Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]
Offlined33p
Welcome to Violence

Registered: 07/12/03
Posts: 5,381
Loc: the shores of Tripoli
Last seen: 10 years, 8 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: BrAiN]
    #7570922 - 10/28/07 08:33 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

BrAiN said:
Quote:

d33p said:
Brain, why does it seem like you either ignore or seriously downplay the effects of the soviet's meddling in Chile.




I never denied this involvement. But the USSR didn't just INSTALL a Marxist leader. Their own citizens elected him. I'd be singing a different story if the USSR just overthrew the gov't with their OWN leader in their own coup like they did in Afghanistan in 1979.

Why are you putting words in my mouth?




Why do you put so much faith into elections of 1970s Chilie? Is it because the US didn't get what it wanted? The close margins? Their own citizens may elected him but when it was by a margin of less than 2% in an election likely rife with voting fraud. The situation was a bit more complicated than you make it out to be. Is it allright for the soviets to manipulate a country against the US's interests as long as they don't do so blatently? Is discretion all that matters to you? Results are what counts imo.

Where did i put workds in your mouth.


--------------------
I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends.

bang bang


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineThe_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN Flag
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: BrAiN]
    #7570927 - 10/28/07 08:33 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

liquidating our population of native americans i think is one of them.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrAiN
Art Fag
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: d33p]
    #7570942 - 10/28/07 08:39 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:


Where did i put workds in your mouth.




That I deny or downplay the USSR's involvement. I never said anything like that. You're just straight up saying LIES about me. I'm trying to focus on how thousands of people end up dying because of coups WE help instigate and everyone's throwing around the "WAaaa! Waaa! The USSR did it TOO so it was justifed bullshit."

I don't give a crap. The USSR was evil! There I said it! Can we move on now and just talk about what started this whole debate?

Whether or not the CIA was involved in the Iran/Chile coups? Everyone denies it and the second we bust out facts to prove it, everyone tries to divert attention away from the fact that they were wrong by suddenly talking about the USSR. At BEST we were both guilty of fucking up other countries.

I don't give a shit about the USSR and I'm not saying we or they were right. I'm trying to say that it's no wonder countries like Iran are pissed at us and we're trying to act like we never did anything wrong to them. They have every right to be pissed at us. Shit... at least can't our government just apologize to the Iranian people and say "Sorry for fucking you guys in the ass, but we were fighting communists?"

Oops! Wait. Madeline Albright alrighy did that!

You're right.. there WAS voter fraud. Everyone wanted the Shaw to be in power. They wanted it SO much they ousted him 20 years later in a massive revolution.

There MUST have been voter fraud in Chile. I mean... shit. Why would anyone want a president that decided to nationalize the oil industry for the benefit of his own people when they could have a dictator like Pinochet murdering thousands of his own people?

Gah! What was I thinking?


Edited by BrAiN (10/28/07 09:01 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlined33p
Welcome to Violence

Registered: 07/12/03
Posts: 5,381
Loc: the shores of Tripoli
Last seen: 10 years, 8 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: BrAiN]
    #7571018 - 10/28/07 09:02 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

BrAiN said:
Quote:


Where did i put workds in your mouth.




That I deny or downplay the USSR's involvement. I never said anything like that. Nowhere in any declassified documents does it say the gov't and CIA were worried about VOTER FRAUD but just that we were worried about Communist influence. Like I said.. I admit that the soviets were meddling as well. You're just straight up saying LIES about me. I'm trying to focus on how thousands of people end up dying because of coups WE help instigate and everyone's throwing around the "WAaaa! Waaa! The USSR did it TOO so it was justifed bullshit." I don't give a crap. The USSR was evil! There I said it! Can we move on now and just talk about what started this whole debate? Whether or not the CIA was involved in the Iran/Chile coups? Everyone denies it and the second we bust out facts to prove it, everyone tries to divert attention away from the fact that they were wrong by suddenly talking about the USSR. At BEST we were both guilty of fucking up other countries.

If you guys think that the possibility of the USSR causing election fraud is enough to warrant a military coup.. well shit.. we've got plenty accusations of it here at home. Why aren't you guys all up in arms telling the Democratic party of the United States to fund the Al Gore military coup?






I said it "seems like." Is english not your first language?

I just disagree with you over fundamental things. I think it was necessary for the US to do "evil" things. There is no definitive right and wrong or black and white, just a blur of grey where a government must do what it can to secure their interests and the interests of their allies. The expansion of the soviet sphere of influence had to be stopped and "they were doing it too" was as good a justification as any. The CIA was involved as it should have been and pinochet left a lot to be desired but he was better than the alternative.

