Russia snubs US on Iran sanctions

  • 72 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for majwill24
majwill24

1355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 majwill24
Member since 2004 • 1355 Posts

I don't know about anyone else, but I have literally been on the edge of my seat worried that Russia would side with the US on the Iranian nuclear issue. To use the religious term "thank God" Russia is standing its grown against the US and Israeli agression and warmongering. This will also make it easier for China to side with the Iranians and avoid being isolated with such a stance.

Click here for the Good news!

Say what you will about Ahmadinejad, but he's doing a damn good job standing firm against the West, particularly the US and at the same time strengthening ties with the rising powers in Asia. IT really is a losing battle for the West and ISrael, all Iran need is to buy time until it can finally shift the balance of power away from Israel. From that point on, the Iran and the other Arab states will have so more options at the table when dealing with the Israeli issue.

Avatar image for gameguy6700
gameguy6700

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 gameguy6700
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

That's not a surprise, Russia and Iran have been good pals for a long time.

As for Ahmadenijad, I'd have more respect for him were he the actual, legitimately elected leader of Iran.

Avatar image for majwill24
majwill24

1355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 majwill24
Member since 2004 • 1355 Posts

That's not a surprise, Russia and Iran have been good pals for a long time.

As for Ahmadenijad, I'd have more respect for him were he the actual, legitimately elected leader of Iran.

gameguy6700

Well its hard to know how much vote tampering went on and if it would have had any impact on the election results. A partial recount and internal investigations showed that Ahmadinejad would still have won.

As for the western media, seriously you really can't take them seriously when it comes to covering non democratic nations. They will do anything to subvert the population and rally behind any opposition that can bring regime change. Even western liberal progressive have a militant view of ends justifying the means. Manipulating reports, new coverage and outright lying is all worth it if they can bring down non democratic governments. Why do you think China put so much energy blocking western net sites like youtube and facebook which is used by the CIA?

Avatar image for Stesilaus
Stesilaus

4999

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#4 Stesilaus
Member since 2007 • 4999 Posts

Russia clearly understands that the ultimate goal of the US, UK and EU is to install in Iran another pro-West Shah, who will not only allow Western companies to exploit Iran's oil reserves but also probably allow NATO to construct military bases and airbases in Iranian territory.

Given the extent to which Russia's economy depends on the Russian oil industry, and the proximity of Iran to many former Soviet Republics, it's hardly surprising that Russia doesn't want another Anglo-American puppet government in Iran.

Avatar image for fidosim
fidosim

12901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#5 fidosim
Member since 2003 • 12901 Posts
Glad to see we gave up that missile shield for a good purpose.
Avatar image for majwill24
majwill24

1355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 majwill24
Member since 2004 • 1355 Posts

Glad to see we gave up that missile shield for a good purpose.fidosim

Actually, you should welcome giving up the missile shield. Anything that weakens US foreign policy and aggression can only be a boon for the world and to Americans who are weary of wars, terrorism and financial burdens. I'm no expert on the matter, but economist still say its not too late save your country from imploding.Even comdeian Treasury secretary, who was laughed at earlier this year by the chinese for saying"Chinese financial assets are very safe," is finally starting to come around with a first step into some senseGeithner says Americans will have to save more

So try to look at it from an economic angle, not a security problem. Only those on the fringe see Iran as a threat to the US.

Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#7 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts
Glad to see we gave up that missile shield for a good purpose.fidosim
The creation of a missle defense shield would destroy MAD, which would create a whole new arms race.. Why hasn't there been any more major wars sense World War 2? Thats because of nuclear weapons and MAD make major war too costly.. You would think people would understand this basic knowledge what so ever.. Seriously people take a history course and Political Science 101.. Having a nuclear weapon is one of the greatest forms of defense because it pretty much garentees that no other country will attack you, because if they did you would olbiterate them with retaliation.
Avatar image for fidosim
fidosim

12901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#8 fidosim
Member since 2003 • 12901 Posts
[QUOTE="fidosim"]Glad to see we gave up that missile shield for a good purpose.sSubZerOo
The creation of a missle defense shield would destroy MAD, which would create a whole new arms race.. Why hasn't there been any more major wars sense World War 2? Thats because of nuclear weapons and MAD make major war too costly.. You would think people would understand this basic knowledge what so ever.. Seriously people take a history course and Political Science 101.. Having a nuclear weapon is one of the greatest forms of defense because it pretty much garentees that no other country will attack you, because if they did you would olbiterate them with retaliation.

No major wars since world war 2? Are you sober?
Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#9 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="fidosim"]Glad to see we gave up that missile shield for a good purpose.fidosim
The creation of a missle defense shield would destroy MAD, which would create a whole new arms race.. Why hasn't there been any more major wars sense World War 2? Thats because of nuclear weapons and MAD make major war too costly.. You would think people would understand this basic knowledge what so ever.. Seriously people take a history course and Political Science 101.. Having a nuclear weapon is one of the greatest forms of defense because it pretty much garentees that no other country will attack you, because if they did you would olbiterate them with retaliation.

