NickDG 23 #1 August 20, 2008 I've never been a fan boy of Donald Trump, but he said something once about Condi Rice that was right on the money. "She waves, and gets on the plane. The plane lands, she gets off, and she waves. Then she gets back on the plane to leave, and she waves, then the planes returns, and she gets off, and she waves." "But she never makes a deal!" With all the Neocon knuckleheads getting everybody worked up about Iran's nuclear prowess and the Russian's recent actions everybody really needs to take a breath. Go to a library and look at newspapers from days gone by. There's always some kind of dire crisis going on and mostly they all pass in time. So it's how you react at the time that counts. I know there is a fine line between isolationism and standing up for everyone else in the world. But the Russians will only continue what they are doing until the Russian people get fed up with it. It happened before in Afghanistan. When the Afghani resistance got organized and started kicking Russian ass all the mothers and fathers in Russia began raising hell about why they were losing their sons for pointless reasons. The same thing will happen this time unless some idiot in Washington decides this is their big moment in history. Besides, what happened to walk softly and carry a big stick? Russia's nuclear footing is in disarray and disrepair. And both they and the Iranians know if they cross the line to the point we seriously start worrying about a "real" impending threat to America, we'd turn them into a smoking hole in the ground. And while some argue radical Muslims will commit suicide for the cause, that's only the small fish, not the boys at the top. All they want to do is stay in power. Most every war begins with an over reaction on someone's part. And right now in Washington we have a group consisting of the mother's of all over reactors . . . And that's something to be really worried about. NickD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,476 #2 August 20, 2008 >When the Afghani resistance got organized and started kicking Russian >ass all the mothers and fathers in Russia began raising hell about why >they were losing their sons for pointless reasons. Well, to be fair, the reason the Afghani resistance (the Mujahideen) got organized is that we started sending explosives, weapons, ammunition and instructors over there. I think we were spending over a billion dollars a year supporting the Mujahideen at one point. It's hard _not_ to get organized with that amount of money, training and weapons coming in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Darius11 12 #3 August 20, 2008 QuoteMost every war begins with an over reaction on someone's part Well we still have people reacting to 9-11. 3000 people died a horrifying event off course but when you think we have killed 10 to 100 times that amount just in Iraq you might be able to put it in perspective. The American populace is paranoid because they have never had to deal with such events. So in a way I understand the paranoia yet at the same time if you are looking at the world and peoples reactions or over reactions we are the kings. I think this is just a byproduct of living in a great safe country. What I do however not understand is how so many fail to react or easily excuse the massive loss of humane life we are responsible for. I think these are scary times because people are very likely to over react. We have way to many people who have zero facts and basically run on fear. I know a few of my GF friends who don’t know me at all just know that I was born in Iran have asked her “ are you sure he is not a terrorist?” That’s not a joke it has happened many times. Whenever you have ignorance, paranoia, and sheep mentality combined bad things happen. I wouldn’t be surprised if one day there is a lynchmob out side my house just because I am brown. QuoteBesides, what happened to walk softly and carry a big stick? Russia's nuclear footing is in disarray and disrepair. And both they and the Iranians know if they cross the line to the point we seriously start worrying about a "real" impending threat to America, we'd turn them into a smoking hole in the ground. And while some argue radical Muslims will commit suicide for the cause, that's only the small fish, not the boys at the top. All they want to do is stay in power. I always find the movie action hero way of thinking as the dimmest view of the world. First if you want to nuke a country that has been a place for the terrorist or Islamic radicals; you would have to start by nuking the president’s best buddy’s country. The Arabs have so much money they own him so that will not happen. I would hope the world and most Americans would not just sit there and allow there country to destroy yet another country that poses ZERO threat to our home land, but then again we do have a lot of stupid people.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Darius11 12 #4 August 20, 2008 What is your definition of terrorist?I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #5 August 20, 2008 QuoteWhat is your definition of terrorist? How about the Iranian backed and supplied explosives that killed over 200 American Marines ... or is that a freedom fighter to you?? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Darius11 12 #6 August 20, 2008 QuoteHow about the Iranian backed and supplied explosives that killed over 200 American Marines ... or is that a freedom fighter to you?? Is it only Iranian backed explosives that qualify it as a terrorist? When it is only the race or nationality of a person that makes you decide what someone is or not guess what your racists. If its giving explosives to bad people to kill troops from another country……….hey just read Bills post there is a good example for you. So are you saying the United States is a terrorist organization? I don’t think many would agree with you or maybe you just hate brown people. Still you failed to define anything other then your self. Try harder.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shropshire 0 #7 August 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteWhat is your definition of terrorist? How about the Iranian backed and supplied explosives that killed over 200 American Marines ... or is that a freedom fighter to you?? Not too dissimilar from Plastic Irish paying for Plastic Explosives.... Or many of our countries arming people that are freedom fighters to some and terrorists to others. Depends upon ones point of view. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #8 August 20, 2008 Just the kind of post I expected of you DariusDid Iran support the terrorists who attacked the Marine Barracks or not?? Pretty simple question.. even for you to answer. Instead we will get hours of America and Israel bashingDont forget to throw in a poor brown person jibe or two...and how we are all racists for just wanting to nuke brown people Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #9 August 20, 2008 QuoteDid Iran support the terrorists who attacked the Marine Barracks or not?? Let's not forget how the US supported the mujahideen in Afghanistan (including al Qaeda) as "freedom fighters" under Reagan and Bush I. The distinction between "freedom fighters" and "terrorists" often has more to do with political expedience than with any substantive difference.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #10 August 20, 2008 Are you equating the the Marines in Beirut as being equal to the Russians in Afghanistan?? Sure sounds like it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #11 August 20, 2008 QuoteAre you equating the the Marines in Beirut as being equal to the Russians in Afghanistan?? Sure sounds like it. I'm equating al Qaeda to al Qaeda (al Qaeda == al Qaeda) and the mujahideen to jihadists (mujahideen == jihadists). Which, of course means one man's (Reagan's) freedom fighter is another man's (Bush II's) terrorist.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites livendive 8 #12 August 20, 2008 Quote Did Iran support the terrorists who attacked the Marine Barracks or not?? Why would you refer to people who attack foreign military targets as "terrorists"? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nerdgirl 0 #13 August 20, 2008 QuoteQuote Did Iran support the terrorists who attacked the Marine Barracks or not?? Why would you refer to people who attack foreign military targets as "terrorists"? If they are doing it as non-state actors, yes. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites livendive 8 #14 August 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote Did Iran support the terrorists who attacked the Marine Barracks or not?? Why would you refer to people who attack foreign military targets as "terrorists"? If they are doing it as non-state actors, yes. VR/Marg Personally, I think the term relates more to the targets than the sponsors. In my mind, targetting civilians = terrorism. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,476 #15 August 20, 2008 > Are you equating the the Marines in Beirut as being equal to the > Russians in Afghanistan?? I'd say they're not even close. Beirut deaths from state-sponsored terrorism: 299, all military. Afghanistan deaths from state-sponsored terrorism: ~14,000, mostly civilian. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites NickDG 23 #16 August 20, 2008 >>How about the Iranian backed and supplied explosives that killed over 200 American Marines ... or is that a freedom fighter to you??<< You take that back . . . I'm a former Marine and when that happened it hurt me deeply. When any Marine dies I feel it. And my definition of a terrorist is the same as for any common criminal. No more, no less. And I believe the Marines Corps should only be unleashed in declared wars against state nations that attacked us first. They should not to be sent out looking for Jr. Al Capones on the whim of some fucktard in Washington. NickD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #17 August 20, 2008 I remember the barracks explosion and the events surrounding it well. The Multi National force was sent there to provide a buffer between the factions who were trying to kill each other. Iran was then and has been at war with the US since the downfall of the Shah. More Americans need to realize this.. or we are in for ANOTHER rude awakening like we did when Bin Laden made his point that we were at war with his organization from the time they declared war on us. People like Darius seem to want to portray Hizbollah and Islamic Jihad as freedom fighters...I define them as terrorist scum.. and ANYONE who wishes to participate in "martyrdom" operations needs to be hunted down WORLDWIDE and sent to Allah just as fast as we can get them there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites gkc1436 3 #18 August 21, 2008 >How about the Iranian backed and supplied explosives that killed over 200 American Marines ... or is that a freedom fighter to you?? How about when we funded and armed iraq against iran? Or the original sin of placing the Shah in power... Terrorist's come in all