USSR involvement was enough to warrent a military coup.


--------------------
I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends.

bang bang


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrAiN
Art Fag
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: d33p]
    #7571125 - 10/28/07 09:33 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

d33p said:
Quote:

BrAiN said:
Quote:


Where did i put workds in your mouth.




That I deny or downplay the USSR's involvement. I never said anything like that. Nowhere in any declassified documents does it say the gov't and CIA were worried about VOTER FRAUD but just that we were worried about Communist influence. Like I said.. I admit that the soviets were meddling as well. You're just straight up saying LIES about me. I'm trying to focus on how thousands of people end up dying because of coups WE help instigate and everyone's throwing around the "WAaaa! Waaa! The USSR did it TOO so it was justifed bullshit." I don't give a crap. The USSR was evil! There I said it! Can we move on now and just talk about what started this whole debate? Whether or not the CIA was involved in the Iran/Chile coups? Everyone denies it and the second we bust out facts to prove it, everyone tries to divert attention away from the fact that they were wrong by suddenly talking about the USSR. At BEST we were both guilty of fucking up other countries.

If you guys think that the possibility of the USSR causing election fraud is enough to warrant a military coup.. well shit.. we've got plenty accusations of it here at home. Why aren't you guys all up in arms telling the Democratic party of the United States to fund the Al Gore military coup?






I said it "seems like." Is english not your first language?

I just disagree with you over fundamental things. I think it was necessary for the US to do "evil" things. There is no definitive right and wrong or black and white, just a blur of grey where a government must do what it can to secure their interests and the interests of their allies. The expansion of the soviet sphere of influence had to be stopped and "they were doing it too" was as good a justification as any. The CIA was involved as it should have been and pinochet left a lot to be desired but he was better than the alternative.

USSR involvement was enough to warrent a military coup.




Well... we agree to disagree then. But like I said.. whether or not it was "right" is sort of not really relevant to my argument. I'm really talking about whether or not Iran has a right to be pissed at us for our involvement. We can both argue until our faces our blue what the people of Chile and Iran really wanted. Hell.. back in the day I bet it was as divided and debated amongst their citizens as it was during the 2000 election here.

Like I said... my point: Take a look at the situation through an Iranian's shoes. You're in Iran... the USSR and Russia are both competing for power and BOTH fucking you in the ass. America finally wins and has major involvement in pushing the Shaw on your country whether you want it or not.

Now pretend the same thing is happening to YOU in America. If you were being played as a pawn by two other countries and the leader that finally got the nudge by another country ended up being an asshole and that asshole sits there and remains in power because another country keeps giving him support.

We Americans wouldn't stand for it? Would you? I don't know about you, but I'd be fed up with that country.. fed up enough to storm THEIR embassy and to demand to the world to be taken seriously.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrAiN
Art Fag
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: d33p]
    #7571159 - 10/28/07 09:43 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

The CIA was involved as it should have been and pinochet left a lot to be desired but he was better than the alternative.





And since we've already gone off topic I might as well ask you this:

So a facist dictator that murders thousands of his own people that oppose him is better than a communist? Remember.. He was a Marxist... not a Stalinist. Allende refused to use force against any of his opponents despite the fact that the USSR encouraged him to. Besides.. he was elected as a president.. someone who would only have been in office for 6 years wheras a dictator.. you're stuck with.

In addition to murdering h3000 of his countrymen to stay in power, torturing 30,000, Pinochet was convicted of plenty of other crimes including tax evasion and imbezzlement embezzlement. In fact, he was eventually convicted of 300 different crimes while in office.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: d33p]
    #7571760 - 10/29/07 03:04 AM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

d33p said:
There is no definitive right and wrong or black and white, just a blur of grey where a government must do what it can to secure their interests and the interests of their allies.




No, there isn't a "blur of grey". This thinking is false. One government cannot hold itself to be sovereign if it disregards the sovereignity of another. Clearly the line of thinking you have outlined is one that our government assumes to be evident, but it has no basis.

Quote:

The Declaration of Independence said:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.




Governments instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.... hhhm.... I have to admit, I don't see anything about foreign countries violating the sovereignity of another country through covert means... :shrug:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: BrAiN]
    #7573208 - 10/29/07 02:40 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

BrAiN said:
Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Democratically elected? Then how come it was so easy to overcome the supposed will of the people?