No major wars since world war 2? Are you sober?

Korean War, Vietnam.. The Cold War was proof on both countries would not move on one another because of a nuclear war.. Those wars were not neccesary and they were based upon the failed policy of containment.. Nor were they exactly major sense World War 2.. They were with 2nd and 3rd world countries.. Not some 1st world high tech nation.
Avatar image for fidosim
fidosim

12901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#10 fidosim
Member since 2003 • 12901 Posts

[QUOTE="fidosim"]Glad to see we gave up that missile shield for a good purpose.majwill24

Actually, you should welcome giving up the missile shield. Anything that weakens US foreign policy and aggression can only be a boon for the world and to Americans who are weary of wars, terrorism and financial burdens. I'm no expert on the matter, but economist still say its not too late save your country from imploding.Even comdeian Treasury secretary, who was laughed at earlier this year by the chinese for saying"Chinese financial assets are very safe," is finally starting to come around with a first step into some senseGeithner says Americans will have to save more

So try to look at it from an economic angle, not a security problem. Only those on the fringe see Iran as a threat to the US.

Well ever since the regime we supported was overthrown by one that chants "death to America" and paints US flags on the ground so people can walk over them all day, we haven't been on the best terms with them. It's only natural that we see them as a threat. Anyway, if we give up our political dominance, our economic dominance will fade as well, which will not do well for us.
Avatar image for metroidfood
metroidfood

11175

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 metroidfood
Member since 2007 • 11175 Posts

Why do you think China put so much energy blocking western net sites like youtube and facebook which is used by the CIA?

majwill24

Because they're trying to keep their citizens safe from the free flow of information. :roll:

Also, I checked out your link, which does not support the claim you made. It's about a site like FB/Youtube, called A-Space, for CIA and other organizations to share info. Try reading your sources.

Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#12 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts
[QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="majwill24"]

Glad to see we gave up that missile shield for a good purpose.fidosim

Actually, you should welcome giving up the missile shield. Anything that weakens US foreign policy and aggression can only be a boon for the world and to Americans who are weary of wars, terrorism and financial burdens. I'm no expert on the matter, but economist still say its not too late save your country from imploding.Even comdeian Treasury secretary, who was laughed at earlier this year by the chinese for saying"Chinese financial assets are very safe," is finally starting to come around with a first step into some senseGeithner says Americans will have to save more

So try to look at it from an economic angle, not a security problem. Only those on the fringe see Iran as a threat to the US.

Well ever since the regime we supported was overthrown by one that chants "death to America" and paints US flags on the ground so people can walk over them all day, we haven't been on the best terms with them. It's only natural that we see them as a threat. Anyway, if we give up our political dominance, our economic dominance will fade as well, which will not do well for us.

.... I think you missed something.. That regime that the United States government supported was a brutal and corrupt dictatorship.. Which the CIA and MI6 overthrew the beloved democratically elected president Mosadeq in 1953.... These people have a right to be pissed at us..
Avatar image for fidosim
fidosim

12901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#13 fidosim
Member since 2003 • 12901 Posts
[QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"] The creation of a missle defense shield would destroy MAD, which would create a whole new arms race.. Why hasn't there been any more major wars sense World War 2? Thats because of nuclear weapons and MAD make major war too costly.. You would think people would understand this basic knowledge what so ever.. Seriously people take a history course and Political Science 101.. Having a nuclear weapon is one of the greatest forms of defense because it pretty much garentees that no other country will attack you, because if they did you would olbiterate them with retaliation.sSubZerOo
No major wars since world war 2? Are you sober?

Korean War, Vietnam.. The Cold War was proof on both countries would not move on one another because of a nuclear war.. Those wars were not neccesary and they were based upon the failed policy of containment.. Nor were they exactly major sense World War 2.. They were with 2nd and 3rd world countries.. Not some 1st world high tech nation.

I would consider a war with China a pretty major war, not to mention the numerous wars that have taken place between India and Pakistan, two nuclear armed nations. But i'm not getting your argument that the shield would destroy MAD. It's not like MAD made the US and USSR abandon conventional militaries.
Avatar image for majwill24
majwill24

1355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 majwill24
Member since 2004 • 1355 Posts

[QUOTE="majwill24"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"]Glad to see we gave up that missile shield for a good purpose.fidosim

Actually, you should welcome giving up the missile shield. Anything that weakens US foreign policy and aggression can only be a boon for the world and to Americans who are weary of wars, terrorism and financial burdens. I'm no expert on the matter, but economist still say its not too late save your country from imploding.Even comdeian Treasury secretary, who was laughed at earlier this year by the chinese for saying"Chinese financial assets are very safe," is finally starting to come around with a first step into some senseGeithner says Americans will have to save more

So try to look at it from an economic angle, not a security problem. Only those on the fringe see Iran as a threat to the US.

