2012 09:53 seiferoth10 wrote: It's pretty much all of the UN against Iran at this point, barring maybe Russia as I don't know their stance on it yet.
UN Goal = Turn the middle east into a smoking crater? Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Egypt Mission accomplished.Looks like Syria and Iran are next in the crosshairs. It wouldn't surprise me if this turns into World War 3.
I think we can all agree WW3 is gonna originate from the middle east... or Germany lol jk.
You can draw very similar comparisons (obviously scaled back) to the Yugoslavic powder keg which eventually lead to the first world war.
On September 08 2012 10:59 TriO wrote: Were going to war soon with Iran no doubt. Someone I know who works in the aerospace and defense development(aka smart airbourne weapons)they are one of the biggest contractors for the U.S. government, had their productions increased last few months. Last time that happen was few months before the Iraq war.
This and there have been some news lately (in Norway at least) that Kongsberg Defence just got another contract with the US (saying that the old one was increased is more correct) for thousands more turrets. I am no expert so I just call them turrets, its the ones they use on top of vehicles, the machine guns.
On September 08 2012 10:59 TriO wrote: Were going to war soon with Iran no doubt in my mind. Someone I know who works in the aerospace and defense development(aka smart airbourne weapons)they are one of the biggest contractors for the U.S. government, had their productions increased last few months. Last time that happen was few months before the Iraq war. Were definitely not stocking up for the hell of it. Something big is about to happen within the next few months.
Honestly Israel has been threatening Iran long enough for their threats to be as credible as North Korea's war threats to the south so I don't think a war is going to happen anytime soon. Also it is election year so every politician acts tough this year in order to gain votes.
On September 08 2012 10:59 TriO wrote: Were going to war soon with Iran no doubt. Someone I know who works in the aerospace and defense development(aka smart airbourne weapons)they are one of the biggest contractors for the U.S. government, had their productions increased last few months. Last time that happen was few months before the Iraq war.
This and there have been some news lately (in Norway at least) that Kongsberg Defence just got another contract with the US (saying that the old one was increased is more correct) for thousands more turrets. I am no expert so I just call them turrets, its the ones they use on top of vehicles, the machine guns.
It's quite alright, turrets do just fine with that explanation hahaha (Also the type of mounted weapon may change and vary depending on vehicle class so it's not a big deal again that you used "turret)
It will not be as interesting as some people seem to think, Albert Einstein was a smart man and I would put my money behind his wit when he said that WW4 would be fought with sticks and stones.
Can anyone explain Canada's rationale for doing this (Besides the huge Israeli conspiracy or the Illuminati)? Did Iran do something recently to spark this? Is the jury back regarding Iran's nuclear intentions?
On September 08 2012 11:24 Sofestafont wrote: Can anyone explain Canada's rationale for doing this (Besides the huge Israeli conspiracy or the Illuminati)? Did Iran do something recently to spark this? Is the jury back regarding Iran's nuclear intentions?
Could be completely unrelated to both of the things you just said. Similar to Sweden (you may hear some backlash about this but it is frankly true and can be proven through case studies) US says "jump" and we kindly oblige. The last real premier to push back hard enough to make noise was during the Cold War but staying away from the history lesson it is election year, Canada is just simply getting back in bed with the US showing that they'll follow them.
Even though this does not seem to be public opinion in Canada, our government has gone ahead and done it anyway.
Does know one think the Government knows something about foreign relations more than some Canadian jackoffs on the internet? You think they don't have more intelligence and reason than you have?
I also love how this thread got 2 posts before the USA bashing began gotta love TL.
On September 08 2012 09:49 StyLeD wrote: Probably were pushed and heavily rewarded by the US government. They are our biggest trade partner.
Harper is a shill for Israeli interests, and I'm sure the only reward Canada got for this was a thank you call from Netanyahu.
was going to quote exactly that, this is just proof that Israel has infiltrated Canada as badly as it has the united states. John Bhaird is thee worst foriegn relations minister Canada has ever had, it is painfully obvious where his allegences lie.
make no mistake, the assault on Iran is nothing more than the states protecting their petro dollar and the international bankers destroying the last government controlled central bank in the world. After which all central banks will be in the hands of private interests...
Believe it or not, Canada, the United States and Israel are democracies and your conspircy theories are the most anti-intellectual ideas possible. You blame small groups of conspirators who have the magic ability to hijack democracies when it has alwyas been the popular ideas of the people that has decided the fate of countries. Central banks exist because people think they work and even if they are technically private, it is undeniable that they are controlled by government. The USD is doomed (which you probably don't realize) because of the actions of the Federal Reserve and which is controlled by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas. It is those ideas that matter, not your imaginary conspiracy theories.
I don't think you understand how a republic works and that throughout the years the imperfect system of voting has been abused time and time again, now to argue that a "conspiracy" exists without backing proof is about as naive and stupid as arguing that they don't exist or at least are non-likely based off personal assumptions.
To go into more detail, I would say that one could connect a few dots here and there over the years and argue that conspiracies "The action of plotting or conspiring" have not only happened on multiple occasions, but are happening frequently. If I want that promotion I may conspire to undermine my colleague in an attempt to elevate my position, a company may conspire with other companies to corner the market and remove a specific organization and a country may conspire with another country to hit an end goal that another country may find unjust or plain wrong and yet they do it everyday.
"Small groups of conspirators" When has a large group of conspirators ever existed? Do you think Stalin when he was overthrowing his superiors conspired with the public, or Hitler with his public with regards to conspiring against millions of jews?
Conspiracies are always small groups with big plans that play off the naive and they've happened since before Caesar whispered "Et tu, Brutus" (or so the lore goes)
"by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas." Arguably this is a false assumption, what if we have 2 candidates to vote for and we're forced to vote, if our candidates are Hitler and Stalin (used in a previous example, might as well carry it) then when they kill millions of people, was it the people who decided those deaths? Arguably yes yet they were elected to power because of power and propaganda... I doubt many average joes who voted for Hitler's party assumed he'd attempt to exterminate an entire race of people, so it's their fault for not having that assumption.
The government may be chosen by the people, but the actions of the government are not always of the people and when this occurs it is the duty of the people to either take back control of the government or overthrow it entirely but in today's world that is a near impossibility so we're stuck between choosing the white cat and the black cat (someone might get that reference ^^)
I know how a Republic works but Canada and America are not Republics. America used to be a Republic, but unfortunately, democracy has taken over and it's not anymore. Imperfections in the voting systems are minor. Flaws in campaign laws are more serious but the effects are still minor compared to the ideas held by the majority.
If you conspire to undermine a colleague, you're not going to have much of an affect on an entire country. A company may conspire to corner a market, but it will only be successful if it has government backing either through direct cronyism/bribery and the lack of a vigilant public or through the use of regulations which the people don't realize lead to monopolies. Stalin might have conspired to take over the USSR but if it wasn't him, it would have been another communist murderer. Hitler may not have informed the public about the Holocaust, but they knew they were voting for and supporting an anti-semetic totaltarian dictator. I don't deny that individuals can have large effects, but it is always the ideas of the general populace which controls the direction of an entire country and this is especially true where there is sustained democracy. The only individuals who have truly drastic effects are the philosophers who come up with and popularize ideas.
The only way that a democracy will ever have two dictators as the only viable candidates, is if the people are in favor of dictatorship. Just look at America. It's not at the point of dictatorship but they are stuck choosing between two statists because the American people are in favor of statism. Third parties exist, but they will never win because they are not in line with mainstream ideology. A country which largely rejects dictatorship can't just have it forced upon itself from within. Remember, no matter how powerful the military, it is still made up of people who will generally share the ideas of the general populace. The only exception would be a foreign take over but that wouldn't be conspiracy, that would be brought about through the ideas of the people of the invading nation.
On September 08 2012 09:49 StyLeD wrote: Probably were pushed and heavily rewarded by the US government. They are our biggest trade partner.
Harper is a shill for Israeli interests, and I'm sure the only reward Canada got for this was a thank you call from Netanyahu.
was going to quote exactly that, this is just proof that Israel has infiltrated Canada as badly as it has the united states. John Bhaird is thee worst foriegn relations minister Canada has ever had, it is painfully obvious where his allegences lie.
make no mistake, the assault on Iran is nothing more than the states protecting their petro dollar and the international bankers destroying the last government controlled central bank in the world. After which all central banks will be in the hands of private interests...
Believe it or not, Canada, the United States and Israel are democracies and your conspircy theories are the most anti-intellectual ideas possible. You blame small groups of conspirators who have the magic ability to hijack democracies when it has alwyas been the popular ideas of the people that has decided the fate of countries. Central banks exist because people think they work and even if they are technically private, it is undeniable that they are controlled by government. The USD is doomed (which you probably don't realize) because of the actions of the Federal Reserve and which is controlled by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas. It is those ideas that matter, not your imaginary conspiracy theories.
the Federal Reserve is not at all controlled by the government. You probably havn't watched CSPAN at all during briefings for where the bail out money was going. Bernanke refused to say what the money was going to be used for and where it was going. It has been said in interviews by Alan Greenspan that congress does not control the FED. When was the last time the FED was audited? No government agency can get away with never being audited.
On September 08 2012 09:53 seiferoth10 wrote: It's pretty much all of the UN against Iran at this point, barring maybe Russia as I don't know their stance on it yet.
UN Goal = Turn the middle east into a smoking crater? Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Egypt Mission accomplished.Looks like Syria and Iran are next in the crosshairs. It wouldn't surprise me if this turns into World War 3.
I think we can all agree WW3 is gonna originate from the middle east... or Germany lol jk.
You can draw very similar comparisons (obviously scaled back) to the Yugoslavic powder keg which eventually lead to the first world war.
no, you can't. there is no system of interlocked alliances, there are no shared borders, there are tensions nowhere the level required to draw in major foreign powers. anyone who thinks China will go to war over Iran is a blithering idiot, and Russia is a non-factor.
war with Iran would be just that- war with Iran, no one else. believing Russia or China would go to WAR over Iran is simply wrong. that's just how it is. the ww1 comparisons are illogical and lacking any real substance when viewed with an analytic mind.
On September 08 2012 09:49 StyLeD wrote: Probably were pushed and heavily rewarded by the US government. They are our biggest trade partner.
Harper is a shill for Israeli interests, and I'm sure the only reward Canada got for this was a thank you call from Netanyahu.
was going to quote exactly that, this is just proof that Israel has infiltrated Canada as badly as it has the united states. John Bhaird is thee worst foriegn relations minister Canada has ever had, it is painfully obvious where his allegences lie.
make no mistake, the assault on Iran is nothing more than the states protecting their petro dollar and the international bankers destroying the last government controlled central bank in the world. After which all central banks will be in the hands of private interests...
Believe it or not, Canada, the United States and Israel are democracies and your conspircy theories are the most anti-intellectual ideas possible. You blame small groups of conspirators who have the magic ability to hijack democracies when it has alwyas been the popular ideas of the people that has decided the fate of countries. Central banks exist because people think they work and even if they are technically private, it is undeniable that they are controlled by government. The USD is doomed (which you probably don't realize) because of the actions of the Federal Reserve and which is controlled by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas. It is those ideas that matter, not your imaginary conspiracy theories.
I don't think you understand how a republic works and that throughout the years the imperfect system of voting has been abused time and time again, now to argue that a "conspiracy" exists without backing proof is about as naive and stupid as arguing that they don't exist or at least are non-likely based off personal assumptions.
To go into more detail, I would say that one could connect a few dots here and there over the years and argue that conspiracies "The action of plotting or conspiring" have not only happened on multiple occasions, but are happening frequently. If I want that promotion I may conspire to undermine my colleague in an attempt to elevate my position, a company may conspire with other companies to corner the market and remove a specific organization and a country may conspire with another country to hit an end goal that another country may find unjust or plain wrong and yet they do it everyday.
"Small groups of conspirators" When has a large group of conspirators ever existed? Do you think Stalin when he was overthrowing his superiors conspired with the public, or Hitler with his public with regards to conspiring against millions of jews?
Conspiracies are always small groups with big plans that play off the naive and they've happened since before Caesar whispered "Et tu, Brutus" (or so the lore goes)
"by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas." Arguably this is a false assumption, what if we have 2 candidates to vote for and we're forced to vote, if our candidates are Hitler and Stalin (used in a previous example, might as well carry it) then when they kill millions of people, was it the people who decided those deaths? Arguably yes yet they were elected to power because of power and propaganda... I doubt many average joes who voted for Hitler's party assumed he'd attempt to exterminate an entire race of people, so it's their fault for not having that assumption.
The government may be chosen by the people, but the actions of the government are not always of the people and when this occurs it is the duty of the people to either take back control of the government or overthrow it entirely but in today's world that is a near impossibility so we're stuck between choosing the white cat and the black cat (someone might get that reference ^^)
I know how a Republic works but Canada and America are not Republics. America used to be a Republic, but unfortunately, democracy has taken over and it's not anymore. Imperfections in the voting systems are minor. Flaws in campaign laws are more serious but the effects are still minor compared to the ideas held by the majority.
If you conspire to undermine a colleague, you're not going to have much of an affect on an entire country. A company may conspire to corner a market, but it will only be successful if it has government backing either through direct cronyism/bribery and the lack of a vigilant public or through the use of regulations which the people don't realize lead to monopolies. Stalin might have conspired to take over the USSR but if it wasn't him, it would have been another communist murderer. Hitler may not have informed the public about the Holocaust, but they knew they were voting for and supporting a totaltarian dictator. I don't deny that individuals can have large effects, but it is always the ideas of the general populace which controls the direction and this is especially true where there is sustained democracy. The only individuals who have truly drastic effects are the philosophers who come up with and popularize ideas.
The only way that a democracy will ever have two dictators as the only viable candidates to vote for, is if the people are in favor of dictators. Just look at America. It's not at the point of dictatorship but they are stuck choosing between two statists because the American people are in favor of statism. Third parties exist, but they will never win because they are not in line with mainstream ideology. A country which largely rejects dictatorship can't just have it forced upon itself from within. Remember, no matter how powerful the military, it is still made up of people who will generally share the ideas of the general populace. The only exception would be a foreign take over but that wouldn't be conspiracy, that would be brought about through the ideas of the people of the invading nation.
I would like to make a point to note you really didn't argue anything in this ... rebuttal? but I will bite anyway as this is TL and posting standards can be low at times.
"I know how a Republic works but Canada and America are not Republics." Actually it is a constitutional Republic or is being heralded as one more frequently (Utah, which passed a bill to teach that the US is a Republic and not a Democracy, although they can be closely related, The House voted 57-17)+ Show Spoiler +
So firstly your initial comment is either wrong or such a small truth that using it as a statement is arguably misleading.
I would like to split your next few sentences up although they all related to my comparison between people/companies/nations.
" you conspire to undermine a colleague, you're not going to have much of an affect on an entire country."
Firstly the text I wrote was used to show the escalation of possibilities with regards to how anyone (or anything be it company/country) can and usually will conspire to get ahead.
Secondly you agree that conspiring against a colleague is a possibility thus your next statement holds no merit in the conversation thus let's just say "We can conspire on a personal level (between people)"
"A company may conspire to corner a market, but it will only be successful if it has government backing either through direct cronyism/bribery and the lack of a vigilant public or through the use of regulations which the people don't realize lead to monopolies."
Firstly again, you say a company "may" conspire to corner a market so without government involvement you agree that the possibility of companies conspiring exists which leads us to the next level, and we'll simplify it to "We can conspire on monopolistic ideals, such as companies attempting to corner a market"
To continue into your counter argument you state that it "will only be successful",which note agrees that the possibility again exists, "if it has government backing either through direct bribery (lobbying) and/or (paraphrased) the lack of a vigilant public or through regulations which the people don't realize lead to monopolies."
I would not try to argue that you're wrong, I would simply state that in all three of your examples (I will use America as the prime example since it is really the head of any debate with regards to conspiracies) America has hit the head on the nail with failing to stop such things from happening by having lobbying (bribing), a non vigilant public (allowing multiple occasions of "security over freedom" style acts etc etc and a community of peoples who simply don't follow politics closely enough (not that it matters since they don't vote on every issue, just who can decide upon that issue) to be able to defend or approve of a regulation that would lead or stop monopolies.
"Stalin might have conspired to take over the USSR but if it wasn't him, it would have been another communist murderer. Hitler may not have informed the public about the Holocaust, but they knew they were voting for and supporting a totaltarian dictator. I don't deny that individuals can have large effects, but it is always the ideas of the general populace which controls the direction and this is especially true where there is sustained democracy. The only individuals who have truly drastic effects are the philosophers who come up with and popularize ideas."