Yes.. Allenda was democratically elected. PLAIN FACT.

http://foia.state.gov/Reports/HincheyReport.asp




I was not aware that Allenda was elected president of Iran. If you want to make a thread about Chile, go for it. I'm glad to hear that you acknowledge the Soviet threat. This is what dominated foreign policy for 50 years. Rightly so. It was not always well prosecuted and hind sight is perfect but in the end, we won. They lost. Contemplate, if you will, the ramifications of their victory. Not pretty.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrAiN
Art Fag
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #7573223 - 10/29/07 02:44 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

fair enough... At least the Shaw wasn't as bad as who we helped install in Chile.

You can't deny, though, the right Iranians had to be really pissed at us or be really suprised at what happened in 1979. Being someone else's pawn in a chess game really takes away your country's dignity. They probably would have been just as pissed at the soviets eventually and rightly so. Just look at what happened in the Ganny-stan.

> I was not aware that Allenda was elected president of Iran

You just love twisting around people's posts, don't you?


Edited by BrAiN (10/29/07 02:50 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: BrAiN]
    #7573233 - 10/29/07 02:48 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Well no, I don't. You just went completely off on a tangent with Chile. I had no idea we were talking about Chile in the 70s. I daresay that I would expect the CIA to be a good bit more effective there than in Iran. Not omnipotent, but better.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrAiN
Art Fag
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #7573243 - 10/29/07 02:52 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

I was just using it as another example of the effectiveness of the CIA at helping topple gov'ts during the cold war. I thought there were quite a few things in common with the situation in Iran.

And I wouldn't call it a tangent. I wasn't respnding to the Iran-part of the threat so much as I was about the power of the CIA during the cold war. Ain't nothing wrong with bustin' out a few examples that are related to the issue at hand.

Tagents are what that FecalBongwhatshisname guy goes on here in the forums :P


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: BrAiN]
    #7573298 - 10/29/07 03:09 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Ya know, I'm not gonna go all nuts about this, but they don't really compare that well either, when discussing CIA effectiveness. Iran is right in Russia's backyard and Chile is a good bit distant. I just get tired of hearing people blather endlessly about how the CIA "installed" the Shah and and and, well, blowback (that is just a stupid word. Try "consequences". It's been around for centuries.). I'd call it a nudge.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlined33p
Welcome to Violence

Registered: 07/12/03
Posts: 5,381
Loc: the shores of Tripoli
Last seen: 10 years, 8 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: BrAiN]
    #7573530 - 10/29/07 04:19 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

BrAiN said:
And since we've already gone off topic I might as well ask you this:

So a facist dictator that murders thousands of his own people that oppose him is better than a communist? Remember.. He was a Marxist... not a Stalinist. Allende refused to use force against any of his opponents despite the fact that the USSR encouraged him to. Besides.. he was elected as a president.. someone who would only have been in office for 6 years wheras a dictator.. you're stuck with.

In addition to murdering h3000 of his countrymen to stay in power, torturing 30,000, Pinochet was convicted of plenty of other crimes including tax evasion and imbezzlement embezzlement. In fact, he was eventually convicted of 300 different crimes while in office.




I feel that had Allende continued holding power the country would have continued descending into hell(debatable how much the CIA was responsible for). As, it did measures would of have been taken to hold onto power quickly turning it into a more stalinist-like regime with closer ties to the Soviets and increasingly hostile to the US. Ultimately, pinochet was a good thing for Chile and the support for him him even into the '90s is evidence of that. It's shitty to think of trading human life for ideology that I perceive to be more right, but... fuck, i don't even know what to say to make that sound less horrible.


--------------------
I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends.

bang bang


Edited by d33p (10/29/07 04:29 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlined33p
Welcome to Violence

Registered: 07/12/03
Posts: 5,381
Loc: the shores of Tripoli
Last seen: 10 years, 8 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: fireworks_god]
    #7573535 - 10/29/07 04:21 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

fireworks_god said:
Quote:

d33p said:
There is no definitive right and wrong or black and white, just a blur of grey where a government must do what it can to secure their interests and the interests of their allies.




No, there isn't a "blur of grey". This thinking is false. One government cannot hold itself to be sovereign if it disregards the sovereignity of another. Clearly the line of thinking you have outlined is one that our government assumes to be evident, but it has no basis.

Quote:

The Declaration of Independence said:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.




Governments instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.... hhhm.... I have to admit, I don't see anything about foreign countries violating the sovereignity of another country through covert means... :shrug:




I didn't say that it doesn't suck.