. Anyway, if we give up our political dominance, our economic dominance will fade as well, which will not do well for us.

You dont have to be a super power or have the highest GDP to do well. Being compelled to go back to a more humbler and frugal time would be a good thing for the US imo

Avatar image for fidosim
fidosim

12901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#15 fidosim
Member since 2003 • 12901 Posts

.... I think you missed something.. That regime that the United States government supported was a brutal and corrupt dictatorship.. Which the CIA and MI6 overthrew the beloved democratically elected president Mosadeq in 1953.... These people have a right to be pissed at us..sSubZerOo
And? The west has a vested interest in undermining a state taken over by belligerent fundamentalists.

Avatar image for fidosim
fidosim

12901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#16 fidosim
Member since 2003 • 12901 Posts
[QUOTE="majwill24"]

You dont have to be a super power or have the highest GDP to do well. Being compelled to go back to a more humbler and frugal time would be a good thing for the US imo

Certainly you think it would be a good thing that the U.S. would isolate itself, because you're not an American. However, we have to look out for our own interests.
Avatar image for majwill24
majwill24

1355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 majwill24
Member since 2004 • 1355 Posts

[QUOTE="majwill24"]

Why do you think China put so much energy blocking western net sites like youtube and facebook which is used by the CIA?

metroidfood

Because they're trying to keep their citizens safe from the free flow of information. :roll:

Also, I checked out your link, which does not support the claim you made. It's about a site like FB/Youtube, called A-Space, for CIA and other organizations to share info. Try reading your sources.

here is a wired article on the matter. The CIA say its only for recruiting purposes, but lets be intellectually honest here

If you're a Facebook member, a career as a government spook is only a click away.

Since December 2006, the Central Intelligence Agency has been usingFacebook.com, the popular social networking site, to recruit potential employees into its National Clandestine Service. It marks the first time the CIA has ventured into social networking to hire new personnel.

TheCIA's Facebook page(login required) provides an overview of what the NCS is looking for in a recruit, along with a 30-second promotionalYouTube videoaimed at potential college-aged applicants. U.S. citizens with a GPA above 3.0 can apply.

"It's an invaluable tool when it comes to peer-to-peer marketing," says Michele Neff, a CIA spokeswoman.

TheNCS, one of the four directorates of the CIA, was established following 9/11 to gather intelligence from sources both domestic and abroad. In 2004, President Bush directed the CIA to increase the "human intelligence capabilities" of the agency and hire more officers that can "blend more easily in foreign cities."

The search for better spies led the NCS to set up shop on Facebook, which is used primarily by college students. Every Facebook user has her or his own page, and users can choose to join Facebook "groups," which can be created by individuals or sponsored by companies as paid promotions. The NCS-sponsored Facebook group was launched on Dec. 19, 2006 and will stay active for two months. The group currently has over 2,100 members, up from around 200 one week after its debut.

Scores of companies and organizations have set up shop on Facebook, using the site's interactive tools like chat, video and personal messaging to establish relationships with potential hires. However, compared to most recruitment pages, the CIA's page is remarkably light on interactive content.

For example, Ernst & Young'sFacebook group(login required) offers resume advice, interaction with current employees and videos of actual interns. But like the CIA group, the accounting agency's page operates mostly as a gateway to its corporate careers website.

Like many corporations or nonprofit organizations, the CIA has long turned to colleges with diverse and intelligent student bodies when hiring. But its foray into social networks is a new strategy not yet adopted by other agencies.

There are strict federal regulations that guide recruitment and hiring, which are tightly controlled by the Office of Personnel Management. The bureau audits the recruitment practices of five to six government agencies a year on a rotating basis, according to Kevin Mahoney, OPM's associate director for human capital leadership.

Yet the CIA is an "exempted agency," meaning it has its own hiring authority and isn't audited by OPM. As a result, the CIA is less encumbered by bureaucratic recruitment procedures. Basically, it runs its own show.

"We don't have to obtain permissions on any of the venues we have scheduled for print or web," says the CIA's Neff.

According to Robert Danbeck, associate director for OPM's human resources products and services division, there is talk about using social networks to let people know about other government jobs. However, most of the focus remains on the one-stop government job siteUSAJOBS.gov, which currently has around 220,000 job vacancies.

"Right now, we really don't know about (social networking). We haven't gotten our arms around it yet," Danbeck says.

Government agencies may be forced to turn to social networks and other web-based means for recruitment in the future. Hundreds of thousands of government workers are set to retire in the coming years, and new talent can increasingly be found on websites like Facebook and LinkedIn.

However, dealings between social networks and the government may raise the hackles of citizens concerned about their privacy online.

"If (the CIA) knows about Facebook, and they have a page on Facebook, it would be surprising if they weren't using it in other ways," says Nicole Ozer, civil liberties and technology policy director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California.

Facebook'sprivacy policystates that outside companies sponsoring groups don't have access to personal information or profiles. However, it does say that information may be shared with "other companies, lawyers, agents or government agencies," in order to comply with the law.