shapes, sizes's, colors, and government's. That being said.......Call me when Iran is funding radical canadians who are blowing up tourists at niagra falls. Until then, accept the fact that if we fuck around in everybodys backyard. sooner or later, someone will kick us in the balls for doing so. g Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bodypilot90 0 #19 August 21, 2008 Quote People like Darius seem to want to portray Hizbollah and Islamic Jihad as freedom fighters...I define them as terrorist scum.. and ANYONE who wishes to participate in "martyrdom" operations needs to be hunted down WORLDWIDE and sent to Allah just as fast as we can get them there. we completely agree on something Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #20 August 21, 2008 Quote How about when we funded and armed iraq against iran? Or the original sin of placing the Shah in power... Terrorist's come in all shapes, sizes's, colors, and government's. That being said.......Call me when Iran is funding radical canadians who are blowing up tourists at niagra falls. Until then, accept the fact that if we fuck around in everybodys backyard. sooner or later, someone will kick us in the balls for doing so. Hmmm interesting.. perhaps a bit of reading might be in order for you....Sadaam did not need to be prodded into attacking Iran... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Iraq_War Saddam Hussein biographers have described Saddam's anti-Iranianism, developed in his formative years living with his virulently anti-Iranian uncle Khairallah Talfah as a factor in his later foreign policy, including the Iran-Iraq War.[8][9] Talfah was the author of Three Whom God Should Not Have Created: Persians, Jews, and Flies, a pamphlet Saddam's government was later to republish.[10] On balance we can argue till we are blue in the face....but the fact remains we have been at war with Iran for about 30 years since the Mullahs uttered fatwa's against YOU...the great Satan. Just remember , you have a target on YOUR forhead too. MOIS and the IRG has been putting people here for years..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,476 #21 August 21, 2008 >Sadaam did not need to be prodded into attacking Iran... No one said he did. We did, however, fund, arm and give him military intelligence for use against Iran. The enemy of my enemy and all that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #22 August 21, 2008 Yup we sure did.. He was SUCH a dissapointment... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites gkc1436 3 #23 August 21, 2008 "In 1953 the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran's popular Prime Minister, Mohammed Massadegh. The Eisenhower Administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons; but the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development. And it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs."[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi Like i said, fuck around in peoples backyard long enough...etc..etc Or, maybe this time they will play a card out of our deck and pay someone to kick us in the balls. Hmmm, Russia maybe? g Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #24 August 21, 2008 Quote"In 1953 the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran's popular Prime Minister, Mohammed Massadegh. The Eisenhower Administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons; but the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development. And it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs."[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi Like i said, fuck around in peoples backyard long enough...etc..etc Or, maybe this time they will play a card out of our deck and pay someone to kick us in the balls. Hmmm, Russia maybe? g I understand what you're saying, but Russia thinks more of themselves than they really are at this point. They can walk into Georgia and buzz some rickety bombers around our coast, but kicking any world power in the balls ain't in the cards. If you're talking about distracting us, pitching a fit about missile defense, or screwing with their neighbors then yes, they can do that. I assume by kick in the balls you mean significantly destroy all or a large portion of our military and/or country. We are undoubtedly spread thin, but Russia would not be a formidable enemy in declared war. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #25 August 21, 2008 Did you read the REST of the link you posted.. The Shah assumed the throne far earlier than 1953.. and Iran was on a path of destabilization since the Soviets were doing everything they could in that area. Snip from your link Quote In the midst of World War II in 1941, Nazi Germany began Operation Barbarossa and invaded the Soviet Union, breaking the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. This had a major impact on Iran as the country had declared neutrality in the conflict.