--------------------
I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends.

bang bang


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrAiN
Art Fag
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: d33p]
    #7573706 - 10/29/07 05:18 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

d33p said:
Quote:

BrAiN said:
And since we've already gone off topic I might as well ask you this:

So a facist dictator that murders thousands of his own people that oppose him is better than a communist? Remember.. He was a Marxist... not a Stalinist. Allende refused to use force against any of his opponents despite the fact that the USSR encouraged him to. Besides.. he was elected as a president.. someone who would only have been in office for 6 years wheras a dictator.. you're stuck with.

In addition to murdering h3000 of his countrymen to stay in power, torturing 30,000, Pinochet was convicted of plenty of other crimes including tax evasion and imbezzlement embezzlement. In fact, he was eventually convicted of 300 different crimes while in office.




I feel that had Allende continued holding power the country would have continued descending into hell(debatable how much the CIA was responsible for). As, it did measures would of have been taken to hold onto power quickly turning it into a more stalinist-like regime with closer ties to the Soviets and increasingly hostile to the US. Ultimately, pinochet was a good thing for Chile and the support for him him even into the '90s is evidence of that. It's shitty to think of trading human life for ideology that I perceive to be more right, but... fuck, i don't even know what to say to make that sound less horrible.




Eh well.. touce'.. touche.. (sp?). whatever

This really just comes down to guessing and opinion here. No one really would have known what Allende's government really would have been like.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDisco Cat
iS A PoiNdexteR

Registered: 09/15/00
Posts: 2,601
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: Spanki]
    #7577688 - 10/30/07 05:24 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

So... there is no evidence that Iran is building a nuke, only suspicions based on thin reasoning.

----------------------------------------------------

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States on Monday brushed aside the UN nuclear watchdog agency chief's warning that there was no proof Iran seeks atomic weapons, and invited him to stay out of diplomacy with Tehran.

Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told CNN Sunday that he had no evidence Iran was building nuclear weapons and accused US leaders of adding "fuel to the fire" with their warlike rhetoric.

"He will say what he will. He is the head of a technical agency," US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters. "I think we can handle diplomacy on this one."

"We appreciate the work that the IAEA is performing but it is the member states of the international community that are going to be responsible of the diplomacy with respect to Iran and its nuclear program," said McCormack.

At the White House, spokeswoman Dana Perino said there was no doubt about Iran's plans because "this is a country that is enriching and reprocessing uranium and the reason that one does that is to lead towards a nuclear weapon."

Uranium enrichment and reprocessing produces fuel for nuclear reactors, but can also be a key step to creating the core of an atomic bomb. Iran says it wants a civilian energy program, not an atomic arsenal.

Asked whether any country enriching uranium seeks nuclear weapons, US National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe clarified Perino's remarks.

"I would say that we're concerned about Iran doing this because they could have the capability to have a nuclear weapon. Each country is different, but obviously Dana was asked and was talking about Iran," he said.


Iran's leaders have repeatedly said they will never suspend enrichment, in flagrant defiance of repeated UN Security Council resolutions calling on Tehran to suspend the process.

"We have put on the table for Iran a path for them to get a civil nuclear program. And all they have to do to get there is to suspend its enrichment of reprocessing of uranium and they can come to the table and we can have a further discussion," said Perino.

"It's the Iranians who have decided not to be at that table," she said.

The United States has sharply escalated its rhetoric against the Islamic Republic, while slapping a new set of sanctions on its Revolutionary Guards, accused of spreading weapons of mass destruction, and its elite Quds Force, which was designated as a supporter of terrorism.

"Iran is the largest national security challenge we have in regards to nuclear weapons today," said Perino, who contrasted Tehran's approach to North Korea's agreement to dismantle its nuclear weapons program.

"We are in discussions with North Korea, through the six-party talks, and that is because North Korea agreed to give up its weapons and make a full declaration of activities that they've been pursuing," she said.

She was referring to negotiations grouping China, Japan, Russia, North and South Korea and the United States, and a deal offering Pyongyang economic and diplomatic rewards if it gives up it nuclear weapons program.

"Iran could have the same option, but they've chosen not to," the spokeswoman said.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: Disco Cat]
    #7577745 - 10/30/07 05:42 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Disco Cat said:
So... there is no evidence that Iran is building a nuke, only suspicions based on thin reasoning.

----------------------------------------------------






Thin? I don't think so since they often assert their right to have them, have zero need for nuclear power due to their oil wealth, and turned down an offer to supply them with processed fuel in return for their sending the waste back.