Besides the fact that it isn't technically a company, the CIA says it is only using Facebook as an advertisement for new recruits.

"The (CIA Facebook) page is only for information purposes; people cannot leave messages or engage in commentary," says Neff. "There is no collection of names, bio information or resume collection from this site, nor do we engage members in any way."

Neff's claim is reinforced by Facebook's director of marketing Melanie Deitch, who refers to the agency as an "advertiser."

"The CIA has no direct access to any user's profile," Deitch says. "They adhere to the same rules as all of our advertisers. We do not publish or disseminate our users' information to any advertiser."

Ozer says that there's no way we can be sure what the CIA is up to online.

"It seems if they would go to the trouble to infiltrate peace groups that they are also online looking at information."

Avatar image for majwill24
majwill24

1355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 majwill24
Member since 2004 • 1355 Posts

[QUOTE="majwill24"]

You dont have to be a super power or have the highest GDP to do well. Being compelled to go back to a more humbler and frugal time would be a good thing for the US imo

fidosim

Certainly you think it would be a good thing that the U.S. would isolate itself, because you're not an American. However, we have to look out for our own interests.

isolation? why you call it going back to isolation if the US is forced to reduce its military and foreign interventions? Do you see France, Germany, Japan, Brazil, china as isolationist countries?

Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#19 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="fidosim"] No major wars since world war 2? Are you sober?fidosim
Korean War, Vietnam.. The Cold War was proof on both countries would not move on one another because of a nuclear war.. Those wars were not neccesary and they were based upon the failed policy of containment.. Nor were they exactly major sense World War 2.. They were with 2nd and 3rd world countries.. Not some 1st world high tech nation.

I would consider a war with China a pretty major war, not to mention the numerous wars that have taken place between India and Pakistan, two nuclear armed nations. But i'm not getting your argument that the shield would destroy MAD. It's not like MAD made the US and USSR abandon conventional militaries.

No but they never went into full out war because it would lead to nuclear weapons.. Thats why the Cold War did not go hot.. Pakistan and India have small scale battles with one another, they do not risk full out war to the point becuase it would escalate to nuclear war because no one would need.. China 50 years ago was a technologically inferior country.. That was no major war.. When you look at something like World War 2, they are dealing with forces where one side could clearly win.. China could never win that war, they had no navy, no real technology only a huge amount of men.. A missle defense system would cause escalation of arms again to create new and more dangerous weapons to get by that shield.. Do you understand??? THERE is a reason why the UN has a Balistics treaty which BANS THIS.. Meaning that the nuclear weapon is the top of the line, and having one doesn't mean your enemy will have better.. Meaning there is no NEED for a arms race.. Please tell me, what does Iran have anything to gain from launching a nuclear weapon anywhere? NOTHING.. The moment they launch it, would mark the destruction of that nation and its leadership.. NOTHING would be gained from it.. Iranian leadership has been shown to be at least rational in this catagory.. Same with North Korea.. If they weren't why hadn't they torn themselves apart? Why havn't they gone to a destructive war years or decades ago? BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING to gain from it.. Furthermore the people who think that Iran would actually nuke Israel are completely clueless of history.. Israel has the 3rd most important land mark for Islamic religion... There are also a sizable amount of Arabs living in and around Israel.. That would be killed by it.. This seems like a farcry from the nationalist and islamic religious head they have been trying to be..
Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#20 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts
[QUOTE="majwill24"]

You dont have to be a super power or have the highest GDP to do well. Being compelled to go back to a more humbler and frugal time would be a good thing for the US imo

fidosim
Certainly you think it would be a good thing that the U.S. would isolate itself, because you're not an American. However, we have to look out for our own interests.

... Surely you do not agree with the United States foriegn policy in the past 50 years?
Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#21 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"].... I think you missed something.. That regime that the United States government supported was a brutal and corrupt dictatorship.. Which the CIA and MI6 overthrew the beloved democratically elected president Mosadeq in 1953.... These people have a right to be pissed at us..fidosim

And? The west has a vested interest in undermining a state taken over by belligerent fundamentalists.

... Mosadeq wasn't a fundamentalist lol.. Infact the only hostile thing he did to the west was kick out the British Oil company from the country which he felt was ripping off the country. Maybe you should actually read history instead of making false claims or coming to ridiculosu conclusions.
Avatar image for metroidfood
metroidfood

11175

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 metroidfood
Member since 2007 • 11175 Posts

here is a wired article on the matter. The CIA say its only for recruiting purposes, but lets be intellectually honest here

majwill24

Even if the CIA were looking, why would China need to block it? The only info is what users themselves put up there.

Avatar image for taj7575
taj7575

12084

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#23 taj7575
Member since 2008 • 12084 Posts

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"].... I think you missed something.. That regime that the United States government supported was a brutal and corrupt dictatorship.. Which the CIA and MI6 overthrew the beloved democratically elected president Mosadeq in 1953.... These people have a right to be pissed at us..fidosim

And? The west has a vested interest in undermining a state taken over by belligerent fundamentalists.