This entire statement is completely opinionated based, you state how if Stalin didn't exist another one would fill his place and that the German people "knew they were voting for and supporting a totalitarian dictator" which again is another opinion based off zero proof other then your own reasoning such that I can't argue if this is true or not because most Germans voted for charisma, not dictatorship and the "National Socialist" party really doesn't come off as Ghengis Khan to me, would you think that? Hitler was voted in for saying he'd bring them out of one of the (if not the) greatest depression Germany ever had, not ruling the world or killing jews.
"The only way that a democracy will ever have two dictators as the only viable candidates to vote for, is if the people are in favor of dictators. Just look at America. It's not at the point of dictatorship but they are stuck choosing between two statists because the American people are in favor of statism. Third parties exist, but they will never win because they are not in line with mainstream ideology. A country which largely rejects dictatorship can't just have it forced upon itself from within. Remember, no matter how powerful the military, it is still made up of people who will generally share the ideas of the general populace. The only exception would be a foreign take over but that wouldn't be conspiracy, that would be brought about through the ideas of the people of the invading nation."
So I quoted the above, but frankly you go from accusing America of being a statism (which frankly could be true but it seems to be an opinion to stating how the only way two dictators can be the only viable candidates (often times only one has to be while showing off good charisma) is wrong as well because again using the hitler example a single dictator who hid under being for "socialism" was elected, not by dictator supporters but everyday people trying to get their four square meals.
I hope this helps clear up some of your comments, again it was hard to go through.
On September 08 2012 09:53 seiferoth10 wrote: It's pretty much all of the UN against Iran at this point, barring maybe Russia as I don't know their stance on it yet.
UN Goal = Turn the middle east into a smoking crater? Iraq , Afghanistan , Libya , Egypt Mission accomplished.Looks like Syria and Iran are next in the crosshairs. It wouldn't surprise me if this turns into World War 3.
I think we can all agree WW3 is gonna originate from the middle east... or Germany lol jk.
You can draw very similar comparisons (obviously scaled back) to the Yugoslavic powder keg which eventually lead to the first world war.
no, you can't. there is no system of interlocked alliances, there are no shared borders, there are tensions nowhere the level required to draw in major foreign powers. anyone who thinks China will go to war over Iran is a blithering idiot, and Russia is a non-factor.
war with Iran would be just that- war with Iran, no one else. believing Russia or China would go to WAR over Iran is simply wrong. that's just how it is. the ww1 comparisons are illogical and lacking any real substance when viewed with an analytic mind.
I never equated that it would occur, but saying that "no system of interlocked alliances" when systems of interlocking alliances exist, just much more simply is a fallacy imo And no, how wars like this start is through escalation and pushing/shoving matches. Also growing tensions across the world are rising at frankly an unpredictable level and since the last time Iran was threatened to be attacked Putin put his ICBMS on highalert (those missles that fire and, with today's technology, have no specific way of being accurately shot down) I wouldn't say Russia isn't going to take notice nor lead to something more severe.
On September 08 2012 11:24 Sofestafont wrote: Can anyone explain Canada's rationale for doing this (Besides the huge Israeli conspiracy or the Illuminati)? Did Iran do something recently to spark this? Is the jury back regarding Iran's nuclear intentions?
That's the thing. This action came completely out of left field. Hell, I didn't even know they were considering severing ties with Iran before I read this article. We can only speculate about the real rationale.
Hell, Canada's not even that big of a player on the international stage. Iran probably doesn't even care that we're gone. I honestly don't know how this move benefits us.
On September 08 2012 09:47 blinken wrote: John Baird, Canada's foreign affairs minister has labelled Iran the “most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
Can someone tell me precisely why ? Is Iran secretly actively attacking someone ? Are they threatening to nuke people ? Are they actively preparing for some sort of offensive action ?
I'm honestly pretty confused as to why Iran is such a "threat". Or is Israel just mad and everyone does what Israel wants ?
On September 08 2012 09:47 blinken wrote: John Baird, Canada's foreign affairs minister has labelled Iran the “most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
Can someone tell me precisely why ? Is Iran secretly actively attacking someone ? Are they threatening to nuke people ? Are they actively preparing for some sort of offensive action ?
I'm honestly pretty confused as to why Iran is such a "threat". Or is Israel just mad and everyone does what Israel wants ?
1. They're in an oil rich region of the world and any conflict will have major ramifications on the world economy. 2. They're working to proliferate nuclear weapons and giving everyone the heeby jeebies. 3. We can't control them with our "throw money at the problem" influence. 4. They don't drink the kool-aid of the other nations, whose asses we shove our hands up and use as puppets.
On September 08 2012 09:47 blinken wrote: John Baird, Canada's foreign affairs minister has labelled Iran the “most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
Does this statement not infuriate anyone else?
The greatest threat to peace is probably my America...
We're supposed to be the peace loving country of the world, peace keepers, and negotiators. Not the get the fuck out of here because our neighbours don't like it country. I don't condone the whole Iranian situation or their regime, but I also don't think that jumping ship and kicking out their diplomats will help rectify the situation.
Ok, pull out our embassy if it looks like its about to get hairy, or our people are in danger, but I don't think either one of those is imminent in any way shape or form. And at least keep their diplomats. That's about as helpful as sticking our fingers in our fears and yelling, "LA LA LA LA LA!"
If war IS coming, you're sending those poor saps to their deaths.
Canada is finally starting to do what is right for Canada and that includes supporting the only country of Western values in an area which is the center of the Jihad against us and our Western allies. For too long all of our military expeditions were self-sacrifical. Peace keeping was a worthless sham and the War in Afhganistan, while initially legitimate, turned into an altruistic nation-building mission which only helped our enemies. Unapologetically ending states who sponsor terrorism against us, attacks on our soldiers over seas and outright proxy wars against our allies is the most rational, selfish thing we can do.
What are you even saying, you're obviously adding a facetious tone but I just... I just constantly facepalm, please clarify maybe?
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
Arguably the United States is the biggest funding partner to most terrorist organizations although what they define as "terrorism" and "freedom fighters" often tread a fine line such that we get things like Saddam Hussein who is at one point funded by the States and then another condemned for arguably being the same principle with the difference of charging more for oil.
We basically gave Osama Bin Laden all his power when we tried to beef up Afghani extremists to resist potential "Soviet threat" in the '80s. Many of the worlds problems are traced to overpowered nations interfering where they ought not to at some point.
On September 08 2012 09:47 blinken wrote: John Baird, Canada's foreign affairs minister has labelled Iran the “most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
Does this statement not infuriate anyone else?
The greatest threat to peace is probably my America...
You should see some of the Facebook statuses my buddies in political studies have said with regards to Baird. They hate him with a passion. I personally am not too far behind them. He's a complete idiot and he and the rest of the Conservative party are ruining all of the goodwill Canada has built up with the rest of the world. I feel ashamed to be a Canadian at times now because of what our government does. They aren't representing their people at all, just embarrassing them.
Sorry, I don't normally get mad in posts but what the Conservative Party has been doing is ruining Canada. All they do at home is cut spending on social and scientific programs while helping oil companies, attempt to infringe on our rights and then when they go abroad they embarrass us repeatedly on the world stage. They have no reason to cut ties with Iran other than to appease the Americans and Israelis. It gains us nothing and makes us look bad to everyone that isn't those two countries. What happened to us being a country of peacekeepers?
On September 08 2012 13:07 MountainDewJunkie wrote:
On September 08 2012 09:47 blinken wrote: John Baird, Canada's foreign affairs minister has labelled Iran the “most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
Does this statement not infuriate anyone else?
The greatest threat to peace is probably my America...
You should see some of the Facebook statuses my buddies in political studies have said with regards to Baird. They hate him with a passion. I personally am not too far behind them. He's a complete idiot and he and the rest of the Conservative party are ruining all of the goodwill Canada has built up with the rest of the world. I feel ashamed to be a Canadian at times now because of what our government does. They aren't representing their people at all, just embarrassing them.
Sorry, I don't normally get mad in posts but what the Conservative Party has been doing is ruining Canada. All they do at home is cut spending on social programs while helping oil companies, attempt to infringe on our rights and then when they go abroad they embarrass us repeatedly on the world stage. They have no reason to cut ties with Iran other than to appease the Americans and Israelis. It gains us nothing and makes us look bad to everyone that isn't those two countries. What happened to us being a country of peacekeepers?
Edit: @fire_brand I see I'm not alone in this.
I think Serj said it best: "The bottom line is money; nobody gives a fuck." I mean, maybe you or I do individually, but the people we passively put in power? The are dancing to whomever has "employed" them. Just as we are dancing to them.
On September 08 2012 11:24 Sofestafont wrote: Can anyone explain Canada's rationale for doing this (Besides the huge Israeli conspiracy or the Illuminati)? Did Iran do something recently to spark this? Is the jury back regarding Iran's nuclear intentions?
That's the thing. This action came completely out of left field. Hell, I didn't even know they were considering severing ties with Iran before I read this article. We can only speculate about the real rationale.
Hell, Canada's not even that big of a player on the international stage. Iran probably doesn't even care that we're gone. I honestly don't know how this move benefits us.
My thoughts exactly. In the big picture Canada has very little influence on what is going to be done with Iran. I have no idea what kind of communications have been going back and forth between us and Iran lately. I imagine they have been completely useless for some time. The Iranian government doesn't rub me as the type of rational people to deal with. Still, what we have to gain by cutting off official diplomatic ties? Just doing a solid for Uncle Sam I guess.
There's so much stuff going on behind closed doors that none of us can do much more than speculate at this point.
On September 08 2012 13:31 Mid[N]ight- wrote: HUGE move by Canada... not really no one in the world cares
I think you are agreeing with me but I will assume you didn't mean to.
I don't normally bother people with Canadian politics but I feel that this situation has broad implications on the global stage.
Canada has typically taken the moral highground in international affairs and kept to peacekeeping, and most of the world would acknowledge that. The fact that Canada is the first to do this is implying that essentially, the West is "right" and anyone else can go to hell. We are implying that it is up to the world to stop these awful Iranians.
The message Canada should be sending, what its people actually want, is to get the hell out of the middle east. We aren't god, and should have no desire to change people's culture for the "better".
When former Prime Minister Jean Chretien said no to the Coalition of the Willing to invade Iraq, the opposition opposed. You can guess who was leader of the oppositionat the time... that's right, Stephen Harper. Had Harper been Prime Minister at that time, Canada would have joined the war in Iraq. Most Canadians I know are proud we had nothing to do with that mess.
What we are doing with this idiotic gesture is setting ourselves up as a target. Maybe that's what TPTB want, a terrorist attack in Canada. That would really get us on board.
I think it's hilarious how the media always covers Iran, who aren't even flaunting ANYTHING - trying to paint them so badly that they want everyone to go to war with them, but then you have North Korea who are like "HEY GUYS LOOK WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE NUKES, HELL WE'RE EVEN GONNA TEST THEM OUT SO EVERYONE CAN SEE! LOOK OVER HERE" but everyone just says "Lol nope".
It's either completely obvious that Iran gets special coverage for "special reasons" *cough Israel cough* or a complete god damn coincidence.
On September 08 2012 09:49 StyLeD wrote: Probably were pushed and heavily rewarded by the US government. They are our biggest trade partner.
Harper is a shill for Israeli interests, and I'm sure the only reward Canada got for this was a thank you call from Netanyahu.
was going to quote exactly that, this is just proof that Israel has infiltrated Canada as badly as it has the united states. John Bhaird is thee worst foriegn relations minister Canada has ever had, it is painfully obvious where his allegences lie.
make no mistake, the assault on Iran is nothing more than the states protecting their petro dollar and the international bankers destroying the last government controlled central bank in the world. After which all central banks will be in the hands of private interests...
Believe it or not, Canada, the United States and Israel are democracies and your conspircy theories are the most anti-intellectual ideas possible. You blame small groups of conspirators who have the magic ability to hijack democracies when it has alwyas been the popular ideas of the people that has decided the fate of countries. Central banks exist because people think they work and even if they are technically private, it is undeniable that they are controlled by government. The USD is doomed (which you probably don't realize) because of the actions of the Federal Reserve and which is controlled by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas. It is those ideas that matter, not your imaginary conspiracy theories.
The Feds are not controlled by the government. They are led by a group of private bankers.
Is it me or does every single one of your post sound like sarcasm.
EDIT: Ironically, no central bank to my knowledge in the West is controlled by the government. Only in the glorious democracy that is China that banks and government form one entity.
On September 08 2012 09:49 StyLeD wrote: Probably were pushed and heavily rewarded by the US government. They are our biggest trade partner.
Harper is a shill for Israeli interests, and I'm sure the only reward Canada got for this was a thank you call from Netanyahu.
was going to quote exactly that, this is just proof that Israel has infiltrated Canada as badly as it has the united states. John Bhaird is thee worst foriegn relations minister Canada has ever had, it is painfully obvious where his allegences lie.
make no mistake, the assault on Iran is nothing more than the states protecting their petro dollar and the international bankers destroying the last government controlled central bank in the world. After which all central banks will be in the hands of private interests...
Believe it or not, Canada, the United States and Israel are democracies and your conspircy theories are the most anti-intellectual ideas possible. You blame small groups of conspirators who have the magic ability to hijack democracies when it has alwyas been the popular ideas of the people that has decided the fate of countries. Central banks exist because people think they work and even if they are technically private, it is undeniable that they are controlled by government. The USD is doomed (which you probably don't realize) because of the actions of the Federal Reserve and which is controlled by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas. It is those ideas that matter, not your imaginary conspiracy theories.
I don't think you understand how a republic works and that throughout the years the imperfect system of voting has been abused time and time again, now to argue that a "conspiracy" exists without backing proof is about as naive and stupid as arguing that they don't exist or at least are non-likely based off personal assumptions.
To go into more detail, I would say that one could connect a few dots here and there over the years and argue that conspiracies "The action of plotting or conspiring" have not only happened on multiple occasions, but are happening frequently. If I want that promotion I may conspire to undermine my colleague in an attempt to elevate my position, a company may conspire with other companies to corner the market and remove a specific organization and a country may conspire with another country to hit an end goal that another country may find unjust or plain wrong and yet they do it everyday.
"Small groups of conspirators" When has a large group of conspirators ever existed? Do you think Stalin when he was overthrowing his superiors conspired with the public, or Hitler with his public with regards to conspiring against millions of jews?
Conspiracies are always small groups with big plans that play off the naive and they've happened since before Caesar whispered "Et tu, Brutus" (or so the lore goes)
"by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas." Arguably this is a false assumption, what if we have 2 candidates to vote for and we're forced to vote, if our candidates are Hitler and Stalin (used in a previous example, might as well carry it) then when they kill millions of people, was it the people who decided those deaths? Arguably yes yet they were elected to power because of power and propaganda... I doubt many average joes who voted for Hitler's party assumed he'd attempt to exterminate an entire race of people, so it's their fault for not having that assumption.
The government may be chosen by the people, but the actions of the government are not always of the people and when this occurs it is the duty of the people to either take back control of the government or overthrow it entirely but in today's world that is a near impossibility so we're stuck between choosing the white cat and the black cat (someone might get that reference ^^)
I know how a Republic works but Canada and America are not Republics. America used to be a Republic, but unfortunately, democracy has taken over and it's not anymore. Imperfections in the voting systems are minor. Flaws in campaign laws are more serious but the effects are still minor compared to the ideas held by the majority.
If you conspire to undermine a colleague, you're not going to have much of an affect on an entire country. A company may conspire to corner a market, but it will only be successful if it has government backing either through direct cronyism/bribery and the lack of a vigilant public or through the use of regulations which the people don't realize lead to monopolies. Stalin might have conspired to take over the USSR but if it wasn't him, it would have been another communist murderer. Hitler may not have informed the public about the Holocaust, but they knew they were voting for and supporting a totaltarian dictator. I don't deny that individuals can have large effects, but it is always the ideas of the general populace which controls the direction and this is especially true where there is sustained democracy. The only individuals who have truly drastic effects are the philosophers who come up with and popularize ideas.
The only way that a democracy will ever have two dictators as the only viable candidates to vote for, is if the people are in favor of dictators. Just look at America. It's not at the point of dictatorship but they are stuck choosing between two statists because the American people are in favor of statism. Third parties exist, but they will never win because they are not in line with mainstream ideology. A country which largely rejects dictatorship can't just have it forced upon itself from within. Remember, no matter how powerful the military, it is still made up of people who will generally share the ideas of the general populace. The only exception would be a foreign take over but that wouldn't be conspiracy, that would be brought about through the ideas of the people of the invading nation.
I would like to make a point to note you really didn't argue anything in this ... rebuttal? but I will bite anyway as this is TL and posting standards can be low at times.
"I know how a Republic works but Canada and America are not Republics." Actually it is a constitutional Republic or is being heralded as one more frequently (Utah, which passed a bill to teach that the US is a Republic and not a Democracy, although they can be closely related, The House voted 57-17)+ Show Spoiler +
" you conspire to undermine a colleague, you're not going to have much of an affect on an entire country."