I suppose there is pretty "thin" evidence that 2 plus 2 equals 4 at your school. At my school they considered it pretty strong.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDisco Cat
iS A PoiNdexteR

Registered: 09/15/00
Posts: 2,601
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #7578194 - 10/30/07 07:46 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Actaully, their thin reasoning was exaplained by themselves and plainly highlighted above. You're analysis is lacking, but that's normal.

Their case is that normally these circumstances aren't a concern, but since it's Iran, and they don't trust Iran, they assume it's for nuclear weapons - without evidence.
"Evidence." If you have troubles with understanding that work, seek a dictionary.



Allah willing, we expect to soon join the club of the countries that have a nuclear industry, with all its branches, except the military one, in which we are not interested. We want to get what we're entitled to. I say unequivocally that for no price will we be willing to relinquish our legal and international right. I also say unequivocally to those who make false claims: Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons, but it will not give up its rights. Your provocation will not make us pursue nuclear weapons. We hope that you come to your senses soon and do not get the world involved in disputes and crises. - Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Iran's former president



The U.S. maintains that Iran does not need nuclear power due to its abundant oil reserves since nuclear power is more expensive for the Iranians to generate than oil-fired power. This argument has been contradicted by studies conducted by the National Academy of Sciences in the US, and by an investigation by the British Parliament. It is also contradicted by former policies of the United States government which encouraged and supported Iran's nuclear program.

A potential reason behind US resistance to an Iranian nuclear program lies in Middle Eastern geopolitics. In essence, the US feels that it must guard against even the possibility of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapons capability. Some nuclear technology is dual-use; i.e. it can be used for peaceful energy generation, and to develop nuclear weapons, a situation that resulted in India's nuclear weapons programme in the 1960s. A nuclear-armed Iran would dramatically change the balance of power in the middle east, weakening US influence. It could also encourage other middle eastern nations to develop nuclear weapons of their own further reducing US influence in a critical region.

In November 2006, Seymour Hersh described a classified draft assessment by the Central Intelligence Agency "challenging the White House's assumptions about how close Iran might be to building a nuclear bomb. He continued, "The CIA found no conclusive evidence, as yet, of a secret Iranian nuclear-weapons programme running parallel to the civilian operations that Iran has declared to the International Atomic Energy Agency,"




Zap, isn't it about time you just lay down and die, or at least shut up and stop lowering the IQ level of this forum with your bullshit?


Edited by Disco Cat (10/30/07 08:13 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #7578306 - 10/30/07 08:25 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Thin? I don't think so since they often assert their right to have them




They do have a right to have them. :sorry:

Quote:


...have zero need for nuclear power due to their oil wealth




Perhaps they realize how relying on non-renewable resources as a source for energy is a dead-end. :hehehe:

Quote:


, and turned down an offer to supply them with processed fuel in return for their sending the waste back.




Does the United States of America get supplied with processed fuel in return for returning their waste? :strokebeard: Why should Iran have to?


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 10 days
Re: So, whats the deal with Iran? [Re: Disco Cat]
    #7579458 - 10/31/07 05:30 AM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Zap, isn't it about time you just lay down and die, or at least shut up and stop lowering the IQ level of this forum with your bullshit?




Wow, grow up. If you can't debate like a civilized human being, perhaps it is you who should be vacating the forum.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* How to Deal With a Psychopath: Give Him Nuclear Bombs ekomstop 493 0 09/24/04 07:20 AM
by ekomstop
* Iran in new talks with SA on nuclear deal lonestar2004 407 0 11/07/05 03:11 PM
by lonestar2004
* Kerry would still supply Iran with nuclear fuel Great_Satan 1,607 9 10/10/04 12:12 PM
by Medley
* Iran, Venezuela discuss oil embargo. lonestar2004 1,449 14 08/18/05 12:12 AM
by Baby_Hitler
* May 1, 2005: No More Nuclear Excuses for War! march in new york
( 1 2 all )
starptv23 2,084 29 04/03/05 04:31 AM
by Silversoul
* Iran Will Allow U.N. Inspections of Nuclear Sites Zahid 718 3 10/22/03 11:50 PM
by Zahid
* Russia, EU in Deadlock Over Iran Atomic Ambitions daimyo 657 4 09/22/05 11:35 AM
by Redstorm
* Blair Urges U.N. to Consider Action On Iran daimyo 551 4 01/11/06 09:31 AM
by Seuss

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
5,960 topic views. 0 members, 6 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.028 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 15 queries.