Actually, that started after we pissed them off ;)

Avatar image for fidosim
fidosim

12901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#24 fidosim
Member since 2003 • 12901 Posts
[QUOTE="majwill24"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="majwill24"]

You dont have to be a super power or have the highest GDP to do well. Being compelled to go back to a more humbler and frugal time would be a good thing for the US imo

Certainly you think it would be a good thing that the U.S. would isolate itself, because you're not an American. However, we have to look out for our own interests.

isolation? why you call it going back to isolation if the US is forced to reduce its military and foreign interventions? Do you see France, Germany, Japan, Brazil, china as isolationist countries?

Moreso than us, yes. The EU is currently trying to establish itself as a world power though.
Avatar image for munu9
munu9

11109

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#25 munu9
Member since 2004 • 11109 Posts
2 of the worlds most powerful nations are now on the side of a country that is run by a loon such as Ahmadinejad? This is good news?
Avatar image for majwill24
majwill24

1355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 majwill24
Member since 2004 • 1355 Posts

[QUOTE="majwill24"]

here is a wired article on the matter. The CIA say its only for recruiting purposes, but lets be intellectually honest here

metroidfood

Even if the CIA were looking, why would China need to block it? The only info is what users themselves put up there.

Actually in some ways I do agree that China shouldnt be so strict with their censoring. The CCP need to have a little more faith in its people. Talking with chinese people daily, you will quickly notice they can see through the propaganda of the West. Mention CNN to them and watch their faces turn red lol.

Avatar image for fidosim
fidosim

12901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#27 fidosim
Member since 2003 • 12901 Posts
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="fidosim"]

.... I think you missed something.. That regime that the United States government supported was a brutal and corrupt dictatorship.. Which the CIA and MI6 overthrew the beloved democratically elected president Mosadeq in 1953.... These people have a right to be pissed at us..sSubZerOo
And? The west has a vested interest in undermining a state taken over by belligerent fundamentalists.

... Mosadeq wasn't a fundamentalist lol.. Infact the only hostile thing he did to the west was kick out the British Oil company from the country which he felt was ripping off the country. Maybe you should actually read history instead of making false claims or coming to ridiculosu conclusions.

Ayatollah Khomeni was pretty much a fundamentalist, and the current regime in Iran is pretty much a fundamentalist one.
Avatar image for fidosim
fidosim

12901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#28 fidosim
Member since 2003 • 12901 Posts
[QUOTE="taj7575"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"]

.... I think you missed something.. That regime that the United States government supported was a brutal and corrupt dictatorship.. Which the CIA and MI6 overthrew the beloved democratically elected president Mosadeq in 1953.... These people have a right to be pissed at us..sSubZerOo
And? The west has a vested interest in undermining a state taken over by belligerent fundamentalists.

Actually, that started after we pissed them off ;)

I ask again: And?
Avatar image for weezyfb
weezyfb

14703

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#29 weezyfb
Member since 2009 • 14703 Posts
this is good news
Avatar image for fidosim
fidosim

12901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#30 fidosim
Member since 2003 • 12901 Posts
[QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="majwill24"]

You dont have to be a super power or have the highest GDP to do well. Being compelled to go back to a more humbler and frugal time would be a good thing for the US imo

sSubZerOo
Certainly you think it would be a good thing that the U.S. would isolate itself, because you're not an American. However, we have to look out for our own interests.

... Surely you do not agree with the United States foriegn policy in the past 50 years?

Despite some mistakes, we've maintained our supremacy in the world. The 20th century is called the American Century for a reason.
Avatar image for taj7575
taj7575

12084

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#31 taj7575
Member since 2008 • 12084 Posts

[QUOTE="taj7575"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"] And? The west has a vested interest in undermining a state taken over by belligerent fundamentalists.

fidosim

Actually, that started after we pissed them off ;)

I ask again: And?

Well you were basically saying we were trying to stop fundamentalists. And I answered that that started mainly after Mosadeq was overthrown and Shah was put in place, and he had US support. How would that have not pissed them off? Thats when fundamentalism really started.

Avatar image for t3hTwinky
t3hTwinky

3701

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#32 t3hTwinky
Member since 2005 • 3701 Posts

The creation of a missle defense shield would destroy MAD, which would create a whole new arms race.. Why hasn'tthere beenany moremajor warssenseWorld War 2? Thats because of nuclear weapons and MAD make major war too costly.. You would think people would understand this basic knowledge what so ever.. Seriously people take a history course and Political Science 101.. Having a nuclear weapon is one of the greatest forms of defense because it pretty much garentees that no other country will attack you, because if they did you would olbiterate them with retaliation.sSubZerOo

ORLY?

Read this article, GS isn't letting me link it for some reason.

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj97/win97/parrin.html

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

60881

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#33 mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 60881 Posts

Iran being cool with Russia is fine

Iran being cool with China is fine as well.

but those two big kids on the block (Russia and China) are gonna have it out some day because there is only room for one of them in Iran.