[2] During the subsequent military invasion and occupation, the joint Allied and Soviet command forced Reza Shah to abdicate in favor of his son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. He replaced his father on the throne on September 16, 1941. It was hoped that the younger prince would be more open to influence from the pro-Allied West, which later proved to be the case. Subsequent to his succession as Shah, Iran became a major conduit for British and, later, American aid to the USSR during the war. This massive supply effort became known as the Persian Corridor and marked the first large-scale American and Western involvement in Iran, an involvement that would continue to grow until the successful revolution against the Iranian monarchy in 1979. In the early 1950s, there was a political crisis centered in Iran that commanded the focused attention of British and American intelligence agencies. In 1951 Dr. Mossadegh came to office, committed to re-establishing democracy and constitutional monarchy, and to nationalizing the Iranian petroleum industry, which was controlled by the British. From the start he erroneously believed that the Americans, who had no interest in the Anglo-Iranian Oil company, would support his nationalization plan. He was buoyed by the American Ambassador, Henry Grady. However, during these events, the Americans supported the British, and, fearing that the Communists with the help of the Soviets were poised to overthrow the government, they decided to remove Mossadegh Just like now.. its ALL about the oil....better protect your balls... there is a LOT of kicking yet to do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
billvon 2,476 #2 August 20, 2008 >When the Afghani resistance got organized and started kicking Russian >ass all the mothers and fathers in Russia began raising hell about why >they were losing their sons for pointless reasons. Well, to be fair, the reason the Afghani resistance (the Mujahideen) got organized is that we started sending explosives, weapons, ammunition and instructors over there. I think we were spending over a billion dollars a year supporting the Mujahideen at one point. It's hard _not_ to get organized with that amount of money, training and weapons coming in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #3 August 20, 2008 QuoteMost every war begins with an over reaction on someone's part Well we still have people reacting to 9-11. 3000 people died a horrifying event off course but when you think we have killed 10 to 100 times that amount just in Iraq you might be able to put it in perspective. The American populace is paranoid because they have never had to deal with such events. So in a way I understand the paranoia yet at the same time if you are looking at the world and peoples reactions or over reactions we are the kings. I think this is just a byproduct of living in a great safe country. What I do however not understand is how so many fail to react or easily excuse the massive loss of humane life we are responsible for. I think these are scary times because people are very likely to over react. We have way to many people who have zero facts and basically run on fear. I know a few of my GF friends who don’t know me at all just know that I was born in Iran have asked her “ are you sure he is not a terrorist?” That’s not a joke it has happened many times. Whenever you have ignorance, paranoia, and sheep mentality combined bad things happen. I wouldn’t be surprised if one day there is a lynchmob out side my house just because I am brown. QuoteBesides, what happened to walk softly and carry a big stick? Russia's nuclear footing is in disarray and disrepair. And both they and the Iranians know if they cross the line to the point we seriously start worrying about a "real" impending threat to America, we'd turn them into a smoking hole in the ground. And while some argue radical Muslims will commit suicide for the cause, that's only the small fish, not the boys at the top. All they want to do is stay in power. I always find the movie action hero way of thinking as the dimmest view of the world. First if you want to nuke a country that has been a place for the terrorist or Islamic radicals; you would have to start by nuking the president’s best buddy’s country. The Arabs have so much money they own him so that will not happen. I would hope the world and most Americans would not just sit there and allow there country to destroy yet another country that poses ZERO threat to our home land, but then again we do have a lot of stupid people.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #4 August 20, 2008 What is your definition of terrorist?I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #5 August 20, 2008 QuoteWhat is your definition of terrorist? How about the Iranian backed and supplied explosives that killed over 200 American Marines ... or is that a freedom fighter to you?? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #6 August 20, 2008 QuoteHow about the Iranian backed and supplied explosives that killed over 200 American Marines ... or is that a freedom fighter to you?? Is it only Iranian backed explosives that qualify it as a terrorist? When it is only the race or nationality of a person that makes you decide what someone is or not guess what your racists. If its giving explosives to bad people to kill troops from another country……….hey just read Bills post there is a good example for you. So are you saying the United States is a terrorist organization? I don’t think many would agree with you or maybe you just hate brown people. Still you failed to define anything other then your self. Try harder.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #7 August 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteWhat is your definition of terrorist? How about the Iranian backed and supplied explosives that killed over 200 American Marines ... or is that a freedom fighter to you?? Not too dissimilar from Plastic Irish paying for Plastic Explosives.... Or many of our countries arming people that are freedom fighters to some and terrorists to others. Depends upon ones point of view. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #8 August 20, 2008 Just the kind of post I expected of you DariusDid Iran support the terrorists who attacked the Marine Barracks or not?? Pretty simple question.. even for you to answer. Instead we will get hours of America and Israel bashingDont forget to throw in a poor brown person jibe or two...and how we are all racists for just wanting to nuke brown people Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #9 August 20, 2008 QuoteDid Iran support the terrorists who attacked the Marine Barracks or not?? Let's not forget how the US supported the mujahideen in Afghanistan (including al Qaeda) as "freedom fighters" under Reagan and Bush I. The distinction between "freedom fighters" and "terrorists" often has more to do with political expedience than with any substantive difference.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #10 August 20, 2008 Are you equating the the Marines in Beirut as being equal to the Russians in Afghanistan?? Sure sounds like it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #11 August 20, 2008 QuoteAre you equating the the Marines in Beirut as being equal to the Russians in Afghanistan?? Sure sounds like it. I'm equating al Qaeda to al Qaeda (al Qaeda == al Qaeda) and the mujahideen to jihadists (mujahideen == jihadists). Which, of course means one man's (Reagan's) freedom fighter is another man's (Bush II's) terrorist.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #12 August 20, 2008 Quote Did Iran support the terrorists who attacked the Marine Barracks or not?? Why would you refer to people who attack foreign military targets as "terrorists"? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #13 August 20, 2008 QuoteQuote Did Iran support the terrorists who attacked the Marine Barracks or not?? Why would you refer to people who attack foreign military targets as "terrorists"? If they are doing it as non-state actors, yes. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #14 August 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote Did Iran support the terrorists who attacked the Marine Barracks or not?? Why would you refer to people who attack foreign military targets as "terrorists"? If they are doing it as non-state actors, yes. VR/Marg Personally, I think the term relates more to the targets than the sponsors. In my mind, targetting civilians = terrorism. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,476 #15 August 20, 2008 > Are you equating the the Marines in Beirut as being equal to the > Russians in Afghanistan?? I'd say they're not even close. Beirut deaths from state-sponsored terrorism: 299, all military. Afghanistan deaths from state-sponsored terrorism: ~14,000, mostly civilian. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NickDG 23 #16 August 20, 2008 >>How about the Iranian backed and supplied explosives that killed over 200 American Marines ... or is that a freedom fighter to you??<< You take that back . . . I'm a former Marine and when that happened it hurt me deeply. When any Marine dies I feel it. And my definition of a terrorist is the same as for any common criminal. No more, no less. And I believe the Marines Corps should only be unleashed in declared wars against state nations that attacked us first. They should not to be sent out looking for Jr. Al Capones on the whim of some fucktard in Washington. NickD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #17 August 20, 2008 I remember the barracks explosion and the events surrounding it well. The Multi National force was sent there to provide a buffer between the factions who were trying to kill each other. Iran was then and has been at war with the US since the downfall of the Shah. More Americans need to realize this.. or we are in for ANOTHER rude awakening like we did when Bin Laden made his point that we were at war with his organization from the time they declared war on us. People like Darius seem to want to portray Hizbollah and Islamic Jihad as freedom fighters...I define them as terrorist scum.. and ANYONE who wishes to participate in "martyrdom" operations needs to be hunted down WORLDWIDE and sent to Allah just as fast as we can get them there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gkc1436 3 #18 August 21, 2008 >How about the Iranian backed and supplied explosives that killed over 200 American Marines ... or is that a freedom fighter to you?? How about when we funded and armed iraq against iran? Or the original sin of placing the Shah in power... Terrorist's come in all shapes, sizes's, colors, and government's. That being said.......Call me when Iran is funding radical canadians who are blowing up tourists at niagra falls. Until then, accept the fact that if we fuck around in everybodys backyard. sooner or later, someone will kick us in the balls for doing so. g Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #19 August 21, 2008 Quote People like Darius seem to want to portray Hizbollah and Islamic Jihad as freedom fighters...I define them as terrorist scum.. and ANYONE who wishes to participate in "martyrdom" operations needs to be hunted down WORLDWIDE and sent to Allah just as fast as we can get them there. we completely agree on something Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #20 August 21, 2008 Quote How about when we funded and armed iraq against iran? Or the original sin of placing the Shah in power... Terrorist's come in all shapes, sizes's, colors, and government's. That being said.......Call me when Iran is funding radical canadians who are blowing up tourists at niagra falls. Until then, accept the fact that if we fuck around in everybodys backyard. sooner or later, someone will kick us in the balls for doing so. Hmmm interesting.. perhaps a bit of reading might be in order for you....Sadaam did not need to be prodded into attacking Iran... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Iraq_War Saddam Hussein biographers have described Saddam's anti-Iranianism, developed in his formative years living with his virulently anti-Iranian uncle Khairallah Talfah as a factor in his later foreign policy, including the Iran-Iraq War.[8][9] Talfah was the author of Three Whom God Should Not Have Created: Persians, Jews, and Flies, a pamphlet Saddam's government was later to republish.[10] On balance we can argue till we are blue in the face....but the fact remains we have been at war with Iran for about 30 years since the Mullahs uttered fatwa's against YOU...the great Satan. Just remember , you have a target on YOUR forhead too. MOIS and the IRG has been putting people here for years..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,476 #21 August 21, 2008 >Sadaam did not need to be prodded into attacking Iran... No one said he did. We did, however, fund, arm and give him military intelligence for use against Iran. The enemy of my enemy and all that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #22 August 21, 2008 Yup we sure did.. He was SUCH a dissapointment... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gkc1436 3 #23 August 21, 2008 "In 1953 the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran's popular Prime Minister, Mohammed Massadegh. The Eisenhower Administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons; but the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development. And it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs."[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi Like i said, fuck around in peoples backyard long enough...etc..etc Or, maybe this time they will play a card out of our deck and pay someone to kick us in the balls. Hmmm, Russia maybe? g Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #24 August 21, 2008 Quote"In 1953 the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran's popular Prime Minister, Mohammed Massadegh. The Eisenhower Administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons; but the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development. And it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs."[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi Like i said, fuck around in peoples backyard long enough...etc..etc Or, maybe this time they will play a card out of our deck and pay someone to kick us in the balls. Hmmm, Russia maybe? g I understand what you're saying, but Russia thinks more of themselves than they really are at this point. They can walk into Georgia and buzz some rickety bombers around our coast, but kicking any world power in the balls ain't in the cards. If you're talking about distracting us, pitching a fit about missile defense, or screwing with their neighbors then yes, they can do that. I assume by kick in the balls you mean significantly destroy all or a large portion of our military and/or country. We are undoubtedly spread thin, but Russia would not be a formidable enemy in declared war. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #25 August 21, 2008 Did you read the REST of the link you posted.. The Shah assumed the throne far earlier than 1953.. and Iran was on a path of destabilization since the Soviets were doing everything they could in that area. Snip from your link Quote In the midst of World War II in 1941, Nazi Germany began Operation Barbarossa and invaded the Soviet Union, breaking the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. This had a major impact on Iran as the country had declared neutrality in the conflict.[2] During the subsequent military invasion and occupation, the joint Allied and Soviet command forced Reza Shah to abdicate in favor of his son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. He replaced his father on the throne on September 16, 1941. It was hoped that the younger prince would be more open to influence from the pro-Allied West, which later proved to be the case. Subsequent to his succession as Shah, Iran became a major conduit for British and, later, American aid to the USSR during the war. This massive supply effort became known as the Persian Corridor and marked the first large-scale American and Western involvement in Iran, an involvement that would continue to grow until the successful revolution against the Iranian monarchy in 1979. In the early 1950s, there was a political crisis centered in Iran that commanded the focused attention of British and American intelligence agencies. In 1951 Dr. Mossadegh came to office, committed to re-establishing democracy and constitutional monarchy, and to nationalizing the Iranian petroleum industry, which was controlled by the British. From the start he erroneously believed that the Americans, who had no interest in the Anglo-Iranian Oil company, would support his nationalization plan. He was buoyed by the American Ambassador, Henry Grady. However, during these events, the Americans supported the British, and, fearing that the Communists with the help of the Soviets were poised to overthrow the government, they decided to remove Mossadegh Just like now.. its ALL about the oil....better protect your balls... there is a LOT of kicking yet to do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