Firstly the text I wrote was used to show the escalation of possibilities with regards to how anyone (or anything be it company/country) can and usually will conspire to get ahead.
Secondly you agree that conspiring against a colleague is a possibility thus your next statement holds no merit in the conversation thus let's just say "We can conspire on a personal level (between people)"
"A company may conspire to corner a market, but it will only be successful if it has government backing either through direct cronyism/bribery and the lack of a vigilant public or through the use of regulations which the people don't realize lead to monopolies."
Firstly again, you say a company "may" conspire to corner a market so without government involvement you agree that the possibility of companies conspiring exists which leads us to the next level, and we'll simplify it to "We can conspire on monopolistic ideals, such as companies attempting to corner a market"
To continue into your counter argument you state that it "will only be successful",which note agrees that the possibility again exists, "if it has government backing either through direct bribery (lobbying) and/or (paraphrased) the lack of a vigilant public or through regulations which the people don't realize lead to monopolies."
I would not try to argue that you're wrong, I would simply state that in all three of your examples (I will use America as the prime example since it is really the head of any debate with regards to conspiracies) America has hit the head on the nail with failing to stop such things from happening by having lobbying (bribing), a non vigilant public (allowing multiple occasions of "security over freedom" style acts etc etc and a community of peoples who simply don't follow politics closely enough (not that it matters since they don't vote on every issue, just who can decide upon that issue) to be able to defend or approve of a regulation that would lead or stop monopolies.
"Stalin might have conspired to take over the USSR but if it wasn't him, it would have been another communist murderer. Hitler may not have informed the public about the Holocaust, but they knew they were voting for and supporting a totaltarian dictator. I don't deny that individuals can have large effects, but it is always the ideas of the general populace which controls the direction and this is especially true where there is sustained democracy. The only individuals who have truly drastic effects are the philosophers who come up with and popularize ideas."
This entire statement is completely opinionated based, you state how if Stalin didn't exist another one would fill his place and that the German people "knew they were voting for and supporting a totalitarian dictator" which again is another opinion based off zero proof other then your own reasoning such that I can't argue if this is true or not because most Germans voted for charisma, not dictatorship and the "National Socialist" party really doesn't come off as Ghengis Khan to me, would you think that? Hitler was voted in for saying he'd bring them out of one of the (if not the) greatest depression Germany ever had, not ruling the world or killing jews.
"The only way that a democracy will ever have two dictators as the only viable candidates to vote for, is if the people are in favor of dictators. Just look at America. It's not at the point of dictatorship but they are stuck choosing between two statists because the American people are in favor of statism. Third parties exist, but they will never win because they are not in line with mainstream ideology. A country which largely rejects dictatorship can't just have it forced upon itself from within. Remember, no matter how powerful the military, it is still made up of people who will generally share the ideas of the general populace. The only exception would be a foreign take over but that wouldn't be conspiracy, that would be brought about through the ideas of the people of the invading nation."
So I quoted the above, but frankly you go from accusing America of being a statism (which frankly could be true but it seems to be an opinion to stating how the only way two dictators can be the only viable candidates (often times only one has to be while showing off good charisma) is wrong as well because again using the hitler example a single dictator who hid under being for "socialism" was elected, not by dictator supporters but everyday people trying to get their four square meals.
I hope this helps clear up some of your comments, again it was hard to go through.
I know that America was founded as a Constitutional Republic but what I was getting at is that America has effectively (but not officially) abandoned it's roots and descended into democracy. I think it is good to teach kids that America is a Constitutional Republic and not a democracy, because that is an ideal which is not officially lost and should be restored. When they see America operating as a democracy, hopefully they will realize that something is wrong and this is not what Ameica was supposed to be.
As for the rest of your response, let me first make clear my main idea which is: Conspirators don't determine the direction of nations, the ideas of the people do. In your first response to me, your main point seemed to be that "conspiracies "The action of plotting or conspiring" have not only happened on multiple occasions, but are happening frequently". I conceeded this but the point of my response was to demonstrate how these conspiracies are unimportant.
As for companies conspiring to corner a market, yes, they can try to do it without government backing. This is irrelevant to my point because they will always fail. When they do succeed, it is irrelevant to my point because it is the ideas of the people which led to the cronyist government which made their success possible. Do you think, that if the majority of Americans suddenly became vehemently opposed to government having the powers for lobbyists to buy, that it would not cause a return to fair market competition within several years?
As for Stalin, I think it's pretty obvious that it would have been him or another. The most obvious evidence is the leaders who preceeded, succeeded him and competed with him. As for Germany, there happens to be a great book on this very topic called The Ominous Parallels. It demonstrates the philosophic ideas that led to Nazism, their historical roots, their widespread acceptance amongst the German culture and how Nazism was a logical conclusion of these ideas. A preview is available on google books. Of course, you probably won't read it so I'll just make a couple concrete points. Lebensraum, among other heinous ideas, was detailed in Mein Kampf which was widely distributed and known before Hitler's rise to power. With the knowledge of the Lebensraum (again, among other heinous ideas), millions of men still volunteered and fought proudly for their country. Regardless of Hitler, there were thousands of would be dictators who could have taken his place, from his high command, who actually would have in the case of his death, or the obidient SS murderers who shared his spirit. These scenarios don't just come about by a charismatic man fooling a down and out people.
P.S. I didn't adress this comment, because I do not follow the logic. "Secondly you agree that conspiring against a colleague is a possibility thus your next statement holds no merit in the conversation thus let's just say "We can conspire on a personal level (between people)"
Why did people need to elect Harper and the dumbass conservatives again I like it much better when we just mind our own business and try to help people when they need it. I know for a fact that almost everyone (if not everyone) I know would be opposed to us sticking our nose into this business. We need Chretien back, he was a political genius. He knew how to tow the line between US ally and independant nation so so well. The Liberal party really needs to get its shit together and find a suitable leader.
On September 08 2012 09:49 StyLeD wrote: Probably were pushed and heavily rewarded by the US government. They are our biggest trade partner.
Harper is a shill for Israeli interests, and I'm sure the only reward Canada got for this was a thank you call from Netanyahu.
was going to quote exactly that, this is just proof that Israel has infiltrated Canada as badly as it has the united states. John Bhaird is thee worst foriegn relations minister Canada has ever had, it is painfully obvious where his allegences lie.
make no mistake, the assault on Iran is nothing more than the states protecting their petro dollar and the international bankers destroying the last government controlled central bank in the world. After which all central banks will be in the hands of private interests...
Believe it or not, Canada, the United States and Israel are democracies and your conspircy theories are the most anti-intellectual ideas possible. You blame small groups of conspirators who have the magic ability to hijack democracies when it has alwyas been the popular ideas of the people that has decided the fate of countries. Central banks exist because people think they work and even if they are technically private, it is undeniable that they are controlled by government. The USD is doomed (which you probably don't realize) because of the actions of the Federal Reserve and which is controlled by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas. It is those ideas that matter, not your imaginary conspiracy theories.
The Feds are not controlled by the government. They are led by a group of private bankers.
Is it me or does every single one of your post sound like sarcasm.
EDIT: Ironically, no central bank to my knowledge in the West is controlled by the government. Only in the glorious democracy that is China that banks and government form one entity.
The Fed is not led by a group of private bankers. Private bankers own the stock of the Federal Reserve. Their ownership of Fed stock is not like other private stocks. It entails no actual ownership of the institution nor any control over it. The Fed is controlled by a Board of Governors who are appointed by the President and Senate and it pays all excess earnings to the US Treasury. The central bank and government are not technically one entity but, so what? Taking this back to my original point, the actions of the Federal Reserve are still controlled by the ideas of the people. The people think it is good that the Fed exists and they think it is it's place to stimulate the economy. That is why it exists and it is why we have QE.
ww3 needs to hurry up, i want to get on with my life and having to worry about this noise is annoying. Just get it over with and lets move on. The victor alway writes history so go go go
On September 08 2012 15:46 Cornstarched wrote: ww3 needs to hurry up, i want to get on with my life and having to worry about this noise is annoying. Just get it over with and lets move on. The victor alway writes history so go go go
I guess you will be one of the first to enlist if you're so eager for a war?
On September 08 2012 15:56 forestry wrote: Terrorist State/State sponsored Terrorism. Harbouring Terrorists. Funding, providing equipment, weapons, training and giving sanctuary to Terrorists. Terrorist descent.
In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.
I did not realize that civilized men endorse apartheid.
On September 08 2012 15:56 forestry wrote: Terrorist State/State sponsored Terrorism. Harbouring Terrorists. Funding, providing equipment, weapons, training and giving sanctuary to Terrorists. Terrorist descent.
In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.
Ever thought about blowing up your computer and never buy another one again?
havent there been enough wars in the past century? why completely remove the only way of comunication with a country that despises its leader so much, with a little help from the west the green revolution might have happened.
But western countries seem to have forgotten how to resolve a conflict peacefully anymore, everywhere we see its terrorists and WMD. we know how that turned out in Iraq.
does no one else get mad when they read lines from OsoVega: "you don't just hit them back eye for an eye, you have a moral obligation to utterly and completely obliterate them if you have the means"
Zealot extremism of any kind is not helping at all, while small revolutions like the epyptian and tunisian one are actually a way of civilizing countries that previously had no democracy. But then again people like OsoVega think democracy is a bad thing...
i`m really wondering why there are so many ideological warmongers in the northern part of America. is it something in the water?
Why would Iran be a threat to the world? Right now USA, Israel, the Gulf states and the American occupied Afghanistan are sieging Iran with drone strikes, malicious computer virus and agent assassinations. I would suggest that the those countries are a threat to the world. American forces has used nuclear bombs on civilians and I fear that they might use it on Iran. The Iranian civilization has lasted thousands of years and has done some by playing their cards right.
Even if Iran wanted nuclear weapons, they are a defensive weapon anyways. All it will mean is that Israel won't be able to use force to get their way in the region.
Israel has hundreds of nukes, and they are a far more hostile and warmongering nation than any other.
All Iranian spending is in defensive weapon systems because they just want to be left alone. It would be great if they did acquire nuclear weapons, because that would bring stability to the region.
Two years ago I wrote on my facebook that Iran would be the next country invaded by the US. Bold, maybe, but I wouldnt throw it out of the water quite yet.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
Yeah war is awesome. I think Iran and their allies should realize they should have declared war on canada years ago! There is oil and natural gas to steal, men to kill and women to rape. Buildings to send rockets at, maybe they will be in a helicopter gunning down civilians and journalists too? I heard thats np.
Seriously though Iran is under attack on all side, trade embargos, usa sponsored terrorism on their land, computer hacking, drone strikes... hell yeah they are trying to defend themselves!
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
There is no country on earth that can attack Iran, conventionally, without use of weapons of mass destruction, and succeed without paying STEEP costs, and lose an entire generation of their young. So shut up and take your warmongering else where.
On a side note, I am fucked now. My girlfriend and I were going to visit my relatives in Iran next year butt now there is a damn obstacle in the way.... I can still go, I have an Iranian passport as well as a Canadian passport. But my gf is white Canadian and she would need a Visa to go and now I don't know wtf we are going to do...
Excellent. There is nothing remaining between us and Iran until our companions awaken and understand that we should have announced war on and damaged them ten decades ago.
On September 08 2012 20:40 james5 wrote: Excellent. There is nothing remaining between us and Iran until our companions awaken and understand that we should have announced war on and damaged them ten decades ago.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
On September 08 2012 20:40 james5 wrote: Excellent. There is nothing remaining between us and Iran until our companions awaken and understand that we should have announced war on and damaged them ten decades ago.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
?????
What's going on here?
Israeli megaphone or other organized psychological warfare they use to alert supporters to flood a forum with pro-Israel views, probably.
On September 08 2012 20:40 james5 wrote: Excellent. There is nothing remaining between us and Iran until our companions awaken and understand that we should have announced war on and damaged them ten decades ago.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
?????
What's going on here?
Israeli megaphone or other organized psychological warfare they use to alert supporters to flood a forum with pro-Israel views, probably.
As a fellow Canadian, I like this decision Iran is showing nothing good as of late ( and always had their sticky fingers in "questionable" organisations )
On September 08 2012 21:23 Fusa wrote: As a fellow Canadian, I like this decision Iran is showing nothing good as of late ( and always had their sticky fingers in "questionable" organisations )
Yet for some reason Canada retains diplomatic relations with Israel and the US, which have done way more and way worse things. Double standards much?
On September 08 2012 21:23 Fusa wrote: As a fellow Canadian, I like this decision Iran is showing nothing good as of late ( and always had their sticky fingers in "questionable" organisations )
Yet for some reason Canada retains diplomatic relations with Israel and the US, which have done way more and way worse things. Double standards much?
The reason for that is simple, because they haven't.
On September 08 2012 21:23 Fusa wrote: As a fellow Canadian, I like this decision Iran is showing nothing good as of late ( and always had their sticky fingers in "questionable" organisations )
Yet for some reason Canada retains diplomatic relations with Israel and the US, which have done way more and way worse things. Double standards much?
The reason for that is simple, because they haven't.
On September 08 2012 21:23 Fusa wrote: As a fellow Canadian, I like this decision Iran is showing nothing good as of late ( and always had their sticky fingers in "questionable" organisations )
Yet for some reason Canada retains diplomatic relations with Israel and the US, which have done way more and way worse things. Double standards much?
The reason for that is simple, because they haven't.
I guess the United States toppling the democratically elected Iranian government and installing a dictatorship doesn't count? The dictatorship that's unpopularity led to the Islamic Revolution and hence the tensions between Iran and Israel today? Come on.
I'm not surprised John Baird is spewing this shit all over the place, he might be the dumbest neoliberal shill out there. Sharing a city with this guy is a daily grind.
Sometimes Canada's toleration disgusts me. The other day I saw a muslim man stringing his wife ten paces behind him. Nobody says a word. Muslim kids made to stand outside their publics schools while the Canadian national anthem is playing. I spend a lot of time in educational centers as I am working to eventually become a highschool English teacher. The sense of political correctness Canadian citizens seem to feel, specifically in my neighborhood, is mind-boggling.
I vote Green or NDP every year but this is one the very few instances I have an extreme right-wing view on.
- You come to Canada, you learn either French or English. Make it easier for all parties. If I were to move my family to Laos, would you not expect me to learn Lao? Or Thai?
- Develop a sense of appreciation for the (essentially infinite) range of benefits and social services Canada has at its disposal. This is one of the most comfortable, the most safe, the most ethnically diverse countries in the world. Forcing (and teaching) your kids to participate in activities that insult the integrity of the country you chose to live in is out of line.
- Don't abuse the marital system. A vast majority of men and women marry their partners for reasons the marital status isn't meant to be used for. The result? Fucked up middle eastern families that don't love one another; parents having children when they're not fit to be parents in the first place.
- Keep the dogma out of school. Good luck with the whole "Jihad will rule the earth" thing, until then my kids will enjoy an education separate from religion. (Young 7th grade muslim boys being picked up early from school because parents have heard that yes, girls are in fact getting their periods. Better stay away. Shit is impure.)
Maybe it's because I'm mad, or because I'm an atheist. I'm pretty okay with being Islamophobic in general. It's a fucked up way to force other people to live. It's oppressive, it's exploitative to its native young. It's sexist beyond belief. I want to say I have no problem what Islamic people do in their homes, Canadian or otherwise, but the fact of the matter is that's not even true. I do care what kids are taught at home. and If they have a father who teaches kids to leave class every hour to pray for 10 minutes, that's incredibly harmful.
Iran is an axis of evil. It's a Islamic state. A whole totalitarian region of the world where all of these repulsive routines are commonplace. Mandatory. What the fuck does Iran have (other than good hash) to offer Canada? Oh wait, we have some of the best hash in the world here too. So nothing.
Poison of the world people.
RIP Christopher Hitchens (4:55 appearance) The world needed you
LOL, if Iran is an axis of evil than America must be an axis of even bigger evil, haha. The US/Israel/West has no moral high ground here. Iran is not responsible for even a fraction of the evil the former have done.
On September 08 2012 15:56 forestry wrote: Terrorist State/State sponsored Terrorism. Harbouring Terrorists. Funding, providing equipment, weapons, training and giving sanctuary to Terrorists. Terrorist descent.
In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.
On September 08 2012 15:56 forestry wrote: Terrorist State/State sponsored Terrorism. Harbouring Terrorists. Funding, providing equipment, weapons, training and giving sanctuary to Terrorists. Terrorist descent.
In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.
Sounds to me like you also descibed Israel.
People to often forget about history which lurks only decades before and then point the finger at the now and not the cause.
Iran's only difference with USA/Israel is that they are public about the support of terrorists. No one seems to remember that American foreign policy has literally placed (including Iran's leadership) dictators into power for their own personal gain which can equate to thousands of deaths.
We should try to stay on topic though with respect to Canada's involvement (since this is a thread on that).