I would not worry about the US, by the way. If Israel attacks Iran (I dont know why...) the US will not get involved because that would be unpopular. If Iran attacks Israel, well, they deserve to get whooped.

Avatar image for taj7575
taj7575

12084

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#34 taj7575
Member since 2008 • 12084 Posts

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"] The creation of a missle defense shield would destroy MAD, which would create a whole new arms race.. Why hasn'tthere beenany moremajor warssenseWorld War 2? Thats because of nuclear weapons and MAD make major war too costly.. You would think people would understand this basic knowledge what so ever.. Seriously people take a history course and Political Science 101.. Having a nuclear weapon is one of the greatest forms of defense because it pretty much garentees that no other country will attack you, because if they did you would olbiterate them with retaliation.t3hTwinky

ORLY?

Read this article, GS isn't letting me link it for some reason.

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj97/win97/parrin.html

I'm pretty sure he's talking about nuclear power vs nuclear power.

Avatar image for fidosim
fidosim

12901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#35 fidosim
Member since 2003 • 12901 Posts

[QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="taj7575"]

Actually, that started after we pissed them off ;)

taj7575

I ask again: And?

Well you were basically saying we were trying to stop fundamentalists. And I answered that that started mainly after Mosadeq was overthrown and Shah was put in place, and he had US support. How would that have not pissed them off? Thats when fundamentalism really started.

I'm not disputing that we've pissed them off, i'm disputing that this should effect our policy toward Iran now. As for the roots of fundamentalism, there are a number of places where you could say that fundamentalism originated from. Europeans have been involved in the Middle East for quite a long time.

Avatar image for taj7575
taj7575

12084

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#36 taj7575
Member since 2008 • 12084 Posts

[QUOTE="taj7575"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"] I ask again: And?fidosim

Well you were basically saying we were trying to stop fundamentalists. And I answered that that started mainly after Mosadeq was overthrown and Shah was put in place, and he had US support. How would that have not pissed them off? Thats when fundamentalism really started.

I'm not disputing that we've pissed them off, i'm disputing that this should effect our policy toward Iran now. As for the roots of fundamentalism, there are a number of places where you could say that fundamentalism originated from.

Well we should deal with Iran as safe as possible. Yes, their leader is crazy, but he is still the leader. Get something worked out. Besides, we treat Israel great and they arent the best country either.. Treat Iran the same way if you need something worked out.

Avatar image for t3hTwinky
t3hTwinky

3701

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#37 t3hTwinky
Member since 2005 • 3701 Posts

I'm pretty sure he's talking about nuclear power vs nuclear power.

taj7575

"...Furthermore, nuclear weapons did not keep the peace in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, the Middle East, the Balkans, Africa, or Latin America, even though one side in those wars often possessed "the Bomb" and theoretically should have coerced the other side into submission.4 By one estimate, 125 million people have died in 149 wars since 1945.5"

He's talking about MAD and nuclear weapons in general.

Avatar image for UnknownSniper65
UnknownSniper65

9238

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#38 UnknownSniper65
Member since 2004 • 9238 Posts

Russia,Iran and China forming closer ties to compete with United States on a geo-political level ?I wonder why that would happen...

It has nothing to do with countering Israeli-American "aggressions" (odd how you don't seem to see China's occupation of Tibet or Russia's recent wars in Chechnya and Georgia wars of aggression) and everything to do trying to gain more power on a world level ( by both Russia and China). Russia and China could care less about Iran,after all, the enemy of my frenemy is my friend.

I am enjoying the subtile Anti-Americanism found in each of the OP's posts. You don't seem to grasp what any reduction in American power (whether it be militaristic or Economic) means for the Western world as a whole. The status quo is changing and China ruling over any part of the Pacific ocean beyond its borders is not a good thing ,especially considering the old wounds left from conflicts of the past in that area. The Japanese Defense force isn't ramping up its defense budget for fun, they see a rising dragon in the West and they're getting ready for it.

You seem to be welcoming the oncoming of the second cold war,so long as it means a deduction of American power across the world. A less powerful United States means a less stable world.

Avatar image for Espada12
Espada12

23247

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#39 Espada12
Member since 2008 • 23247 Posts

Iran being cool with Russia is fine

Iran being cool with China is fine as well.

but those two big kids on the block (Russia and China) are gonna have it out some day because there is only room for one of them in Iran.

I would not worry about the US, by the way. If Israel attacks Iran (I dont know why...) the US will not get involved because that would be unpopular. If Iran attacks Israel, well, they deserve to get whooped.

mrbojangles25

Oh the double standards! Why wouldn't Israel deserve to get whooped as well?

Avatar image for Espada12
Espada12

23247

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#40 Espada12
Member since 2008 • 23247 Posts

You seem to be welcoming the oncoming of the second cold war,so long as it means a deduction of American power across the world. A less powerful United States means a less stable world.

UnknownSniper65

Economically yes.. militaristically? No. The US never resolves conflicts.. they decide a winner(pre-obama) which has never been grounds for shaping a stable world. You want to see some hypocritical actions by the US? Israel rolls on the Palestinian country side after a random rocket, that does no damage hits israeli territory. The us asks them to stop but never shows military force or pushes for any sanctions to be made against them. Now let's use one of your examples. Russia V Georgia the russians attack the georgians after the georgians attacked South Ossetia (see how american and western media spins things? RUSSIA ATTACKED LOLOLOLOL) and yet they are criticised and the US even goes so far to bring georgian troops from iraq and establish a small military presence.

Western Media.. Reporting their version of the story one omission at a time!

Avatar image for majwill24
majwill24

1355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#41 majwill24
Member since 2004 • 1355 Posts

I am enjoying the subtile Anti-Americanism found in each of the OP's posts.

UnknownSniper65

I'm not anti american, I just disagree with US policies.

Earlier this year, I asked myself how can the US still support their ideological crusades around the world, despite the fact that such endaevors is slowly pushing their economy to complete collapse. At first I saw it as nothing but shear insanity, but now I see it in less then simple terms. The US is similar to islamic fundamentalist who sacrifice their lives for a cause they believe in. the US is willing to sacrifice their lives (money/dollar) for what they believe in. I admire this level of conviction, no matter how much i disagree with the cause.

Avatar image for nimatoad2000
nimatoad2000

7505

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#42 nimatoad2000
Member since 2004 • 7505 Posts
OT, you do not know what it is like to live in Iran, you do not know what the iranian people think of ahmadenijad and khamenei. if you would hear the things my family in Iran tells me that goes on over there. you would never think he's doing a " good job" he's a puppet anyways.
Avatar image for fidosim
fidosim

12901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#43 fidosim
Member since 2003 • 12901 Posts
[QUOTE="majwill24"]

[QUOTE="UnknownSniper65"]

I am enjoying the subtile Anti-Americanism found in each of the OP's posts.

I'm not anti american, I just disagree with US policies.

Earlier this year, I asked myself how can the US still support their ideological crusades around the world, despite the fact that such endaevors is slowly pushing their economy to complete collapse. At first I saw it as nothing but shear insanity, but now I see it in less then simple terms. The US is similar to islamic fundamentalist who sacrifice their lives for a cause they believe in. the US is willing to sacrifice their lives (money/dollar) for what they believe in. I admire this level of conviction, no matter how much i disagree with the cause.

Our policies revolve around economic and political needs, as with any other country. We simply back them up with ideology, and we have convictions that we have a great purpose in the world.
Avatar image for gameguy6700
gameguy6700

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44 gameguy6700
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

[QUOTE="UnknownSniper65"]

I am enjoying the subtile Anti-Americanism found in each of the OP's posts.

majwill24

I'm not anti american, I just disagree with US policies.

Earlier this year, I asked myself how can the US still support their ideological crusades around the world, despite the fact that such endaevors is slowly pushing their economy to complete collapse. At first I saw it as nothing but shear insanity, but now I see it in less then simple terms. The US is similar to islamic fundamentalist who sacrifice their lives for a cause they believe in. the US is willing to sacrifice their lives (money/dollar) for what they believe in. I admire this level of conviction, no matter how much i disagree with the cause.

What "idelogical crusades"? Afghanistan was a retaliatory war against the Taliban after 9/11 and Iraq was Bush's little attempt to one-up daddy/get another US friendly government in the Middle East.

The last time we fought an idelogical war was Vietnam. Yeah, we shout "freedom" and "democracy" every time we go into a war, but that's just superficial crap that gets thrown around to try to get more support for whatever war we're fighting at the time.

Avatar image for IZoMBiEI
IZoMBiEI

6477

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45 IZoMBiEI
Member since 2002 • 6477 Posts

[QUOTE="majwill24"]

[QUOTE="UnknownSniper65"]

I am enjoying the subtile Anti-Americanism found in each of the OP's posts.

gameguy6700

I'm not anti american, I just disagree with US policies.

Earlier this year, I asked myself how can the US still support their ideological crusades around the world, despite the fact that such endaevors is slowly pushing their economy to complete collapse. At first I saw it as nothing but shear insanity, but now I see it in less then simple terms. The US is similar to islamic fundamentalist who sacrifice their lives for a cause they believe in. the US is willing to sacrifice their lives (money/dollar) for what they believe in. I admire this level of conviction, no matter how much i disagree with the cause.

What "idelogical crusades"? Afghanistan was a retaliatory war against the Taliban after 9/11 and Iraq was Bush's little attempt to one-up daddy/get another US friendly government in the Middle East.

The last time we fought an idelogical war was Vietnam. Yeah, we shout "freedom" and "democracy" every time we go into a war, but that's just superficial crap that gets thrown around to try to get more support for whatever war we're fighting at the time.