On September 08 2012 15:56 forestry wrote: Terrorist State/State sponsored Terrorism. Harbouring Terrorists. Funding, providing equipment, weapons, training and giving sanctuary to Terrorists. Terrorist descent.
In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.
Sounds to me like you also descibed Israel.
People to often forget about history which lurks only decades before and then point the finger at the now and not the cause.
Iran's only difference with USA/Israel is that they are public about the support of terrorists. No one seems to remember that American foreign policy has literally placed (including Iran's leadership) dictators into power for their own personal gain which can equate to thousands of deaths.
We should try to stay on topic though with respect to Canada's involvement (since this is a thread on that).
The US is currently sponsoring a terrorist organisation that commits acts of terrorism on Iranian soil.
Also there's a gigantic difference in scale. The US has killed hundreds of thousands of people because of their operations, overthrown legitimate governments, assasinated dozens of important people and caused unrest around the globe.
On the other hand, Iran is sponsoring Hezbollah, which is a group of actual freedom fighters (although I disagree with their methods), and Syria (maybe some other I'm missing). I find the latter questionable, but it's pretty obvious that Israel and the US are using the uprising as a proxy war against Iran.
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
I agree. I don't hesitate to say that both Iran and Israel are the biggest threats to world peace, and Iran only because of its extremist ideology, not because of its actual military potential.
On September 08 2012 21:23 Fusa wrote: As a fellow Canadian, I like this decision Iran is showing nothing good as of late ( and always had their sticky fingers in "questionable" organisations )
Yet for some reason Canada retains diplomatic relations with Israel and the US, which have done way more and way worse things. Double standards much?
The reason for that is simple, because they haven't.
I guess the United States toppling the democratically elected Iranian government and installing a dictatorship doesn't count? The dictatorship that's unpopularity led to the Islamic Revolution and hence the tensions between Iran and Israel today? Come on.
I'm not surprised John Baird is spewing this shit all over the place, he might be the dumbest neoliberal shill out there. Sharing a city with this guy is a daily grind.
Well, let's use the Iran-supporter logic:
The US has never attacked Iran, so it is entirely peacefull towards Iran and has never done anything wrong.
If Hezbollah doesn't count as offensive action taken against Israel, then why would the CIA's operations count as offensive action against Iran?
The Iranian government at this point is little more than an indigenous occupational force, one that will soon see itself shaken off by the people of Iran. At this point, only the theocrats and western-teenagers are still supporting that blight.
Canada not wanting anything to do with a sick regime like Iran's is perfectly fine. The sooner we get Persia back, the better. Then this whole theocratic business can be what it was always supposed to be, a nasty memory.
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
I agree. I don't hesitate to say that both Iran and Israel are the biggest threats to world peace, and Iran only because of its extremist ideology, not because of its actual military potential.
Pretend for a moment that the roles were reversed.
Let us say that Israel had a very weak economy and military, and the nations surrounding it were very powerfull. What would happen?
They would be running out of trees to hang Jews from, that is what would happen.
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
I agree. I don't hesitate to say that both Iran and Israel are the biggest threats to world peace, and Iran only because of its extremist ideology, not because of its actual military potential.
Pretend for a moment that the roles were reversed.
Let us say that Israel had a very weak economy and military, and the nations surrounding it were very powerfull. What would happen?
They would be running out of trees to hang Jews from, that is what would happen.
Or the Jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere? Or you think that if the Arabs had any kind of power israel would still be created on palestinian land?
On September 08 2012 21:23 Fusa wrote: As a fellow Canadian, I like this decision Iran is showing nothing good as of late ( and always had their sticky fingers in "questionable" organisations )
Yet for some reason Canada retains diplomatic relations with Israel and the US, which have done way more and way worse things. Double standards much?
The responses from some American and Canadian posters in this thread are tragic. Really, they are.
This is probably a good time to bring up the U.S. shakedown of standard chartered haha.
Ok Americans, lets have a think here for a minute. Sixty years ago, a foreign government staged a coup to replace your leader, who was then overthrown. This same foreign government then invades two Countries in very close proximity to you, and funds a nation who wants to destroy you (Israel).
Of course it must be Iran's fault, right?
Right...?
As Zalz mentioned above, the Iranian people want none of this and I they will take back their Country soon. I don't understand why our leaders don't start reaching out to people who are actually representative of a Country rather than its hardline leaders...
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
I agree. I don't hesitate to say that both Iran and Israel are the biggest threats to world peace, and Iran only because of its extremist ideology, not because of its actual military potential.
Pretend for a moment that the roles were reversed.
Let us say that Israel had a very weak economy and military, and the nations surrounding it were very powerfull. What would happen?
They would be running out of trees to hang Jews from, that is what would happen.
Or the Jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere? Or you think that if the Arabs had any kind of power israel would still be created on palestinian land?
Like I said, if the Arabs were in a position of power, every Jew in Israel would be swinging from a tree. Israel, on the other hand, seems to be pretty effective in restraining itself.
I do think it is pretty sick to suggest that they would go back to Europe though.
"You're a Jew, because of your genes you don't belong here, even though you were born here and it is the only land you ever knew. Hand over your possessions and get on a plane."
It is the height of collectivist thinking.
They are Jews, so they must leave and give over everything they worked for. Why on earth do you think that just because someone is a Jew, or an Israeli, he is entitled to fewer rights?
There are people born in Israel, never having known any other place, and you just want to cast them out of their land because of their race or cultural heritage? They have to leave behind their homes, their businesses, only because they happened to be born Jews.
You can feel that way if you like, but don't try and take the moral high ground.
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
I agree. I don't hesitate to say that both Iran and Israel are the biggest threats to world peace, and Iran only because of its extremist ideology, not because of its actual military potential.
Pretend for a moment that the roles were reversed.
Let us say that Israel had a very weak economy and military, and the nations surrounding it were very powerfull. What would happen?
They would be running out of trees to hang Jews from, that is what would happen.
Or the Jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere? Or you think that if the Arabs had any kind of power israel would still be created on palestinian land?
Like I said, if the Arabs were in a position of power, every Jew in Israel would be swinging from a tree. Israel, on the other hand, seems to be pretty effective in restraining itself.
I do think it is pretty sick to suggest that they would go back to Europe though.
"You're a Jew, because of your genes you don't belong here, even though you were born here and it is the only land you ever knew. Hand over your possessions and get on a plane."
It is the height of collectivist thinking.
They are Jews, so they must leave and give over everything they worked for. Why on earth do you think that just because someone is a Jew, or an Israeli, he is entitled to fewer rights?
There are people born in Israel, never having known any other place, and you just want to cast them out of their land because of their race or cultural heritage? They have to leave behind their homes, their businesses, only because they happened to be born Jews.
You can feel that way if you like, but don't try and take the moral high ground.
Im saying, when decision was made to create the state of israel after ww2 if the arabs had any kind of real power to protest it, the jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere ...
I bet you feel very sorry for the end of the apartheid in South Africa as well.
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
I agree. I don't hesitate to say that both Iran and Israel are the biggest threats to world peace, and Iran only because of its extremist ideology, not because of its actual military potential.
Pretend for a moment that the roles were reversed.
Let us say that Israel had a very weak economy and military, and the nations surrounding it were very powerfull. What would happen?
They would be running out of trees to hang Jews from, that is what would happen.
Or the Jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere? Or you think that if the Arabs had any kind of power israel would still be created on palestinian land?
Like I said, if the Arabs were in a position of power, every Jew in Israel would be swinging from a tree. Israel, on the other hand, seems to be pretty effective in restraining itself.
I do think it is pretty sick to suggest that they would go back to Europe though.
"You're a Jew, because of your genes you don't belong here, even though you were born here and it is the only land you ever knew. Hand over your possessions and get on a plane."
It is the height of collectivist thinking.
They are Jews, so they must leave and give over everything they worked for. Why on earth do you think that just because someone is a Jew, or an Israeli, he is entitled to fewer rights?
There are people born in Israel, never having known any other place, and you just want to cast them out of their land because of their race or cultural heritage? They have to leave behind their homes, their businesses, only because they happened to be born Jews.
You can feel that way if you like, but don't try and take the moral high ground.
Im saying, when decision was made to create the state of israel after ww2 if the arabs had any kind of real power to protest it, the jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere ...
I bet you feel very sorry for the end of the apartheid in South Africa as well.
And if dirt tasted like bananas, nobody would ever be hungry again.
Israel exists, there are people living in Israel. You should focus your attention on reality, rather than playing a game of what-if that won't get you, or anyone else, anywhere.
If the Arabs were the global super power of the time, would there be an Israel there? Probably not. Ooh wow, how much we learned! The problem is practically solved...
Ooh hang on, I just looked on google. Turns out Israel is still there.
You, and other anti-Israel folk, should start adressing the truth of what you want to see happening. It involves the forced deporation of millions at best, and their executions at worst (though more realistic).
Israel is there, and if you don't like that, start suggesting practical solutions. Playing what-if games is just poluting the discussion.
Unusually, I find myself agreeing with zalz on something.
Extreme solutions are not way to go, no matter how much one hates Israel or believes it should not exist. Rather, you should offer practical solutions instead of beating war drums about Zionists and taking over the Middle East.
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
I agree. I don't hesitate to say that both Iran and Israel are the biggest threats to world peace, and Iran only because of its extremist ideology, not because of its actual military potential.
Pretend for a moment that the roles were reversed.
Let us say that Israel had a very weak economy and military, and the nations surrounding it were very powerfull. What would happen?
They would be running out of trees to hang Jews from, that is what would happen.
Or the Jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere? Or you think that if the Arabs had any kind of power israel would still be created on palestinian land?
Like I said, if the Arabs were in a position of power, every Jew in Israel would be swinging from a tree. Israel, on the other hand, seems to be pretty effective in restraining itself.
I do think it is pretty sick to suggest that they would go back to Europe though.
"You're a Jew, because of your genes you don't belong here, even though you were born here and it is the only land you ever knew. Hand over your possessions and get on a plane."
It is the height of collectivist thinking.
They are Jews, so they must leave and give over everything they worked for. Why on earth do you think that just because someone is a Jew, or an Israeli, he is entitled to fewer rights?
There are people born in Israel, never having known any other place, and you just want to cast them out of their land because of their race or cultural heritage? They have to leave behind their homes, their businesses, only because they happened to be born Jews.
You can feel that way if you like, but don't try and take the moral high ground.
Im saying, when decision was made to create the state of israel after ww2 if the arabs had any kind of real power to protest it, the jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere ...
I bet you feel very sorry for the end of the apartheid in South Africa as well.
And if dirt tasted like bananas, nobody would ever be hungry again.
Israel exists, there are people living in Israel. You should focus your attention on reality, rather than playing a game of what-if that won't get you, or anyone else, anywhere.
If the Arabs were the global super power of the time, would there be an Israel there? Probably not. Ooh wow, how much we learned! The problem is practically solved...
Ooh hang on, I just looked on google. Turns out Israel is still there.
You, and other anti-Israel folk, should start adressing the truth of what you want to see happening. It involves the forced deporation of millions at best, and their executions at worst (though more realistic).
Israel is there, and if you don't like that, start suggesting practical solutions. Playing what-if games is just poluting the discussion.
meh.. you keep making this as if i want them gone or im hitler and want them exterminated, i was saying that if the arabs had any saying back then in the matter things would be different and jews would still be alive living elsewhere instead of other people lands. They didn't need to be worlds super power they just needed to not be ignored by the super powers of the time. If we want to solve a problem we first have to analyze the roots of the problem, i think this conflict should be solved peacefully and i believe in a two state solution with both Israeli and Palestinian living side by side equally sharing knowledge and culture as they always did... it doesn't matter the past can be forgotten and we can't talk about it
On September 08 2012 23:59 Praetorial wrote: Unusually, I find myself agreeing with zalz on something.
Extreme solutions are not way to go, no matter how much one hates Israel or believes it should not exist. Rather, you should offer practical solutions instead of beating war drums about Zionists and taking over the Middle East.
well i wasn't talking about the present i was just replying to the "arabs having power" comment by zalz,i think the super powers of the time chose a very bad place to create israel, and disregarded the people and cultures living there.. he knows that i was talking about the past but he likes to pretend that i want to exterminate the jews and deport them to the moon
For fucks sake Israel was partitioned by the league of nations after wwII. The Jews aren't to blame, homeless, penniless Jews were given the land democratically.
On September 08 2012 21:52 HoLe wrote: I'm a proud Torontonian.
So you are member of the first nation ,since you claim canada to be your country,right?
On September 09 2012 00:21 HoLe wrote: For fucks sake Israel was partitioned by the league of nations after wwII. The Jews aren't to blame, homeless, penniless Jews were given the land democratically.
you mean that Isreal that was created in year 1948 and that league of nations that ceased to be in 1946?
On September 08 2012 23:59 Praetorial wrote: Unusually, I find myself agreeing with zalz on something.
Extreme solutions are not way to go, no matter how much one hates Israel or believes it should not exist. Rather, you should offer practical solutions instead of beating war drums about Zionists and taking over the Middle East.
well i wasn't talking about the present i was just replying to the "arabs having power" comment by zalz,i think the super powers of the time chose a very bad place to create israel, and disregarded the people and cultures living there.. he knows that i was talking about the past but he likes to pretend that i want to exterminate the jews and deport them to the moon
Don't worry about it, zalz always gets a bit touchy whenever Israel is mentioned.
On September 08 2012 15:15 Focuspants wrote: Why did people need to elect Harper and the dumbass conservatives again I like it much better when we just mind our own business and try to help people when they need it. I know for a fact that almost everyone (if not everyone) I know would be opposed to us sticking our nose into this business. We need Chretien back, he was a political genius. He knew how to tow the line between US ally and independant nation so so well. The Liberal party really needs to get its shit together and find a suitable leader.
I agree completely with that. The conservatives haven't really been doing much to help Canada's image (pulling out of Kyoto was one of them) while Chretien and the Liberals (of that time) did a lot to help.
If the Liberals don't figure things out, our last hope will be the NDP to take the stage. Layton was on track, maybe Mulcair can do it?
On September 09 2012 00:21 HoLe wrote: For fucks sake Israel was partitioned by the league of nations after wwII. The Jews aren't to blame, homeless, penniless Jews were given the land democratically.
you mean that Isreal that was created in year 1948 and that league of nations that ceased to be in 1946?
Good lord. First Nation is a term for natives of Canada. It means "first of the nation".
This thread makes my brain hurt.. Everyone is quick to make broad sweeping comments like ''Canada is in US/Israels pocket''.
1) This sort of thing happens often, for a large variety of reasons, someone earlier in the thread cited Belarus/Sweden as an example and there are many others.
2) People are making it sound like Iran is some sort of victim here, Iran has made it clear on several occasions it's not exactly willing to negotiate on a long list of things that frankly, are pretty important. If a country isn't willing to have rational negotiations with you, and has people in positions of power that are open about their hatred for the western world, why use national resources to house diplomats there. This stuff isn't cheap, for all we know this could have been a financial move.
3) Whatever you think about Harper/the Conservative government (for clarity's sake I did not vote for Harper last election) I'm sure there isn't anyone in the entire Canadian government who WANTS to be involved in a war with Iran. If our government thought there was anything to be gained at this point from having diplomats in Iran then it would not being pulling them out, obviously there is things we don't know and from an analysis they came to the conclusion that this was no longer a worthy investment of resources/time/energy/etc.
4) For the people that derailed this thread to talk about Israel, the only sane and rational/semi-educated comments I've read have been from Zalz. There is no point talking about what happened 60 years ago, the fact is now that country is home to 2nd,3rd,4th,etc. generation Jewish people, when people talk about ''giving it back'' I have to think they are completely dense in that they haven't considered what that entails, or they have no compassion for an entire people group.
On September 09 2012 01:40 JLew wrote: This thread makes my brain hurt.. Everyone is quick to make broad sweeping comments like ''Canada is in US/Israels pocket''.
1) This sort of thing happens often, for a large variety of reasons, someone earlier in the thread cited Belarus/Sweden as an example and there are many others.
2) People are making it sound like Iran is some sort of victim here, Iran has made it clear on several occasions it's not exactly willing to negotiate on a long list of things that frankly, are pretty important. If a country isn't willing to have rational negotiations with you, and has people in positions of power that are open about their hatred for the western world, why use national resources to house diplomats there. This stuff isn't cheap, for all we know this could have been a financial move.
3) Whatever you think about Harper/the Conservative government (for clarity's sake I did not vote for Harper last election) I'm sure there isn't anyone in the entire Canadian government who WANTS to be involved in a war with Iran. If our government thought there was anything to be gained at this point from having diplomats in Iran then it would not being pulling them out, obviously there is things we don't know and from an analysis they came to the conclusion that this was no longer a worthy investment of resources/time/energy/etc.