Im guessing his knowledge of american foreign policy dates back to the red scare, cause Im not sure what he's talking about either.
Avatar image for majwill24
majwill24

1355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46 majwill24
Member since 2004 • 1355 Posts

[QUOTE="gameguy6700"]

[QUOTE="majwill24"]

I'm not anti american, I just disagree with US policies.

Earlier this year, I asked myself how can the US still support their ideological crusades around the world, despite the fact that such endaevors is slowly pushing their economy to complete collapse. At first I saw it as nothing but shear insanity, but now I see it in less then simple terms. The US is similar to islamic fundamentalist who sacrifice their lives for a cause they believe in. the US is willing to sacrifice their lives (money/dollar) for what they believe in. I admire this level of conviction, no matter how much i disagree with the cause.

IZoMBiEI

What "idelogical crusades"? Afghanistan was a retaliatory war against the Taliban after 9/11 and Iraq was Bush's little attempt to one-up daddy/get another US friendly government in the Middle East.

The last time we fought an idelogical war was Vietnam. Yeah, we shout "freedom" and "democracy" every time we go into a war, but that's just superficial crap that gets thrown around to try to get more support for whatever war we're fighting at the time.

Im guessing his knowledge of american foreign policy dates back to the red scare, cause Im not sure what he's talking about either.

I'm talking about the belief that only the US can keep the world peaceful. That the US is enforcement arm of democracy and "human rights".

Avatar image for IZoMBiEI
IZoMBiEI

6477

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47 IZoMBiEI
Member since 2002 • 6477 Posts

[QUOTE="IZoMBiEI"][QUOTE="gameguy6700"]

What "idelogical crusades"? Afghanistan was a retaliatory war against the Taliban after 9/11 and Iraq was Bush's little attempt to one-up daddy/get another US friendly government in the Middle East.

The last time we fought an idelogical war was Vietnam. Yeah, we shout "freedom" and "democracy" every time we go into a war, but that's just superficial crap that gets thrown around to try to get more support for whatever war we're fighting at the time.

majwill24

Im guessing his knowledge of american foreign policy dates back to the red scare, cause Im not sure what he's talking about either.

I'm talking about the belief that only the US can keep the world peaceful. That the US is enforcement arm of democracy and "human rights".

yes that may be true if you replace US with UN in your post. think youre confusing the two, the US doesnt do much more in the world than the rest of the industrilized nations...its true they have a bigger presence in afganistan right now than the other countries but thats because the taliban living there attacked the US...
Avatar image for majwill24
majwill24

1355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#48 majwill24
Member since 2004 • 1355 Posts

Russia,Iran and China forming closer ties to compete with United States on a geo-political level ?I wonder why that would happen...

It has nothing to do with countering Israeli-American "aggressions" (odd how you don't seem to see China's occupation of Tibet or Russia's recent wars in Chechnya and Georgia wars of aggression) and everything to do trying to gain more power on a world level ( by both Russia and China). Russia and China could care less about Iran,after all, the enemy of my frenemy is my friend.

I am enjoying the subtile Anti-Americanism found in each of the OP's posts. You don't seem to grasp what any reduction in American power (whether it be militaristic or Economic) means for the Western world as a whole. The status quo is changing and China ruling over any part of the Pacific ocean beyond its borders is not a good thing ,especially considering the old wounds left from conflicts of the past in that area. The Japanese Defense force isn't ramping up its defense budget for fun, they see a rising dragon in the West and they're getting ready for it.

You seem to be welcoming the oncoming of the second cold war,so long as it means a deduction of American power across the world. A less powerful United States means a less stable world.

UnknownSniper65

I wanted to avoid commenting on this, but I can't hold back. Can't you see the arrogance oozing from your post? You speak as if the rest of the world are children at a playground and that the US is the only adult there to keep order. Look, its been 60+ years, its time to let these children, now adults, manage themselves. If things goes to hell in hand basket, then you can jump back in and be the defacto ruler of the world, but at least give these ancient nations a chance to prove themselves to you and the rest omnipotent peace keepers in the US. Please wise americans, give the world a chance!

Avatar image for Stevo_the_gamer
Stevo_the_gamer

50214

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 49

User Lists: 0

#49 Stevo_the_gamer  Moderator
Member since 2004 • 50214 Posts

Can't wait to see Israel bomb the crap out of Iran's nuclear facilities. :)

Hey, my 12,500th post, how bout' that?

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

60881

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#50 mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 60881 Posts

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

Iran being cool with Russia is fine

Iran being cool with China is fine as well.

but those two big kids on the block (Russia and China) are gonna have it out some day because there is only room for one of them in Iran.

I would not worry about the US, by the way. If Israel attacks Iran (I dont know why...) the US will not get involved because that would be unpopular. If Iran attacks Israel, well, they deserve to get whooped.

Espada12

Oh the double standards! Why wouldn't Israel deserve to get whooped as well?

...because theyre our ally. ITs not a double standard, it is simply remaining loyal to an ally.