4) For the people that derailed this thread to talk about Israel, the only sane and rational/semi-educated comments I've read have been from Zalz. There is no point talking about what happened 60 years ago, the fact is now that country is home to 2nd,3rd,4th,etc. generation Jewish people, when people talk about ''giving it back'' I have to think they are completely dense in that they haven't considered what that entails, or they have no compassion for an entire people group.
On September 09 2012 01:40 JLew wrote: This thread makes my brain hurt.. Everyone is quick to make broad sweeping comments like ''Canada is in US/Israels pocket''.
Agreed, pain in the brain. Everyone has an opinion on this, with a million factors pulling on each side.
My personal opinion is that Iran is retarded, and Israel is just as retarded. There is no real solution to this problem, and there likely will never be one. The rhetoric from Iran is disgusting, while the lies regarding the expansion of Israel as they slowly swallow their feeble neighbor's lands are well, you guessed it also disgusting.
Karma for both sides is reaching an all time low, and again since this is the internet... and personal opinions float around like turds in the Ottawa river, we should just wash our hands of both sides, and not stick our noses where they are not needed.
Despite what people here seem to think Canada is cutting ties in order to try and avoid the situation escalating to war. The logic behind this is that tension is rising and Israel seems closer then ever to a attack however this is something the US wants to avoid. So right now Iran dosnt think the threats of being attacked are that realistic but as more countries cut ties and impose stricter sanctions this increases the chance that Iran will reconsider its nuclear program and international support of terrorism thus preventing war.
Just to note my personal opinion is it wont work but thats just my opinion.
On September 08 2012 23:59 Praetorial wrote: Unusually, I find myself agreeing with zalz on something.
Extreme solutions are not way to go, no matter how much one hates Israel or believes it should not exist. Rather, you should offer practical solutions instead of beating war drums about Zionists and taking over the Middle East.
well i wasn't talking about the present i was just replying to the "arabs having power" comment by zalz,i think the super powers of the time chose a very bad place to create israel, and disregarded the people and cultures living there.. he knows that i was talking about the past but he likes to pretend that i want to exterminate the jews and deport them to the moon
Yup, it's too damn hot here, we should've occupied Canada instead.
Most people will agree with you zalz that if the positions were opposite, Jews would be persecuted. However, this hatred was due to them forcing people out of their homeland on the basis of religion and tradition.
Even Norman Finkelstein would agree that if the Jews in Israel suddenly became a minority, they would be persecuted as all Middle Eastern countries love to do with their minorities. But regardless, I do not see Iran becoming a threat to anyone outside of Israel, they are mostly a threat to their own people.
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
I agree. I don't hesitate to say that both Iran and Israel are the biggest threats to world peace, and Iran only because of its extremist ideology, not because of its actual military potential.
Pretend for a moment that the roles were reversed.
Let us say that Israel had a very weak economy and military, and the nations surrounding it were very powerfull. What would happen?
They would be running out of trees to hang Jews from, that is what would happen.
Or the Jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere? Or you think that if the Arabs had any kind of power israel would still be created on palestinian land?
Like I said, if the Arabs were in a position of power, every Jew in Israel would be swinging from a tree. Israel, on the other hand, seems to be pretty effective in restraining itself.
I do think it is pretty sick to suggest that they would go back to Europe though.
"You're a Jew, because of your genes you don't belong here, even though you were born here and it is the only land you ever knew. Hand over your possessions and get on a plane."
It is the height of collectivist thinking.
They are Jews, so they must leave and give over everything they worked for. Why on earth do you think that just because someone is a Jew, or an Israeli, he is entitled to fewer rights?
There are people born in Israel, never having known any other place, and you just want to cast them out of their land because of their race or cultural heritage? They have to leave behind their homes, their businesses, only because they happened to be born Jews.
You can feel that way if you like, but don't try and take the moral high ground.
Im saying, when decision was made to create the state of israel after ww2 if the arabs had any kind of real power to protest it, the jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere ...
I bet you feel very sorry for the end of the apartheid in South Africa as well.
And if dirt tasted like bananas, nobody would ever be hungry again.
Israel exists, there are people living in Israel. You should focus your attention on reality, rather than playing a game of what-if that won't get you, or anyone else, anywhere.
If the Arabs were the global super power of the time, would there be an Israel there? Probably not. Ooh wow, how much we learned! The problem is practically solved...
Ooh hang on, I just looked on google. Turns out Israel is still there.
You, and other anti-Israel folk, should start adressing the truth of what you want to see happening. It involves the forced deporation of millions at best, and their executions at worst (though more realistic).
Israel is there, and if you don't like that, start suggesting practical solutions. Playing what-if games is just poluting the discussion.
meh.. you keep making this as if i want them gone or im hitler and want them exterminated, i was saying that if the arabs had any saying back then in the matter things would be different and jews would still be alive living elsewhere instead of other people lands. They didn't need to be worlds super power they just needed to not be ignored by the super powers of the time. If we want to solve a problem we first have to analyze the roots of the problem, i think this conflict should be solved peacefully and i believe in a two state solution with both Israeli and Palestinian living side by side equally sharing knowledge and culture as they always did... it doesn't matter the past can be forgotten and we can't talk about it
Fact of the matter is that jews made up a huge percentage of people in the mandate area of Palestine, there was no reason to create an Arab state with a jewish miniority, even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation.
The Palestinians had a chance for their own state twice ( 48 and camp david accords) but opted for violence with the aim of making a True Arab state ( and thus screwing over the infidels, druze and other people who are not Arab Muslims)
For the sake of the Jews, Christians, Druze lets be glad Israel exists in the cesspool of Arab Apartheid nations.
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
I agree. I don't hesitate to say that both Iran and Israel are the biggest threats to world peace, and Iran only because of its extremist ideology, not because of its actual military potential.
Pretend for a moment that the roles were reversed.
Let us say that Israel had a very weak economy and military, and the nations surrounding it were very powerfull. What would happen?
They would be running out of trees to hang Jews from, that is what would happen.
Or the Jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere? Or you think that if the Arabs had any kind of power israel would still be created on palestinian land?
Like I said, if the Arabs were in a position of power, every Jew in Israel would be swinging from a tree. Israel, on the other hand, seems to be pretty effective in restraining itself.
I do think it is pretty sick to suggest that they would go back to Europe though.
"You're a Jew, because of your genes you don't belong here, even though you were born here and it is the only land you ever knew. Hand over your possessions and get on a plane."
It is the height of collectivist thinking.
They are Jews, so they must leave and give over everything they worked for. Why on earth do you think that just because someone is a Jew, or an Israeli, he is entitled to fewer rights?
There are people born in Israel, never having known any other place, and you just want to cast them out of their land because of their race or cultural heritage? They have to leave behind their homes, their businesses, only because they happened to be born Jews.
You can feel that way if you like, but don't try and take the moral high ground.
Im saying, when decision was made to create the state of israel after ww2 if the arabs had any kind of real power to protest it, the jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere ...
I bet you feel very sorry for the end of the apartheid in South Africa as well.
And if dirt tasted like bananas, nobody would ever be hungry again.
Israel exists, there are people living in Israel. You should focus your attention on reality, rather than playing a game of what-if that won't get you, or anyone else, anywhere.
If the Arabs were the global super power of the time, would there be an Israel there? Probably not. Ooh wow, how much we learned! The problem is practically solved...
Ooh hang on, I just looked on google. Turns out Israel is still there.
You, and other anti-Israel folk, should start adressing the truth of what you want to see happening. It involves the forced deporation of millions at best, and their executions at worst (though more realistic).
Israel is there, and if you don't like that, start suggesting practical solutions. Playing what-if games is just poluting the discussion.
meh.. you keep making this as if i want them gone or im hitler and want them exterminated, i was saying that if the arabs had any saying back then in the matter things would be different and jews would still be alive living elsewhere instead of other people lands. They didn't need to be worlds super power they just needed to not be ignored by the super powers of the time. If we want to solve a problem we first have to analyze the roots of the problem, i think this conflict should be solved peacefully and i believe in a two state solution with both Israeli and Palestinian living side by side equally sharing knowledge and culture as they always did... it doesn't matter the past can be forgotten and we can't talk about it
Fact of the matter is that jews made up a huge percentage of people in the mandate area of Palestine, there was no reason to create an Arab state with a jewish miniority, even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation.
The Palestinians had a chance for their own state twice ( 48 and camp david accords) but opted for violence with the aim of making a True Arab state ( and thus screwing over the infidels, druze and other people who are not Arab Muslims)
For the sake of the Jews, Christians, Druze lets be glad Israel exists in the cesspool of Arab Apartheid nations.
By huge percentage you mean , 20 % 40% 50% 60% ? If there wasn't the need to create an Arab state where was the need found to create an Israeli one when they were just a minority? "even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation. " if thats the case the super powers of the time should have thought of a better place to create this state for the Jewish people.
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
I agree. I don't hesitate to say that both Iran and Israel are the biggest threats to world peace, and Iran only because of its extremist ideology, not because of its actual military potential.
Pretend for a moment that the roles were reversed.
Let us say that Israel had a very weak economy and military, and the nations surrounding it were very powerfull. What would happen?
They would be running out of trees to hang Jews from, that is what would happen.
Or the Jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere? Or you think that if the Arabs had any kind of power israel would still be created on palestinian land?
Like I said, if the Arabs were in a position of power, every Jew in Israel would be swinging from a tree. Israel, on the other hand, seems to be pretty effective in restraining itself.
I do think it is pretty sick to suggest that they would go back to Europe though.
"You're a Jew, because of your genes you don't belong here, even though you were born here and it is the only land you ever knew. Hand over your possessions and get on a plane."
It is the height of collectivist thinking.
They are Jews, so they must leave and give over everything they worked for. Why on earth do you think that just because someone is a Jew, or an Israeli, he is entitled to fewer rights?
There are people born in Israel, never having known any other place, and you just want to cast them out of their land because of their race or cultural heritage? They have to leave behind their homes, their businesses, only because they happened to be born Jews.
You can feel that way if you like, but don't try and take the moral high ground.
Im saying, when decision was made to create the state of israel after ww2 if the arabs had any kind of real power to protest it, the jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere ...
I bet you feel very sorry for the end of the apartheid in South Africa as well.
And if dirt tasted like bananas, nobody would ever be hungry again.
Israel exists, there are people living in Israel. You should focus your attention on reality, rather than playing a game of what-if that won't get you, or anyone else, anywhere.
If the Arabs were the global super power of the time, would there be an Israel there? Probably not. Ooh wow, how much we learned! The problem is practically solved...
Ooh hang on, I just looked on google. Turns out Israel is still there.
You, and other anti-Israel folk, should start adressing the truth of what you want to see happening. It involves the forced deporation of millions at best, and their executions at worst (though more realistic).
Israel is there, and if you don't like that, start suggesting practical solutions. Playing what-if games is just poluting the discussion.
meh.. you keep making this as if i want them gone or im hitler and want them exterminated, i was saying that if the arabs had any saying back then in the matter things would be different and jews would still be alive living elsewhere instead of other people lands. They didn't need to be worlds super power they just needed to not be ignored by the super powers of the time. If we want to solve a problem we first have to analyze the roots of the problem, i think this conflict should be solved peacefully and i believe in a two state solution with both Israeli and Palestinian living side by side equally sharing knowledge and culture as they always did... it doesn't matter the past can be forgotten and we can't talk about it
Fact of the matter is that jews made up a huge percentage of people in the mandate area of Palestine, there was no reason to create an Arab state with a jewish miniority, even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation.
The Palestinians had a chance for their own state twice ( 48 and camp david accords) but opted for violence with the aim of making a True Arab state ( and thus screwing over the infidels, druze and other people who are not Arab Muslims)
For the sake of the Jews, Christians, Druze lets be glad Israel exists in the cesspool of Arab Apartheid nations.
By huge percentage you mean , 20 % 40% 50% 60% ? If there wasn't the need to create an Arab state where was the need found to create an Israeli one when they were just a minority? "even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation. " if thats the case the super powers of the time should have thought of a better place to create this state for the Jewish people.
40-60 percent in the entire mandate? sure. the Jews were assigned mostly Jewish majority area's anyway. The entire problem for the Arabs was the idea that infidels were next to them as equals, horrible for Arabs no doubt.
The Arabs wanted a islamic Apartheid state and got smacked around in the process, tough luck. I can only hope the world continues to support Israel as global Islamic terrorism is on the rise.
On September 08 2012 22:59 Stratos_speAr wrote: [quote]
I agree. I don't hesitate to say that both Iran and Israel are the biggest threats to world peace, and Iran only because of its extremist ideology, not because of its actual military potential.
Pretend for a moment that the roles were reversed.
Let us say that Israel had a very weak economy and military, and the nations surrounding it were very powerfull. What would happen?
They would be running out of trees to hang Jews from, that is what would happen.
Or the Jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere? Or you think that if the Arabs had any kind of power israel would still be created on palestinian land?
Like I said, if the Arabs were in a position of power, every Jew in Israel would be swinging from a tree. Israel, on the other hand, seems to be pretty effective in restraining itself.
I do think it is pretty sick to suggest that they would go back to Europe though.
"You're a Jew, because of your genes you don't belong here, even though you were born here and it is the only land you ever knew. Hand over your possessions and get on a plane."
It is the height of collectivist thinking.
They are Jews, so they must leave and give over everything they worked for. Why on earth do you think that just because someone is a Jew, or an Israeli, he is entitled to fewer rights?
There are people born in Israel, never having known any other place, and you just want to cast them out of their land because of their race or cultural heritage? They have to leave behind their homes, their businesses, only because they happened to be born Jews.
You can feel that way if you like, but don't try and take the moral high ground.
Im saying, when decision was made to create the state of israel after ww2 if the arabs had any kind of real power to protest it, the jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere ...
I bet you feel very sorry for the end of the apartheid in South Africa as well.
And if dirt tasted like bananas, nobody would ever be hungry again.
Israel exists, there are people living in Israel. You should focus your attention on reality, rather than playing a game of what-if that won't get you, or anyone else, anywhere.
If the Arabs were the global super power of the time, would there be an Israel there? Probably not. Ooh wow, how much we learned! The problem is practically solved...
Ooh hang on, I just looked on google. Turns out Israel is still there.
You, and other anti-Israel folk, should start adressing the truth of what you want to see happening. It involves the forced deporation of millions at best, and their executions at worst (though more realistic).
Israel is there, and if you don't like that, start suggesting practical solutions. Playing what-if games is just poluting the discussion.
meh.. you keep making this as if i want them gone or im hitler and want them exterminated, i was saying that if the arabs had any saying back then in the matter things would be different and jews would still be alive living elsewhere instead of other people lands. They didn't need to be worlds super power they just needed to not be ignored by the super powers of the time. If we want to solve a problem we first have to analyze the roots of the problem, i think this conflict should be solved peacefully and i believe in a two state solution with both Israeli and Palestinian living side by side equally sharing knowledge and culture as they always did... it doesn't matter the past can be forgotten and we can't talk about it
Fact of the matter is that jews made up a huge percentage of people in the mandate area of Palestine, there was no reason to create an Arab state with a jewish miniority, even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation.
The Palestinians had a chance for their own state twice ( 48 and camp david accords) but opted for violence with the aim of making a True Arab state ( and thus screwing over the infidels, druze and other people who are not Arab Muslims)
For the sake of the Jews, Christians, Druze lets be glad Israel exists in the cesspool of Arab Apartheid nations.
By huge percentage you mean , 20 % 40% 50% 60% ? If there wasn't the need to create an Arab state where was the need found to create an Israeli one when they were just a minority? "even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation. " if thats the case the super powers of the time should have thought of a better place to create this state for the Jewish people.
40-60 percent in the entire mandate? sure. the Jews were assigned mostly Jewish majority area's anyway. The entire problem for the Arabs was the idea that infidels were next to them as equals, horrible for Arabs no doubt.
The Arabs wanted a islamic Apartheid state and got smacked around in the process, tough luck. I can only hope the world continues to support Israel as global Islamic terrorism is on the rise.
The violence in Palestine is so one sided I personally hope that the record amount of UN resolutions against Israel to stop their violence against civilian Palestines catches up to them sooner rather than later. Israeli settlers have killed so many more civilians than the terrorists have. It's ridiculous how they can point fingers at terrorists when their own settlers are butchering civilians. The Jewish people were a minority but got a majority of the land. That's a fact. I have nothing against jews, and I couldn't care less about their religion. The foreign policies and the politics in general in the state of Israel is a disgrace to mankind. The state the Palestinians are in are close to concentration camp-like with no influx of medicine and food. All attempts of bringing supplies in get boarded by Israel on international waters, and sometimes with personnel on the ships as casualties. They precision strike UN camps. They specifically target Red Cross vans as they 'might' be hijacked by terrorists. They bomb white phosphorous over one of the densest populated areas in the world, causing men, women and children to dissolve. Israel is one of the worst war criminal states on the globe, and I sincerely hope that the UN will finally have the balls to charge key people to show that such behaviour is not acceptable. To me it's unimaginable how you can back such horror with a straight face and say 'oh them arabs are what's causing problems. Tough luck'.
Pretend for a moment that the roles were reversed.
Let us say that Israel had a very weak economy and military, and the nations surrounding it were very powerfull. What would happen?
They would be running out of trees to hang Jews from, that is what would happen.
Or the Jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere? Or you think that if the Arabs had any kind of power israel would still be created on palestinian land?
Like I said, if the Arabs were in a position of power, every Jew in Israel would be swinging from a tree. Israel, on the other hand, seems to be pretty effective in restraining itself.
I do think it is pretty sick to suggest that they would go back to Europe though.
"You're a Jew, because of your genes you don't belong here, even though you were born here and it is the only land you ever knew. Hand over your possessions and get on a plane."
It is the height of collectivist thinking.
They are Jews, so they must leave and give over everything they worked for. Why on earth do you think that just because someone is a Jew, or an Israeli, he is entitled to fewer rights?
There are people born in Israel, never having known any other place, and you just want to cast them out of their land because of their race or cultural heritage? They have to leave behind their homes, their businesses, only because they happened to be born Jews.
You can feel that way if you like, but don't try and take the moral high ground.
Im saying, when decision was made to create the state of israel after ww2 if the arabs had any kind of real power to protest it, the jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere ...
I bet you feel very sorry for the end of the apartheid in South Africa as well.
And if dirt tasted like bananas, nobody would ever be hungry again.
Israel exists, there are people living in Israel. You should focus your attention on reality, rather than playing a game of what-if that won't get you, or anyone else, anywhere.
If the Arabs were the global super power of the time, would there be an Israel there? Probably not. Ooh wow, how much we learned! The problem is practically solved...
Ooh hang on, I just looked on google. Turns out Israel is still there.
You, and other anti-Israel folk, should start adressing the truth of what you want to see happening. It involves the forced deporation of millions at best, and their executions at worst (though more realistic).
Israel is there, and if you don't like that, start suggesting practical solutions. Playing what-if games is just poluting the discussion.
meh.. you keep making this as if i want them gone or im hitler and want them exterminated, i was saying that if the arabs had any saying back then in the matter things would be different and jews would still be alive living elsewhere instead of other people lands. They didn't need to be worlds super power they just needed to not be ignored by the super powers of the time. If we want to solve a problem we first have to analyze the roots of the problem, i think this conflict should be solved peacefully and i believe in a two state solution with both Israeli and Palestinian living side by side equally sharing knowledge and culture as they always did... it doesn't matter the past can be forgotten and we can't talk about it
Fact of the matter is that jews made up a huge percentage of people in the mandate area of Palestine, there was no reason to create an Arab state with a jewish miniority, even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation.
The Palestinians had a chance for their own state twice ( 48 and camp david accords) but opted for violence with the aim of making a True Arab state ( and thus screwing over the infidels, druze and other people who are not Arab Muslims)
For the sake of the Jews, Christians, Druze lets be glad Israel exists in the cesspool of Arab Apartheid nations.
By huge percentage you mean , 20 % 40% 50% 60% ? If there wasn't the need to create an Arab state where was the need found to create an Israeli one when they were just a minority? "even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation. " if thats the case the super powers of the time should have thought of a better place to create this state for the Jewish people.
40-60 percent in the entire mandate? sure. the Jews were assigned mostly Jewish majority area's anyway. The entire problem for the Arabs was the idea that infidels were next to them as equals, horrible for Arabs no doubt.
The Arabs wanted a islamic Apartheid state and got smacked around in the process, tough luck. I can only hope the world continues to support Israel as global Islamic terrorism is on the rise.
The violence in Palestine is so one sided I personally hope that the record amount of UN resolutions against Israel to stop their violence against civilian Palestines catches up to them sooner rather than later. Israeli settlers have killed so many more civilians than the terrorists have. It's ridiculous how they can point fingers at terrorists when their own settlers are butchering civilians. The Jewish people were a minority but got a majority of the land. That's a fact. I have nothing against jews, and I couldn't care less about their religion. The foreign policies and the politics in general in the state of Israel is a disgrace to mankind. The state the Palestinians are in are close to concentration camp-like with no influx of medicine and food. All attempts of bringing supplies in get boarded by Israel on international waters, and sometimes with personnel on the ships as casualties. They precision strike UN camps. They specifically target Red Cross vans as they 'might' be hijacked by terrorists. They bomb white phosphorous over one of the densest populated areas in the world, causing men, women and children to dissolve. Israel is one of the worst war criminal states on the globe, and I sincerely hope that the UN will finally have the balls to charge key people to show that such behaviour is not acceptable. To me it's unimaginable how you can back such horror with a straight face and say 'oh them arabs are what's causing problems. Tough luck'.
Pretend for a moment that the roles were reversed.
Let us say that Israel had a very weak economy and military, and the nations surrounding it were very powerfull. What would happen?
They would be running out of trees to hang Jews from, that is what would happen.
Or the Jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere? Or you think that if the Arabs had any kind of power israel would still be created on palestinian land?
Like I said, if the Arabs were in a position of power, every Jew in Israel would be swinging from a tree. Israel, on the other hand, seems to be pretty effective in restraining itself.
I do think it is pretty sick to suggest that they would go back to Europe though.
"You're a Jew, because of your genes you don't belong here, even though you were born here and it is the only land you ever knew. Hand over your possessions and get on a plane."
It is the height of collectivist thinking.
They are Jews, so they must leave and give over everything they worked for. Why on earth do you think that just because someone is a Jew, or an Israeli, he is entitled to fewer rights?
There are people born in Israel, never having known any other place, and you just want to cast them out of their land because of their race or cultural heritage? They have to leave behind their homes, their businesses, only because they happened to be born Jews.
You can feel that way if you like, but don't try and take the moral high ground.
Im saying, when decision was made to create the state of israel after ww2 if the arabs had any kind of real power to protest it, the jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere ...
I bet you feel very sorry for the end of the apartheid in South Africa as well.
And if dirt tasted like bananas, nobody would ever be hungry again.
Israel exists, there are people living in Israel. You should focus your attention on reality, rather than playing a game of what-if that won't get you, or anyone else, anywhere.
If the Arabs were the global super power of the time, would there be an Israel there? Probably not. Ooh wow, how much we learned! The problem is practically solved...
Ooh hang on, I just looked on google. Turns out Israel is still there.
You, and other anti-Israel folk, should start adressing the truth of what you want to see happening. It involves the forced deporation of millions at best, and their executions at worst (though more realistic).
Israel is there, and if you don't like that, start suggesting practical solutions. Playing what-if games is just poluting the discussion.
meh.. you keep making this as if i want them gone or im hitler and want them exterminated, i was saying that if the arabs had any saying back then in the matter things would be different and jews would still be alive living elsewhere instead of other people lands. They didn't need to be worlds super power they just needed to not be ignored by the super powers of the time. If we want to solve a problem we first have to analyze the roots of the problem, i think this conflict should be solved peacefully and i believe in a two state solution with both Israeli and Palestinian living side by side equally sharing knowledge and culture as they always did... it doesn't matter the past can be forgotten and we can't talk about it
Fact of the matter is that jews made up a huge percentage of people in the mandate area of Palestine, there was no reason to create an Arab state with a jewish miniority, even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation.
The Palestinians had a chance for their own state twice ( 48 and camp david accords) but opted for violence with the aim of making a True Arab state ( and thus screwing over the infidels, druze and other people who are not Arab Muslims)
For the sake of the Jews, Christians, Druze lets be glad Israel exists in the cesspool of Arab Apartheid nations.
By huge percentage you mean , 20 % 40% 50% 60% ? If there wasn't the need to create an Arab state where was the need found to create an Israeli one when they were just a minority? "even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation. " if thats the case the super powers of the time should have thought of a better place to create this state for the Jewish people.
40-60 percent in the entire mandate? sure. the Jews were assigned mostly Jewish majority area's anyway. The entire problem for the Arabs was the idea that infidels were next to them as equals, horrible for Arabs no doubt.
The Arabs wanted a islamic Apartheid state and got smacked around in the process, tough luck. I can only hope the world continues to support Israel as global Islamic terrorism is on the rise.
The violence in Palestine is so one sided I personally hope that the record amount of UN resolutions against Israel to stop their violence against civilian Palestines catches up to them sooner rather than later. Israeli settlers have killed so many more civilians than the terrorists have. It's ridiculous how they can point fingers at terrorists when their own settlers are butchering civilians. The Jewish people were a minority but got a majority of the land. That's a fact. I have nothing against jews, and I couldn't care less about their religion. The foreign policies and the politics in general in the state of Israel is a disgrace to mankind. The state the Palestinians are in are close to concentration camp-like with no influx of medicine and food. All attempts of bringing supplies in get boarded by Israel on international waters, and sometimes with personnel on the ships as casualties. They precision strike UN camps. They specifically target Red Cross vans as they 'might' be hijacked by terrorists. They bomb white phosphorous over one of the densest populated areas in the world, causing men, women and children to dissolve. Israel is one of the worst war criminal states on the globe, and I sincerely hope that the UN will finally have the balls to charge key people to show that such behaviour is not acceptable. To me it's unimaginable how you can back such horror with a straight face and say 'oh them arabs are what's causing problems. Tough luck'.
The rhetoric is always so extremely fanatical and extreme. You would think Israel is enforcing some North-Korean-esque rule.
The truth is that they don't really kill that many Palestinians, and non-sunni muslims have more religious freedom in Israel than they do in most other middle-eastern countries.
You get people talking about concentration camps, apartheid, genocide. It just isn't true.
"They bomb white phosphorous over one of the densest populated areas in the world, causing men, women and children to dissolve."
Just another clear example. Is white phosphorous bad? Yeah, it is, but that isn't enough. It has to disolve men, women and children. Everything has to be ramped up the extreme.
You're an Arab and the coffee machine at Starbucks was broke? APARTHEID! Everything has to be turned up to 11, it is ridiculous.
The problem with actual casualty numbers is the same as in Iraq.
People use whatever counting method they like best. For example, most people will actually use the method of counting every single Palestinian death since the start of Israel. So if a Palestinian guy walks down the road and gets a heart attack, Israel did that.
Why? Because the lefties will argue that the man's heart attack could have been prevented with better healthcare, and he didn't have that because Israel is sitting on the land.
Guy hangs himself? Depression, caused by Israel.
This lets people bump up the numbers to whatever they want it to be. Hell, someone on this forum once claimed that the number of Iraqi casualties was higher than the total population of Iraq.
Actual Palestinians that died as the result of direct violence of Israel? About 10.000 since it's inception.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
this is just stoopid. YOU would want to have nukes if your neighbor ( Israel ) had some and was threathening to invade. Ofc this is a shitty regime but you cant blame millions of people for trying to secure a future for themselves and their children.
I know for a fact that if I was Iranian I'd back my gorvernment's plans to get nukes so we can finally breathe and feel secure.
every medal has 2 sides, doesnt matter how thin it is.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
this is just stoopid. YOU would want to have nukes if your neighbor ( Israel ) had some and was threathening to invade. Ofc this is a shitty regime but you cant blame millions of people for trying to secure a future for themselves and their children.
I know for a fact that if I was Iranian I'd back my gorvernment's plans to get nukes so we can finally breathe and feel secure.
every medal has 2 sides, doesnt matter how thin it is.
my 2 cents
The Iranians don't really support their government though.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
this is just stoopid. YOU would want to have nukes if your neighbor ( Israel ) had some and was threathening to invade. Ofc this is a shitty regime but you cant blame millions of people for trying to secure a future for themselves and their children.
I know for a fact that if I was Iranian I'd back my gorvernment's plans to get nukes so we can finally breathe and feel secure.
every medal has 2 sides, doesnt matter how thin it is.
my 2 cents
You do realize that Iran's threats are one sided right? Both nations have a non Arab majority and should cooperate to secure a save future. but Iran funds various Jihad militia's for years, Israel does not do the same. Israel has no way to ''invade Iran'' not even by proxy.....
You are just clueless about the entire region and conflict.
Pretend for a moment that the roles were reversed.
Let us say that Israel had a very weak economy and military, and the nations surrounding it were very powerfull. What would happen?
They would be running out of trees to hang Jews from, that is what would happen.
Or the Jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere? Or you think that if the Arabs had any kind of power israel would still be created on palestinian land?
Like I said, if the Arabs were in a position of power, every Jew in Israel would be swinging from a tree. Israel, on the other hand, seems to be pretty effective in restraining itself.
I do think it is pretty sick to suggest that they would go back to Europe though.
"You're a Jew, because of your genes you don't belong here, even though you were born here and it is the only land you ever knew. Hand over your possessions and get on a plane."
It is the height of collectivist thinking.
They are Jews, so they must leave and give over everything they worked for. Why on earth do you think that just because someone is a Jew, or an Israeli, he is entitled to fewer rights?
There are people born in Israel, never having known any other place, and you just want to cast them out of their land because of their race or cultural heritage? They have to leave behind their homes, their businesses, only because they happened to be born Jews.
You can feel that way if you like, but don't try and take the moral high ground.
Im saying, when decision was made to create the state of israel after ww2 if the arabs had any kind of real power to protest it, the jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere ...
I bet you feel very sorry for the end of the apartheid in South Africa as well.
And if dirt tasted like bananas, nobody would ever be hungry again.
Israel exists, there are people living in Israel. You should focus your attention on reality, rather than playing a game of what-if that won't get you, or anyone else, anywhere.
If the Arabs were the global super power of the time, would there be an Israel there? Probably not. Ooh wow, how much we learned! The problem is practically solved...
Ooh hang on, I just looked on google. Turns out Israel is still there.
You, and other anti-Israel folk, should start adressing the truth of what you want to see happening. It involves the forced deporation of millions at best, and their executions at worst (though more realistic).
Israel is there, and if you don't like that, start suggesting practical solutions. Playing what-if games is just poluting the discussion.
meh.. you keep making this as if i want them gone or im hitler and want them exterminated, i was saying that if the arabs had any saying back then in the matter things would be different and jews would still be alive living elsewhere instead of other people lands. They didn't need to be worlds super power they just needed to not be ignored by the super powers of the time. If we want to solve a problem we first have to analyze the roots of the problem, i think this conflict should be solved peacefully and i believe in a two state solution with both Israeli and Palestinian living side by side equally sharing knowledge and culture as they always did... it doesn't matter the past can be forgotten and we can't talk about it
Fact of the matter is that jews made up a huge percentage of people in the mandate area of Palestine, there was no reason to create an Arab state with a jewish miniority, even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation.
The Palestinians had a chance for their own state twice ( 48 and camp david accords) but opted for violence with the aim of making a True Arab state ( and thus screwing over the infidels, druze and other people who are not Arab Muslims)
For the sake of the Jews, Christians, Druze lets be glad Israel exists in the cesspool of Arab Apartheid nations.
By huge percentage you mean , 20 % 40% 50% 60% ? If there wasn't the need to create an Arab state where was the need found to create an Israeli one when they were just a minority? "even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation. " if thats the case the super powers of the time should have thought of a better place to create this state for the Jewish people.
40-60 percent in the entire mandate? sure. the Jews were assigned mostly Jewish majority area's anyway. The entire problem for the Arabs was the idea that infidels were next to them as equals, horrible for Arabs no doubt.
The Arabs wanted a islamic Apartheid state and got smacked around in the process, tough luck. I can only hope the world continues to support Israel as global Islamic terrorism is on the rise.
The violence in Palestine is so one sided I personally hope that the record amount of UN resolutions against Israel to stop their violence against civilian Palestines catches up to them sooner rather than later. Israeli settlers have killed so many more civilians than the terrorists have. It's ridiculous how they can point fingers at terrorists when their own settlers are butchering civilians. The Jewish people were a minority but got a majority of the land. That's a fact. I have nothing against jews, and I couldn't care less about their religion. The foreign policies and the politics in general in the state of Israel is a disgrace to mankind. The state the Palestinians are in are close to concentration camp-like with no influx of medicine and food. All attempts of bringing supplies in get boarded by Israel on international waters, and sometimes with personnel on the ships as casualties. They precision strike UN camps. They specifically target Red Cross vans as they 'might' be hijacked by terrorists. They bomb white phosphorous over one of the densest populated areas in the world, causing men, women and children to dissolve. Israel is one of the worst war criminal states on the globe, and I sincerely hope that the UN will finally have the balls to charge key people to show that such behaviour is not acceptable. To me it's unimaginable how you can back such horror with a straight face and say 'oh them arabs are what's causing problems. Tough luck'.
The violence is one sided indeed, all comming from the Palestinians. Lets face it the IDF is not attacking schools, cafes and busses at random with the aim of killing as many as possible. Much unlike the Palestinians.
Israeli settlers who kill get to jail, much unlike the terrorists who get blessed with martyr status. Remember the Palestinian man who cracked open a baby skull with his ak47? They gave him a statue and named a street after him!.
The Jewish people got a part of the land, all of Palesitne would include Jordan which was part of the mandate area which became Arab, the Jews got less land then promised but accepted it for the sake of peace. the arabs refused this and only wanted a Arab Apartheid state.
All your whining is pathethic. Hamas uses red cross busses, uses schools as training grounds and mosques as weapon storage sites, but may not attack? You know targets like that lose their status as civilian buildings if they are used for military means.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
this is just stoopid. YOU would want to have nukes if your neighbor ( Israel ) had some and was threathening to invade. Ofc this is a shitty regime but you cant blame millions of people for trying to secure a future for themselves and their children.
I know for a fact that if I was Iranian I'd back my gorvernment's plans to get nukes so we can finally breathe and feel secure.
every medal has 2 sides, doesnt matter how thin it is.
my 2 cents
You do realize that Iran's threats are one sided right? Both nations have a non Arab majority and should cooperate to secure a save future. but Iran funds various Jihad militia's for years, Israel does not do the same. Israel has no way to ''invade Iran'' not even by proxy.....
You are just clueless about the entire region and conflict.
He probably meant that Israel was threatening to attack, not invade.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
this is just stoopid. YOU would want to have nukes if your neighbor ( Israel ) had some and was threathening to invade. Ofc this is a shitty regime but you cant blame millions of people for trying to secure a future for themselves and their children.
I know for a fact that if I was Iranian I'd back my gorvernment's plans to get nukes so we can finally breathe and feel secure.
every medal has 2 sides, doesnt matter how thin it is.
my 2 cents
You do realize that Iran's threats are one sided right? Both nations have a non Arab majority and should cooperate to secure a save future. but Iran funds various Jihad militia's for years, Israel does not do the same. Israel has no way to ''invade Iran'' not even by proxy.....
You are just clueless about the entire region and conflict.
He probably meant that Israel was threatening to attack, not invade.
Then he is even more clueless, Iran was never any issue to Israel untill it started to funds thousands of Islamic Jihad fighters ( both in Israel, but also in Yemen Iraq and Lebanon) and call for the destruction of the Jewish state by a nuclear attack.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
this is just stoopid. YOU would want to have nukes if your neighbor ( Israel ) had some and was threathening to invade. Ofc this is a shitty regime but you cant blame millions of people for trying to secure a future for themselves and their children.
I know for a fact that if I was Iranian I'd back my gorvernment's plans to get nukes so we can finally breathe and feel secure.
every medal has 2 sides, doesnt matter how thin it is.
my 2 cents
You do realize that Iran's threats are one sided right? Both nations have a non Arab majority and should cooperate to secure a save future. but Iran funds various Jihad militia's for years, Israel does not do the same. Israel has no way to ''invade Iran'' not even by proxy.....
You are just clueless about the entire region and conflict.
He probably meant that Israel was threatening to attack, not invade.
Then he is even more clueless, Iran was never any issue to Israel untill it started to funds thousands of Islamic Jihad fighters ( both in Israel, but also in Yemen Iraq and Lebanon) and call for the destruction of the Jewish state by a nuclear attack.
So what all the Israeli rhetoric about attacking Iran's nuclear facilities? If thats not threatening to attack what is it then? Also, regarding your other post i find it ironic when israel complains about terrorism when they were the ones that started it in the middle east, maybe karma is coming back to bite? I think the arabs learned well with the jewish terrorist groups, an interesting article about the use of the same tactics by those groups:
Jews, just like Arabs, hid weapons in immoral places Haganah,the Irgun, and the Stern Gang, which operated against the British government and the Arabs in Palestine, used similar tactics to those implemented by Arab militants.
On September 09 2012 05:13 ImFromPortugal wrote: So what all the Israeli rhetoric about attacking Iran's nuclear facilities?
so Iran is building nukes to protect themselves against an Israeli attack on their... nuclear facilities...?
what kind of sense does that make?
building nukes to prevent Israel from invading, as a form of deterrence. Which is ASSUMING they actually are building nuclear weapons using their facilities, they claim it's only for energy. Who can tell, all the news sites I've read seem to be biased towards the US and its allies.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
this is just stoopid. YOU would want to have nukes if your neighbor ( Israel ) had some and was threathening to invade. Ofc this is a shitty regime but you cant blame millions of people for trying to secure a future for themselves and their children.
I know for a fact that if I was Iranian I'd back my gorvernment's plans to get nukes so we can finally breathe and feel secure.
every medal has 2 sides, doesnt matter how thin it is.
my 2 cents
You do realize that Iran's threats are one sided right? Both nations have a non Arab majority and should cooperate to secure a save future. but Iran funds various Jihad militia's for years, Israel does not do the same. Israel has no way to ''invade Iran'' not even by proxy.....
You are just clueless about the entire region and conflict.
He probably meant that Israel was threatening to attack, not invade.
Then he is even more clueless, Iran was never any issue to Israel untill it started to funds thousands of Islamic Jihad fighters ( both in Israel, but also in Yemen Iraq and Lebanon) and call for the destruction of the Jewish state by a nuclear attack.
So what all the Israeli rhetoric about attacking Iran's nuclear facilities? If thats not threatening to attack what is it then? Also, regarding your other post i find it ironic when israel complains about terrorism when they were the ones that started it in the middle east, maybe karma is coming back to bite? I think the arabs learned well with the jewish terrorist groups, an interesting article about the use of the same tactics by those groups:
Jews, just like Arabs, hid weapons in immoral places Haganah,the Irgun, and the Stern Gang, which operated against the British government and the Arabs in Palestine, used similar tactics to those implemented by Arab militants.
On September 09 2012 05:13 ImFromPortugal wrote: So what all the Israeli rhetoric about attacking Iran's nuclear facilities?
so Iran is building nukes to protect themselves against an Israeli attack on their... nuclear facilities...?
what kind of sense does that make?
building nukes to prevent Israel from invading, as a form of deterrence. Which is ASSUMING they actually are building nuclear weapons using their facilities, they claim it's only for energy. Who can tell, all the news sites I've read seem to be biased towards the US and its allies.
Iran enriches above a civilian level so its meant to further enriched for nukes.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
this is just stoopid. YOU would want to have nukes if your neighbor ( Israel ) had some and was threathening to invade. Ofc this is a shitty regime but you cant blame millions of people for trying to secure a future for themselves and their children.
I know for a fact that if I was Iranian I'd back my gorvernment's plans to get nukes so we can finally breathe and feel secure.
every medal has 2 sides, doesnt matter how thin it is.
my 2 cents
You do realize that Iran's threats are one sided right? Both nations have a non Arab majority and should cooperate to secure a save future. but Iran funds various Jihad militia's for years, Israel does not do the same. Israel has no way to ''invade Iran'' not even by proxy.....
You are just clueless about the entire region and conflict.
Yes, they are one sided. Israel is threatening Iran with an invasion. Iran is not threatening Israel. Israel does not do the same? Then what is Jundallah doing in Iran? Israel has no way to attack Iran? The US has military bases in nearly all countries surrounding Iran, for fuck's sake. Get a clue.
On September 08 2012 23:22 ImFromPortugal wrote: [quote]
Or the Jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere? Or you think that if the Arabs had any kind of power israel would still be created on palestinian land?
Like I said, if the Arabs were in a position of power, every Jew in Israel would be swinging from a tree. Israel, on the other hand, seems to be pretty effective in restraining itself.
I do think it is pretty sick to suggest that they would go back to Europe though.
"You're a Jew, because of your genes you don't belong here, even though you were born here and it is the only land you ever knew. Hand over your possessions and get on a plane."
It is the height of collectivist thinking.
They are Jews, so they must leave and give over everything they worked for. Why on earth do you think that just because someone is a Jew, or an Israeli, he is entitled to fewer rights?
There are people born in Israel, never having known any other place, and you just want to cast them out of their land because of their race or cultural heritage? They have to leave behind their homes, their businesses, only because they happened to be born Jews.
You can feel that way if you like, but don't try and take the moral high ground.
Im saying, when decision was made to create the state of israel after ww2 if the arabs had any kind of real power to protest it, the jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere ...
I bet you feel very sorry for the end of the apartheid in South Africa as well.
And if dirt tasted like bananas, nobody would ever be hungry again.
Israel exists, there are people living in Israel. You should focus your attention on reality, rather than playing a game of what-if that won't get you, or anyone else, anywhere.
If the Arabs were the global super power of the time, would there be an Israel there? Probably not. Ooh wow, how much we learned! The problem is practically solved...
Ooh hang on, I just looked on google. Turns out Israel is still there.
You, and other anti-Israel folk, should start adressing the truth of what you want to see happening. It involves the forced deporation of millions at best, and their executions at worst (though more realistic).
Israel is there, and if you don't like that, start suggesting practical solutions. Playing what-if games is just poluting the discussion.
meh.. you keep making this as if i want them gone or im hitler and want them exterminated, i was saying that if the arabs had any saying back then in the matter things would be different and jews would still be alive living elsewhere instead of other people lands. They didn't need to be worlds super power they just needed to not be ignored by the super powers of the time. If we want to solve a problem we first have to analyze the roots of the problem, i think this conflict should be solved peacefully and i believe in a two state solution with both Israeli and Palestinian living side by side equally sharing knowledge and culture as they always did... it doesn't matter the past can be forgotten and we can't talk about it
Fact of the matter is that jews made up a huge percentage of people in the mandate area of Palestine, there was no reason to create an Arab state with a jewish miniority, even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation.
The Palestinians had a chance for their own state twice ( 48 and camp david accords) but opted for violence with the aim of making a True Arab state ( and thus screwing over the infidels, druze and other people who are not Arab Muslims)
For the sake of the Jews, Christians, Druze lets be glad Israel exists in the cesspool of Arab Apartheid nations.
By huge percentage you mean , 20 % 40% 50% 60% ? If there wasn't the need to create an Arab state where was the need found to create an Israeli one when they were just a minority? "even less so when we known Muslims treat Infidels badly in every single nation. " if thats the case the super powers of the time should have thought of a better place to create this state for the Jewish people.
40-60 percent in the entire mandate? sure. the Jews were assigned mostly Jewish majority area's anyway. The entire problem for the Arabs was the idea that infidels were next to them as equals, horrible for Arabs no doubt.
The Arabs wanted a islamic Apartheid state and got smacked around in the process, tough luck. I can only hope the world continues to support Israel as global Islamic terrorism is on the rise.
The violence in Palestine is so one sided I personally hope that the record amount of UN resolutions against Israel to stop their violence against civilian Palestines catches up to them sooner rather than later. Israeli settlers have killed so many more civilians than the terrorists have. It's ridiculous how they can point fingers at terrorists when their own settlers are butchering civilians. The Jewish people were a minority but got a majority of the land. That's a fact. I have nothing against jews, and I couldn't care less about their religion. The foreign policies and the politics in general in the state of Israel is a disgrace to mankind. The state the Palestinians are in are close to concentration camp-like with no influx of medicine and food. All attempts of bringing supplies in get boarded by Israel on international waters, and sometimes with personnel on the ships as casualties. They precision strike UN camps. They specifically target Red Cross vans as they 'might' be hijacked by terrorists. They bomb white phosphorous over one of the densest populated areas in the world, causing men, women and children to dissolve. Israel is one of the worst war criminal states on the globe, and I sincerely hope that the UN will finally have the balls to charge key people to show that such behaviour is not acceptable. To me it's unimaginable how you can back such horror with a straight face and say 'oh them arabs are what's causing problems. Tough luck'.
The rhetoric is always so extremely fanatical and extreme. You would think Israel is enforcing some North-Korean-esque rule.
The truth is that they don't really kill that many Palestinians, and non-sunni muslims have more religious freedom in Israel than they do in most other middle-eastern countries.
You get people talking about concentration camps, apartheid, genocide. It just isn't true.
"They bomb white phosphorous over one of the densest populated areas in the world, causing men, women and children to dissolve."
Just another clear example. Is white phosphorous bad? Yeah, it is, but that isn't enough. It has to disolve men, women and children. Everything has to be ramped up the extreme.
You're an Arab and the coffee machine at Starbucks was broke? APARTHEID! Everything has to be turned up to 11, it is ridiculous.
The problem with actual casualty numbers is the same as in Iraq.
People use whatever counting method they like best. For example, most people will actually use the method of counting every single Palestinian death since the start of Israel. So if a Palestinian guy walks down the road and gets a heart attack, Israel did that.
Why? Because the lefties will argue that the man's heart attack could have been prevented with better healthcare, and he didn't have that because Israel is sitting on the land.
Guy hangs himself? Depression, caused by Israel.
This lets people bump up the numbers to whatever they want it to be. Hell, someone on this forum once claimed that the number of Iraqi casualties was higher than the total population of Iraq.
Actual Palestinians that died as the result of direct violence of Israel? About 10.000 since it's inception.
Yeah they're about 10.000. How many died in 9/11 again? oh.. almost 3000. But we don't care about Palestinians and their civilians because they're Arabs right? Who cares about them having over 3 state sanctioned 9/11s the past years. They have dark skin right, so it's perfectly justified. Israeli death tolls on the other hand are at about 15% of that. Besides it's up to the Israeli as an occupational force to supply the Palestinians in accordance with the Geneve convention. Instead they're murdering people trying to bring them medicine and food. Because that's reasonable.
Fact still remains that Israel has received more UN resolutions to stop their violence than all other states in the world combined.
One day, somebody's gonna have to make a stand. One day, somebody's gonna have to say enough.
That's the general feeling I have when I read bad comments. This thread is filling with them, Zalz with an uncontrollable bias while on the other side of the spectrum the same bias is saying it's all Israeli.
Some of you guys (not all) need to research a topic before you make such strong statements.
Iran getting nuclear weapons would not be an anti war move. Mutually Assured Destruction doesnt work when your country's leaders often just want to see the world burn. Not saying they do now. But with these holy war mentalities its honestly getting hard to tell.
Enriching past the civilian level is a bad sign and it should be stopped until Iran is a country where things start to make sense. They still lead the world in child executions, even over North Korea though NK's numbers are highly subjective.
That being said, I don't know if Canada is capable of making a big impact on the region. One way or another.
Personally I think Isreal attacking Iran on its own is a big mistake.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
this is just stoopid. YOU would want to have nukes if your neighbor ( Israel ) had some and was threathening to invade. Ofc this is a shitty regime but you cant blame millions of people for trying to secure a future for themselves and their children.
I know for a fact that if I was Iranian I'd back my gorvernment's plans to get nukes so we can finally breathe and feel secure.
every medal has 2 sides, doesnt matter how thin it is.
my 2 cents
You do realize that Iran's threats are one sided right? Both nations have a non Arab majority and should cooperate to secure a save future. but Iran funds various Jihad militia's for years, Israel does not do the same. Israel has no way to ''invade Iran'' not even by proxy.....
You are just clueless about the entire region and conflict.
Yes, they are one sided. Israel is threatening Iran with an invasion. Iran is not threatening Israel. Israel does not do the same? Then what is Jundallah doing in Iran? Israel has no way to attack Iran? The US has military bases in nearly all countries surrounding Iran, for fuck's sake. Get a clue.
Errr, Iran wages war against Israel by proxy ( Hizbollah Hamas, Islamic Jihad etc) long before they even had a nuclear program or Israel even made a comment about attacking them.
The entire reason Iran is interesting for Israel is because of their support for many terrorist groups, and their clear aim to destroy Israel ( they said on numerous occasions)
the US having bases means nothing since Iran is a theocratic apartheid state and where the top leaders believe we live in the end times.
Note how Israel has NEVER sided with the US in ANY invasion of Arab nations. Not in the six days war, not in 73, and not in gulf war I & II.
Really? Iran said they want to destroy Israel? You really are brainwashed. Are you, by any chance, talking about Ahmadinejad quoting a dead ayatollah, who's speach the pro-Israel media had taken way out of context?
On September 09 2012 06:56 maybenexttime wrote: Really? Iran said they want to destroy Israel? You really are brainwashed. Are you, by any chance, talking about Ahmadinejad quoting a dead ayatollah, who's speach the pro-Israel media had taken way out of context?
On September 09 2012 05:43 Euronyme wrote: Yeah they're about 10.000. How many died in 9/11 again? oh.. almost 3000. But we don't care about Palestinians and their civilians because they're Arabs right? Who cares about them having over 3 state sanctioned 9/11s the past years. They have dark skin right, so it's perfectly justified.
9/11's? What are you talking about? You think 9/11 was just about the number?
You think we have a 9/11 every day, just because more than 3000 people across the globe die on an average day? What are you talking about?
See, this is the insanity that we have to deal with. You think 10.000 / 3 = three 9/11's. Context means nothing, words mean nothing, history means nothing.
So you begin to hyperbole everything. Surely, if 10.000 dead can be called three 9/11's, what is stopping you from calling 1 dead a holocaust? One checkpoint a death camp? One sanction an orchestrated attempt to exterminate the Palestinians.
There is no rhyme or reason to anything you say, other than to explode anything into, not just its most extreme form, but miles and bounds beyond into the most extreme word you can manage to come up with.
10.000 over 65 years = 153 dead.
Call me crazy, but I don't think those numbers are that ridiculous considering the fact that the Palestinians are actively engaged in a struggle against the Israeli's, going so far as to launch rockets from every inch of land they get.
Adding onto that the well documented history of Hamas using their own people as shields and propaganda fodder, I don't think 153 is all that much.
But the truth is, numbers don't matter. It could be 1 dead Palestinian and you would still scream genocide. Go extreme, go borderline insane with your accusations. Just acknowledge that they are not grounded in any reality.
Israeli death tolls on the other hand are at about 15% of that. Besides it's up to the Israeli as an occupational force to supply the Palestinians in accordance with the Geneve convention. Instead they're murdering people trying to bring them medicine and food. Because that's reasonable.
Israel doesn't build their military infrastructure at the heart of cities. They try to minimize their own casualties, so we can't be too surprised that the numbers aren't equal.
Fact still remains that Israel has received more UN resolutions to stop their violence than all other states in the world combined.
Would that be the same UN that has Saudi-Arabia on the human rights council? Don't make me laugh.
Yeah, Israel needs to stop building settlements, that don't mean much more than that.
On September 09 2012 06:56 maybenexttime wrote: Really? Iran said they want to destroy Israel? You really are brainwashed. Are you, by any chance, talking about Ahmadinejad quoting a dead ayatollah, who's speach the pro-Israel media had taken way out of context?
Wiping out the Zionist cancer would mean Israel surely, or would you disagree?
On September 09 2012 00:21 HoLe wrote: For fucks sake Israel was partitioned by the league of nations after wwII. The Jews aren't to blame, homeless, penniless Jews were given the land democratically.
you mean that Isreal that was created in year 1948 and that league of nations that ceased to be in 1946?
1st quote. Watch your phrasing. First Nations people has a ton of ambiguity. Are you referring to the Indians native to Canada? In any case, what's your point? I've lived in Canada the majority of my life. I've been to every province. I have both British and Canadian citizenship. I really don't see what you're getting at.
2nd quote.
Sorry. 1948, general assembly of the United Nations. My mistake. It's been a while since European history class. Still doesn't change my initial point one bit re: the democratic nature by which the Jews that experienced diaspora during WWII were allocated Israel.
Present more stupid nitpicky fluff points with no substance please.
Is no one concerned about the implications this has in terms of weakening the NPT? What benefit is there for non-nuclear nations to remain committed to non-proliferation if there are only punishments, not rewards?
I'm glad Canada did this even though it is mostly symbolic. Countries pulling bull shit like this and stirring up issues in the already volatile middle east especially with possible nuclear arms can't be ignored.
What's really a shame IMO is that the Palestinians are used as a tool against Israel by other Arab countries. The massive refugee camps that Palestinians live in could easily be assimilated and be taken out of refugee status and given a home by the neighbouring Arab countries instead of living in massive refugee camps.
Regarding the 3 holocausts a year that is probably the stupidest thing I have read in a long long time. 9/11 was an unprovoked attack which killed 3k innocent people and has changed the world incredible amounts. Zalz number of 153 is only 50 more than what peanuts kill in a year for fuck sakes. This is also using the horribly inflated numbers from Palestinians who use any death that could even have a faint chance of being related as death to add to their count. Palestinians fire fucking rockets into Israel all of the time killing people.
Look up all the terrorist attacks on Israel there are so many every year. Imagine if your city had bombs go off, buses being hijacked and the occupants slaughtered, rockets landing randomly all of the time. Heads would roll... Should Israel just ignore this? Do you think thats even an option?
You can't let people responsible for this get away with murdering innocent people. Sadly this means innocents are also in harms way when your seeking out the "bad guys" but I'm sure the IFD does everything they can to avoid collatoral damage especially while under the microscope of the world.
Israel doesn't target hospitals, schools, children, use human shields (for the most part) while hamas does and people try to paint them as the bad guys.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote: Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
this is just stoopid. YOU would want to have nukes if your neighbor ( Israel ) had some and was threathening to invade. Ofc this is a shitty regime but you cant blame millions of people for trying to secure a future for themselves and their children.
I know for a fact that if I was Iranian I'd back my gorvernment's plans to get nukes so we can finally breathe and feel secure.
every medal has 2 sides, doesnt matter how thin it is.
my 2 cents
The Iranians don't really support their government though.
They don't, and for good reason. However, they didn't totally support a democracy either; that's why it was so easily overthrown by the CIA back in '53. Most people HATE government in the Mideast regardless of system or whatever, and when government are popular it's when there's tons of nationalism being stirred or there's some big economic/political victory. A lot of it also has to do with the fact that people in the Mideast are a lot more active than in most of the rest of the world. If they feel they have a reason to fight, good or bad, they will do it.
Fun fact: Iranians used to be extremely liberal/secular, easily one of the most "westernized" countries outside of Europe/NA. And yet, they overthrew a secular social order to put the biggest Islamic fanatic of the modern era in power, who sparked and influenced more Islamic extremism and fundamentalism in the Mideast more than even Wahhabist Saudi Arabia could ever hope for.
GL Mideast. It literally has 4 secular countries left. Two are extremely tiny and relatively uninfluential (Tunisia and Lebanon), one is Israel, and the other is Turkey.
The biggest problem is if the Muslim Brotherhood gains actual power in Egypt (the military still holds the real power). Egypt is literally the media center of the Arab world, and it won't be good if they start putting out shit that is in favor of Islamic fundamentalism. Just as bad is the one country in the Mideast that really cracked down on Islamic extremism and was influential in promoting secularism was sent back to the Stone Age over the span of the past couple decades. Now Iraq is run by a former Islamic terror group in bed with Iran. lol.
Dont worry guys Im sure if Romney wins election his year US Army will be in Iran by the end of next year lol no need for Iranian diplomats in Canada anymore then lol
On September 09 2012 15:58 zala2023 wrote: Dont worry guys Im sure if Romney wins election his year US Army will be in Iran by the end of next year lol no need for Iranian diplomats in Canada anymore then lol
Wut? All you need are carriers aircraft and patience. Just bomb their army into submission.
On September 09 2012 15:34 tokicheese wrote: Look up all the terrorist attacks on Israel there are so many every year. Imagine if your city had bombs go off, buses being hijacked and the occupants slaughtered, rockets landing randomly all of the time. Heads would roll... Should Israel just ignore this? Do you think thats even an option?
You can't let people responsible for this get away with murdering innocent people. Sadly this means innocents are also in harms way when your seeking out the "bad guys" but I'm sure the IFD does everything they can to avoid collatoral damage especially while under the microscope of the world.
Israel doesn't target hospitals, schools, children, use human shields (for the most part) while hamas does and people try to paint them as the bad guys.
You should have a chat with a few Palestinians before you state something like that. Also, microscope of the world? You realise they have a nuclear arsenal and the IAEA doesn't give a single fuck, while Iran, a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is constantly harrassed for using nuclear energy for civilian purposes even?
Israel is a terror state with 0 legitimacy. Looks like it's been too long since 1948 that people have forgotten that they are the aggressors while the Arabs are fighting the defensive war. Therefore the term "Palestinian terrorism" is not even correct. Zionist terrorism has been present in the British Mandate of Palestine however.
arguing why israel is there (holocaust, 1948, travelling down from Poland) is like arguing semantics stay on track this thread is about why Canada severed ties with Iran, which, to me at least, indicates America is considering invasion.
I just read somewhere that Canada and Brazil were the only 2 countries to maintain diplomatic ties with all 192 countries in the UN. Now it's just Brazil, I guess.
On September 09 2012 15:34 tokicheese wrote: Look up all the terrorist attacks on Israel there are so many every year. Imagine if your city had bombs go off, buses being hijacked and the occupants slaughtered, rockets landing randomly all of the time. Heads would roll... Should Israel just ignore this? Do you think thats even an option?
You can't let people responsible for this get away with murdering innocent people. Sadly this means innocents are also in harms way when your seeking out the "bad guys" but I'm sure the IFD does everything they can to avoid collatoral damage especially while under the microscope of the world.
Israel doesn't target hospitals, schools, children, use human shields (for the most part) while hamas does and people try to paint them as the bad guys.
You should have a chat with a few Palestinians before you state something like that. Also, microscope of the world? You realise they have a nuclear arsenal and the IAEA doesn't give a single fuck, while Iran, a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is constantly harrassed for using nuclear energy for civilian purposes even?
Israel is a terror state with 0 legitimacy. Looks like it's been too long since 1948 that people have forgotten that they are the aggressors while the Arabs are fighting the defensive war. Therefore the term "Palestinian terrorism" is not even correct. Zionist terrorism has been present in the British Mandate of Palestine however.
Guy steps on a bus and blows himself up in order to kill as many Israeli citizens as possible, all out of a desire to see the establishment of a Palestinian state, whilst identifying himself as Palestinian.
Totally not Palestinian terrorism.
If anything, it is Israel terrorism, cause Israel is being such a meanie-pants that they are giving these poor Palestinians no other option than to place bombs whose sole goal is to murder as many civillians as possible.
You know, just like how Ghandi was forced to do the same against the British.
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
The only way you can possibly be this clueless is on purpose. Iran fought the US in Afghanistan and Iraq by training and supplying insurgents.
How do you not see a country directing its efforts to attain a nuclear capability that also states they will annihilate Israel as bad fucking news for Israel?
Of course there will be a war against Iran if the course does not change. If France said "We will annihilate Italy" then violently suppressed dissent... What do you think Germany would do about that?
What are we supposed to do, laugh it off? This isn't Call of Duty make believe.
On September 08 2012 09:47 blinken wrote: “most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
nice try but the US is more of a threat than any1 else in the world.
Except the US is not arming thousands of terrorists, or has made any claim or attempt to destroy a nation and its people as Iran has.
As a matter of fact, they are. And they not only attempt to destroy a nation, but they actually wage illegal wars and do destroy nations. It's pointless to discuss the topic with you since you don't even have any idea what the heck you're talkng about.
On September 08 2012 09:47 blinken wrote: “most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
nice try but the US is more of a threat than any1 else in the world.
Except the US is not arming thousands of terrorists, or has made any claim or attempt to destroy a nation and its people as Iran has.
Right, they haven't armed terrorists, they have armed the highest budget military on Earth, and haven't claimed to destroy a nation and it's people except that's what they are doing in practice.
If Canada and Mexico were overran by Iran then the US would have the right to strike back. But if I was Iranian and I've lived to see all the neighbouring countries get invaded or their governments made into USA puppets, then I'd swear by having a nuke just to defend ourselves.
On September 09 2012 23:03 zalz wrote:
If anything, it is Israel terrorism, cause Israel is being such a meanie-pants that they are giving these poor Palestinians no other option than to place bombs whose sole goal is to murder as many civillians as possible.
You know, just like how Ghandi was forced to do the same against the British.
So.. you're basically saying if the Palestinians were only to protest peacefully, Israel would be happy hand them over the 1947 borders?
On September 08 2012 09:47 blinken wrote: “most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
nice try but the US is more of a threat than any1 else in the world.
Except the US is not arming thousands of terrorists, or has made any claim or attempt to destroy a nation and its people as Iran has.
The US has been in the business of arming terrorists.....or freedom fighters when they are your allies moreso than any other country in the past 30-40 years. When you compare arming "terrorists" with the other things the US has done the last century it's actually quite insignificant alongside incidents such as dropping nuclear bombs, deadly sanctions killing over 500,000 kids in Iraq(5% of their whole population) or propping up dictators who go on torture sprees.
People should start looking at their own faults before pointing the finger but it's much easier for everyone to criticize the "enemy" than look at his own faults.
On September 08 2012 09:47 blinken wrote: “most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
nice try but the US is more of a threat than any1 else in the world.
Except the US is not arming thousands of terrorists, or has made any claim or attempt to destroy a nation and its people as Iran has.
The US has been in the business of arming terrorists.....or freedom fighters when they are your allies moreso than any other country in the past 30-40 years. When you compare arming "terrorists" with the other things the US has done the last century it's actually quite insignificant alongside incidents such as dropping nuclear bombs, deadly sanctions killing over 500,000 kids in Iraq(5% of their whole population) or propping up dictators who go on torture sprees.
People should start looking at their own faults before pointing the finger but it's much easier for everyone to criticize the "enemy" than look at his own faults.
Also one should note that Iran's government was set up by the States as well as Al Q ^^
On September 08 2012 10:09 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...I despise the State of Iran but some of the rhetoric is Israeli and Imperialist propaganda.
“most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”
“It routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide; it is among the world’s worst violators of human rights,”
Iran has not invaded other nations in like...forever. It is not a threat, it spends most of its military spending on defense, and they even got attacked by Stuxnet, and they do invest in terrorism but has it done that much harm compared to what America and Israel has done? And we have sent an embargo on Iran. Despite the horrors of the Iranian government, I am sure there is more to fear about the West than there is about the State on its own people.
If there is going to be a war, it is going to happen on Iranian soil.
I agree. I don't hesitate to say that both Iran and Israel are the biggest threats to world peace, and Iran only because of its extremist ideology, not because of its actual military potential.
Pretend for a moment that the roles were reversed.
Let us say that Israel had a very weak economy and military, and the nations surrounding it were very powerfull. What would happen?
They would be running out of trees to hang Jews from, that is what would happen.
Or the Jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere? Or you think that if the Arabs had any kind of power israel would still be created on palestinian land?
Like I said, if the Arabs were in a position of power, every Jew in Israel would be swinging from a tree. Israel, on the other hand, seems to be pretty effective in restraining itself.
I do think it is pretty sick to suggest that they would go back to Europe though.
"You're a Jew, because of your genes you don't belong here, even though you were born here and it is the only land you ever knew. Hand over your possessions and get on a plane."
It is the height of collectivist thinking.
They are Jews, so they must leave and give over everything they worked for. Why on earth do you think that just because someone is a Jew, or an Israeli, he is entitled to fewer rights?
There are people born in Israel, never having known any other place, and you just want to cast them out of their land because of their race or cultural heritage? They have to leave behind their homes, their businesses, only because they happened to be born Jews.
You can feel that way if you like, but don't try and take the moral high ground.
Im saying, when decision was made to create the state of israel after ww2 if the arabs had any kind of real power to protest it, the jews would still be living in Europe and elsewhere ...
I bet you feel very sorry for the end of the apartheid in South Africa as well.
And if dirt tasted like bananas, nobody would ever be hungry again.
Israel exists, there are people living in Israel. You should focus your attention on reality, rather than playing a game of what-if that won't get you, or anyone else, anywhere.
If the Arabs were the global super power of the time, would there be an Israel there? Probably not. Ooh wow, how much we learned! The problem is practically solved...
Ooh hang on, I just looked on google. Turns out Israel is still there.
You, and other anti-Israel folk, should start adressing the truth of what you want to see happening. It involves the forced deporation of millions at best, and their executions at worst (though more realistic).
Israel is there, and if you don't like that, start suggesting practical solutions. Playing what-if games is just poluting the discussion.
meh.. you keep making this as if i want them gone or im hitler and want them exterminated, i was saying that if the arabs had any saying back then in the matter things would be different and jews would still be alive living elsewhere instead of other people lands. They didn't need to be worlds super power they just needed to not be ignored by the super powers of the time. If we want to solve a problem we first have to analyze the roots of the problem, i think this conflict should be solved peacefully and i believe in a two state solution with both Israeli and Palestinian living side by side equally sharing knowledge and culture as they always did... it doesn't matter the past can be forgotten and we can't talk about it
The Arabs did have their say. There was a war.
The Arabs lost.
Russia and the US did not support either side materially. Arabs got their weapons mostly from old British stores left in their countries after WW2. Jews got their weapons smuggled in from Czechoslovakia mostly.
EPT
I like it much better when we just mind our own business and try to help people when they need it. I know for a fact that almost everyone (if not everyone) I know would be opposed to us sticking our nose into this business. We need Chretien back, he was a political genius. He knew how to tow the line between US ally and independant nation so so well. The Liberal party really needs to get its shit together and find a suitable leader.
![[image loading]](http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/9a/92/1342910107_6773_hamas-suicide.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.hyscience.com/Hamas%20mickey.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.mefacts.com/cache/html/incitement/11643_files/Hamas_kids2.jpg)
