 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Little Hawk Date: 28 Feb 05 - 06:08 PM Well, it's a whole lot more important to be good-hearted than to have a big I.Q. Some antisocial people are brilliant, after all, but they're still no boon to society. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Bobert Date: 28 Feb 05 - 06:01 PM A very well educated doctor was driving past a mental hospital when the lug nuts came off is wheel and then, of course, the wheel came off. He pulled over and was scratching his head as to what do do when he looked up and there on the other side of the chain link fence was one of "patients". "Hey, I know what you can do, sir?, said the patient. "Yeah, what?" inquired the well educated doctor. "Well, sir, you can take one lug nut off each of the other wheels and rebolt yer wheel back on with them. That will get you to town..." The learned doctor got a puzzeled look on his face, looked eyeball to eyeball with the patient and asked "Heck, if you are smart why are you doing in there?" to which the patient replied... "Heck, I may be nuts but I ain't stupid..." Bobert p.s. Bobert's SAT's... Fair... Nuthin' to write home about but better than most of the kids with a D+ average in high school did... Actually, I couldn't read much of anything until about the 9th grade when my folks scrounged up enuff dough to send me to the George Washington University Reading Clinic... Drove all me grade school teachers nuts... They thought I was sandbaggin', cause I was articulate and the best visual artist in the school... They hadn't even coined the term lexdexia at that point... But ya. know what? I couldn't care less about SAT's... It's about what folks do with their lives and how they act that counts... God don't care either... St. Peter ain't gonna have no clip board at the Pearly gate's with folks IQ's 'er SAT scores on it... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Little Hawk Date: 28 Feb 05 - 05:33 PM I think there is a very high probability of a terrorist attack on the USA involving either a nuclear or a biological weapon. In fact, I think it's only a matter of time. Virtually inevitable. The trouble is, the main cause of that attack will be: the reaction of some angry 3rd World people to the past few decades of US foreign policy and especially to military actions taken since 911. If it happens, it will most likely be a clandestine attack by a secret cell, not an action by a national government. But the USA will find a national government to blame for it...most likely one that is parked on some valuable strategic real estate. And that will bring forth further tragedy and further retaliation against the USA. The USA, like Imperial Rome or Soviet Russia or any other conquering empire in history, is the author of its own misfortunes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Feb 05 - 05:32 PM Sorry about that- bad formatting- Kerry rumoured total 1190, not confirmed, not released by him. Bush Verbal 566 Math 640 Gore Verbal 625 Math 730 BB Verbal 690 Math 760 I know I have no chance at all to compete with such intellects as Bobert or Amos.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Feb 05 - 05:29 PM Bobert, "fir a knothaed, that is... " Well, I can only claim to be smarter than Gore- since Kerry would not release his test scores. The only reference I could find was a score of 1190 on his SATs, but no real confidence in that number.. Bush Verbal 566 SAT Verbal Score 566 (of 800) Ver 625 (of 800) Gore SAT Math Score 640 (of 800) 730 (of 800) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Feb 05 - 02:54 PM Bobert, Try reading my post. Peace BB |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Bobert Date: 28 Feb 05 - 02:27 PM The only two countries that could even mount an attack and possibly only loose 90% of it people within' a couple of hours are Russia and China. The rest would loose 99.99% of their people within two hours! I can't believe that the Bush folks continue to make this case that countries with very weak armies would even give a second thought to attacking the US... What we are seeing is that with the Bush foriegn policy of "Stomp Heavily and Whack Anyone You Want" that folks are trying to figure out ways to deter being invaded... If the tables werte turned the US would be doing the very same thing... What is needed here are some assurances from the US that it doesn't plan on whacking people. That would be a good start toward a saner planet but, no, what we have are preconditions after preconditions on the US's part. That's not diplomacy. That's ultimatum. Bad policy for a 21st century world... And to think that Bush *had* an opportunity after 9/11 to change the way people go about solving conflict but he blew it big time... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Donuel Date: 28 Feb 05 - 02:01 PM With Ashcroft gone, Goss has taken up the wolf call. 2 weeks ago Goss said "Its not if but when we will be attacked by nuclear and biological weapons." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Feb 05 - 01:47 PM 200! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Bobert Date: 28 Feb 05 - 01:43 PM It is dishonest to misquote people, bb. I gave several examples of where you have done this on this thread. Like I siad, I couldn't care less if you want to get into Bushite PR mythology but when you start posting stuff that none of us on the other side have said because you would very much *liked* for us to say, BUT DIDN'T SAY, that is dishonest... Sure, it might get you a short lived debating point until it is brought to your attention, YET AGAIN, that you are inventing arguments that those on the other side haven't made... That's why I'm just gonna go back to ignoring you... It is impossible to discuss anything with a person who routinely misquotes other folks because you spend so much effort just policing the discussion. Great diversionary tactic on your part... But I see where you got it... I listen to C-SPAN radio now and then and one Bushite after another does the same thing... Caller A : "I'm so sick of these baby killing, homo loving Democrats calling in complaining about our President. (spit)... Caller B : "These Democrats is what is wrong with this country. Yeah, they'd rather have Saddam as out president. (spit)... You may not see yourself in either of these callers but the folks who you have misquoted here in Mudville sure do... See ya... Peace Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Feb 05 - 11:07 AM Bobert, "You and yer war mongin' world criminals have taken over 99% of every media outlet on the planet so please save us that little mindless rebuttal, thank you..." It would be interesting if you were to post the source of this delusion. Amos, in presenting the "popular" view of Bush has been able to find well under 1% comments that favor Bush. Even though about half the country voted for him. The June 7 2004 USNews &World report presents the FACTS of a Pew Research center study showing the LIBERAL bias of journalists and news executives. Perhaps you can present some figures to justify your statement? "If you want outta the prison of narrow mindedness that you have built around you there are alot more sources of news than Fox and the Big Three. But you feel all smug and comfy in yer little prison..." For your information, I don't normally watch TV, except for tapes and DVDs. I have seen probably 12 hours in the last year, mostly CNN Headline news. I have never watched Fox, and get most of my information from WTOP on the way to/from work ( CBS News). I read the Washington Post, and look at CNN.com for most information. "You will say whatever you want irregardless of *truth*. " See the above comment, and talk to me about truth- You seem to like to make blanket indicments of people without trying to get the facts. "And no one from the so-called left here has made any statement, quite the conrrary, that would support YOUR ASSERTION that anyone here is "in favor of the destruction of the Mideast as a habitat for human life." " The policies that the Left has been pursueing in regards to Iran, the Middle East, and WMD are, IMO , ones that lead to further conflict and use of those WMD. Sorry if I am interpreting what is being said as if the people talking mean it. " just dishonest and, like you say, "poorly informed"..." I think I may safely say that this applies as much to you, if not more so, than to me. Perhaps you should consider if YOU have been brainwashed. I resent you calling me dishonest. If you mean that I have been poorly informed as to the "correct" opinions required here, perhaps I am. Live with it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Bobert Date: 26 Feb 05 - 12:32 AM Yeah, the boy ain't half bad, LH... Sniff... ...'fer a brainwashed kinda feller. Iz writ a few o' them sonnets myself but they ain't gonna be nailed up in one the Catbox walls, nope, you ain't gonna have that to pin on me, but on the little that BB posted is good... ..fir a knothaed, that is... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Feb 05 - 11:53 PM Well, we may disagree with BB on politics, but he sure as hell can write good sonnets (check out the "post last" thread). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Bobert Date: 25 Feb 05 - 06:24 PM I agree, LH... I don't think bb is a bad person, just dishonest and, like you say, "poorly informed"... But being a fellow man, yeah, I love him. Just don't *have* to interact with him... You know, I would have more respect for Bush and his blind followers if they would just come clean and say, "Hey, we're attacking these countries for their oil.." Yeah, that would at leasr be honest. But to keep thowing childish rationales and lies at us is arrogant... Mean while the NASCAR/Budwieser/CountryMusic crowd watches Stroker Ace drive a dumb car round, and round, and round, and round, and round.... Give me a break and... Beam my boney butt up... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: freda underhill Date: 25 Feb 05 - 06:15 PM yeh, i regretted sending that post with the last line. sorry bruce! I can listen to your opinions with patience, but not to what feels like a misrepresentation of others opinions! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Feb 05 - 06:07 PM It's tough defending fascism, Freda. :-) It takes nerve, gall, and/or a really strong streak of naivete or innocence. There are always plenty of loyal supporters in the ranks of any blatant military aggressor, and they should not be thought of as bad people...just poorly informed people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: freda underhill Date: 25 Feb 05 - 06:00 PM Apart from the pre-emptive reason for starting the war, another "excuse" the US has been throwing around in the last couple of years is Humanitarian (note: the Sudan). Hey, this country is suffering, we should go in and bomb the hell out of it, put in a puppet regime and suck all the oil out, for humanitarian reasons, of course. the only reason for an invasion is when many countries from the UN do it as a peace keeping mission, with mutual agreement. under Article 51 .. the specific authorization of force by the Security Council as a last resort to maintain international peace and security, under Chapter VII. and yep, bb, talk about your opinions, but when you put a lot of false words into other people's mouths, thats bigotry, arrogance, and offensive. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Feb 05 - 11:40 AM You'be been duped by a lifetime of propaganda, BB, into automatically seeing certain people in the World as "bad guys" if your government says they are. Iran is no threat to the USA, but the USA is gearing up to attack Iran, in my opinion. The USA is not doing it to protect Israel! I laugh at the notion of that. The USA protects no one and nothing except its corporate profits. The USA would flush Israel down the toilet in an instant if Israel stood in the way of its corporate profits...but Israel does not stand in the way. Iran presently stands in the way, because: 1. It has a lot of oil. 2. It is not a USA puppet yet. 3. It is on an important potential oil shipping route from the Caspian region. 4. It's the latest convenient "enemy" of choice for a regime that wants continual war or threat of war, though in truth Iran is not really an enemy at all. What it is, is a small country that has already been persecuted severely in the recent past by the USA, and has had the nerve to kick out an American-backed dictator (the Shah) and remain defiantly independent of American policy. None of the above means I admire Iran's government or its religious fanatics. I don't admire them in the least. But I recognize their right to govern themselves as a sovereign nation and to shoot their own mouths off in an idiotic and aggressive fashion if they so desire...just the way American evangelists and politicians do all the time. Every nation has that right as a given. It's not illegal to make inflammatory statements. What no nation has the right to do is to launch pre-emptive wars on other countries that have launched no direct physical attack on them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Bobert Date: 25 Feb 05 - 09:26 AM First of all, bb, none of the articles that you posted (make that NONE) support your statement "So you feel that it is ok for a country that has threatened the annilation of another country JUST BECAUSE it exists". Your words in your 24Feb, 7:05 post. Rafsanjani does not speak for Iran. And no one from the so-called left here has made any statement, quite the conrrary, that would support YOUR ASSERTION that anyone here is "in favor of the destruction of the Mideast as a habitat for human life." Again your words, pal. Not anyone elses. This is why it is impossible to *discuss* anything with you because you just make stuff up and assume that everyone will just believe your fabrications... Just like the "millions" of folks *might* die. You were the first to make any reference to the "millions" in you 24Feb, 7:14 post when you wrote, "But I guess if we give him the choice between a few thousand killed and millions, he will opt for the laergest number..." These are youe words, pal, not mine. Not Amos's. Not LH's. But yours. You own them. Not us. So when I throw your words right back at you you won't even take responsibilty for them in your Feb24, 10:55 post in telling me "You (meaning me) are saying that, not me..." See, bb, this isn't just about differences of opinions here but about integrity. I've brought this up a couple of other times but, IMO, you remind me very much of Bush. You will say whatever you want irregardless of *truth*. Now that wouldn't be so bad if you were confining your mythologies to world events but you don't stop there. You extend it to others here in Mudville. It's really a rather irritaing little personality disorder, bb, that just show to me that you must feel you are playing a weak hand. It's bad enough to fabricate world events but downright shamefull to state that someone else here said something that they, ahhhh, didn't say... Just like I did last year when you were making up stuff and telling folks I had said them them when I hadn't, I think I'll just go back to ignoring you. You aren't worthy or capable of discussing anything. Peace, Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: freda underhill Date: 25 Feb 05 - 07:38 AM bruce, if you had read or comprehended what I just posted, and thought about what was said at the Nuremberg Tribunal, you would realise that it is just as irrelevant for the US, me or you to ask that question of Iran, as it would be for any of us to question the US over its nuclear stockpiles. a country has sovereignty over itself. other countries come when invited, and behave like nice guests. Nuremberg - doesnt that word resonate for you somehow - the Nuremberg excuse? I repeat: To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole. Nuremberg's condemnation of preventive war was incorporated into the U.N. Charter, affirmed by the General Assembly, and accepted by the Security Council.36 In 1978, the U.S. mobilized the Security Council to condemn Vietnam's invasion of Cambodia and overthrow of the violently repressive Khmer Rouge regime, terming it a breach of Charter and an act of aggression in violation of international law. QED. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 25 Feb 05 - 07:28 AM And will you ask IRAN to comply with the law as to it's UN obligations? I am waiting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: freda underhill Date: 25 Feb 05 - 07:04 AM The point has probably best been made in a speech by Sir Thomas More, written by playwright Robert Bolt, in A Man for All Seasons. More turns to his former confidant Will Roper who has become a vigilante in the name of justice and asks: And when the last law was cut down and the devil turned around on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast – man's laws, not God's – and if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think that you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? www.cesr.org/iraq |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: freda underhill Date: 25 Feb 05 - 07:02 AM excerpts.. from TEARING UP THE RULES: The Illegality of Invading Iraq March 2003; The Center for Economic and Social Rights Emergency Campaign on Iraq www.cesr.org/iraq "Every country in the world is bound by principles of law developed over centuries to govern international relations. International law was significantly strengthened through the creation and universal acceptance of the U.N. Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Geneva Conventions over 50 years ago 1 Under Article 1(1) of the UN Charter, the world organization's central purpose is "to bring about by peaceful means and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace." 1 Similarly, Article 2(3) obligates member states to "settle their international disputes by peaceful means," while Article 2(4) provides that: All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations. It is beyond dispute that these provisions, and the Charter as a whole, impose a general prohibition on the use of force to resolve conflicts in international relations. The Security Council and General Assembly have consistently reaffirmed this legal principle.20 The prohibition against force is binding on all states not only through the Charter but as a peremptory norm in customary international law, so fundamental that "no derogation is permitted." It is, in short, the cornerstone of the collective security system established by the U.N. to prevent any recurrence of the horrors of World War II. Only two exceptions, specified in the Charter and supplemented by customary international law, permit the lawful use of force. First is the right of individual or collective self-defense in response to an armed attack, under Article 51. Second is the specific authorization of force by the Security Council as a last resort to maintain international peace and security, under Chapter VII. Preventive war is unequivocally illegal. In 1946, the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg rejected Germany's argument that it had been compelled to attack Norway and Denmark in selfdefense to prevent a future Allied invasion. The Tribunal concluded that these attacks violated customary law limits on self-defense and instead constituted wars of aggression whose prohibition was demanded by the conscience of the world.4 As the Tribunal stated: To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole. Nuremberg's condemnation of preventive war was incorporated into the U.N. Charter, affirmed by the General Assembly, and accepted by the Security Council.36 In 1978, the U.S. mobilized the Security Council to condemn Vietnam's invasion of Cambodia and overthrow of the violently repressive Khmer Rouge regime, terming it a breach of Charter and an act of aggression in violation of international law. Similarly, in 1981, the Council unanimously condemned Israel's "preventive" attack against an Iraqi nuclear plant as a "clear violation of the Charter of the UN and the norms of international conduct." A Council member explained the consensus: The concept of preventive war, which for many years served as a justification for the abuses of powerful States, since it left to their discretion to define what constituted a threat to them, was definitively abolished by the Charter of the U.N. The German argument in favor of preventive war was judged and condemned by the Nuremberg Tribunal, and German leaders held individually accountable as war criminals. Any return to this doctrine by powerful states such as the U.S. and U.K. would undermine world public order, and in the process encourage states and non-state actors alike to launch unilateral acts of aggression unconstrained by longstanding principles of international law. humanitarian intervention. Source: CESR Report, "Unsanctioned Suffering: Human Rights Violations Under Sanctions (May 1996), www.cesr/iraq. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 25 Feb 05 - 06:21 AM Freda, Can I ask when YOU have ever pointed out that IRAN should comply with it's obligations? I hear a deafening silence for the rest of the world to bother trying to deal with it- BUT you seem happy to criticise the US. "If Iran continues to violate its agreements, however, sanctions or other punishments could follow. According to the Bush administration, a unilateral military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities is not currently under consideration." What part of this do you not understand? WHERE do you come off saying I have said we should have a pre-emptive strike? It MAY be justified- I cannot rule out ANY course of action that would prevent a major nuclear exchange. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: freda underhill Date: 25 Feb 05 - 06:14 AM well, bruce, you are proof that Bush was successful when he proposed the idea of the "pre-emptive strike" being justified. He got you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 25 Feb 05 - 06:02 AM Amos, ""Will this issue be resolved diplomatically? It appears so, if Iran follows through with its pledges to cooperate with the IAEA and opens all of its nuclear facilities to international inspectors. If Iran continues to violate its agreements, however, sanctions or other punishments could follow. According to the Bush administration, a unilateral military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities is not currently under consideration." AND where is the public outcry for this to happen? All I hear about is how evil Bush is trying to start a war- MAYBE if there was even a small voice crying for the Iranians to comply with their obligations, there might be a chance for peace- BUT you (collectively) seem ONLY to want to blame the US for what (IMO) is the responsibility of the Iranians. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 25 Feb 05 - 05:55 AM LH, We disagree. "but merely the next planned media propaganda campaign to prepare the American public to support the next cynical oil war. " By whose media? "TEHRAN 14 Dec. (IPS) One of Iran's most influential ruling cleric called Friday on the Muslim states to use nuclear weapon against Israel, assuring them that while such an attack would annihilate Israel, it would cost them "damages only". "If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave any thing in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world", Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani told the crowd at the traditional Friday prayers in Tehran. Analysts said not only Mr. Hashemi-Rafsanjani's speech was the strongest against Israel, but also this is the first time that a prominent leader of the Islamic Republic openly suggests the use of nuclear weapon against the Jewish State. "It seems that Mr. Hashemi-Rafsanjani is forgetting that due to the present intertwinement of Israel and Palestine, the destruction of the Jewish State would also means the mass killing of Palestinian population as well", observed one Iranian commentator." THIS IS FROM IRANIAN SOURCES. Are you so blinded by your anti-american predjudice that you think Bush controls the IRANIAN press? Amos, I can say that we probably agree as to the desired goal, but differ as to how it might be accomplished. Does this really justify your (previous) constant ad hominim attacks on myself, and all others that disagree with your particular view of the best means to maintain a peaceful world? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Feb 05 - 01:12 AM What you are observing is not any serious or real threat from Iran toward anyone...but merely the next planned media propaganda campaign to prepare the American public to support the next cynical oil war. And none of this is done to protect Americans or Israelis. None of it. In the long run it will hugely endanger Americans and Israelis...and kill many, many other people. Most of them will be poor people who just happen to be "in the way". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Amos Date: 25 Feb 05 - 01:07 AM Excerpt from the CFR link above: "Will this issue be resolved diplomatically? It appears so, if Iran follows through with its pledges to cooperate with the IAEA and opens all of its nuclear facilities to international inspectors. If Iran continues to violate its agreements, however, sanctions or other punishments could follow. According to the Bush administration, a unilateral military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities is not currently under consideration. -- by Sharon Otterman, staff writer, cfr.org" Thanks for the online links, BB. Nerve-wracking stuff, huh? I really wish we had a trustworthy person in the White House. I do not say that to needle you, but because with his history of altering truth it is really hard to know which of his statements to believe at any point in time. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Feb 05 - 12:59 AM Bearded Bruce, I understand exactly how you must see it, but from where I see it you are living in a reality bubble that is as far out of touch with reality as the first Pope was who decided to declare himself infallible... You actually believe the USA stands for liberty and freedom, don't you? Very few people outside the USA are under that splendid illusion any longer, but they weren't brainwashed by American TV all their lives, and that's why... Your intentions are good, but I think you have little or no idea how your country is seen outside its own borders. I am well aware that some religious fanatics in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and every other Muslim country would like to see Israel destroyed. There are such fanatics, yes. There are similar religious fanatics in the USA also, and in Israel, and you can quote their hateful statements anytime you choose to look them up. I do not judge another whole nation on the basis of the statements of a tiny group of noisy psychotics in its midst. The USA has already proven to be a far greater threat to Muslim populations than Iran could possibly be to either the USA or Israel. It is ludicrous to imagine that Iran would lob a nuke at Israel when they would be committing national suicide by so doing...and they know it! That's realpolitik. Israel can blow Iran up 50 times over. Iran will not launch a nuke at Israel under such circumstances, but will certainly indulge in inflammatory rhetoric to pander to its own angry civilian population. That also is realpolitik....and it isn't just Iran that does that sort of thing. All aggressive and fearful regimes do it. The USA does it. No country on Earth spends more time threatening other people than the USA. I'm sure Iran's government would dearly love to see Israel wiped off the face of the Earth...just like Israel would dearly love to see present-day Iran wiped off the face of the Earth. Their intentions toward one another are obvious. But realpolitik makes it clear that that is NOT going to happen. It's not feasible in either case, and for the Iranians it would plainly be totally suicidal. Ergo...they are not going to do it. It doesn't friggin' matter what they say about it. They can't do it without being destroyed themselves. Therefore, they won't do it. At the end of the day they, like everyone else, want to be left standing...not exterminated. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Bobert Date: 24 Feb 05 - 11:15 PM Department of *ENERGY* is now into makin' designer nukes...Wonder who was in those secret meetings with Dick Cheney when the naytional "erergy policy* was written. But we'll never know since the White House is using "Executive Priviledge" to prevent the public from ever knowing... But we do know that the oil companies have never had it so good and Buish and his boys will have a nice little bunker buster nuke that they very much plan on using... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Feb 05 - 11:13 PM http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2001/dec_2001/rafsanjani_nuke_threats_141201.htm http://www.cfr.org/background/iran_nuclear.php http://fas.org/nuke/guide/iran/nuke/ http://www.ceip.org/files/nonprolif/countries/country.asp?ID=2&country=Iran |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Amos Date: 24 Feb 05 - 11:05 PM BB: There is no left left. Who is this "Left" that "should be" asking Iran to do something? Last I saw the election was When you say a "nuclear capability" in the post just above do you mean energy production? Or do you mean weapons? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Bobert Date: 24 Feb 05 - 11:04 PM Would you mind posting your sources... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Feb 05 - 10:55 PM Bobert: "We don't believe stuff like "Ohhhhh, millions are gonna die iF we don't attack _______________!!!!" YOU are saying that, not me. I am saying Why is it that the Left is not asking Iran to comply with it's UN OBLIGATIONS before there are consequences? You don't seem capable of answering that. Fact: IRAN has stated that it will develop a nuclear capability in violation of it's UN agreements. Fact: IRAN has stated that it will destroy the state of Israel. Fact: The Israelis will not let themselves be destroyed just to make you happy. By NOT pushing IRAN toward honoring it's treaty obligations, YOU are encouraging a (probably) nuclear war. But that seems ok with you, as long as you can blame the US... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Bobert Date: 24 Feb 05 - 10:42 PM And then bb woke up.... Millions of deaths, bb? Really? Would you like to present your evidence this time before going off and kill off a 100,000 innocent people? Yeah, show us the evidence. Oh, you ain't got any? But you want us to just, ahhhhhhh, believe you? Yeah right. Get me once, shame on you. Get me twice, shame on me... PRESENT YOUR CASE FIR WAR IN IRAN... ..or shut the heck up... We don't believe stuff like "Ohhhhh, millions are gonna die iF we don't attack _______________!!!!" That's bull... PRESENT YOUR CASE!!! Facts acceptable... Note: Until I hear something from you that is factual, I'll ignore any more of your posts jst like I have in past you have shown to be nuthin' but an shill who doesn't know anything about anything... So if you got the facts, then let the discussion begin... But you don't... ...so, most likely, good bye to you, part 2... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Feb 05 - 10:24 PM Bobert, The only one around here that is "believe(ing) any and everything that comes outta George Bushe's mouth " seems to be you. Stop telling me what I think. You obviously do not wish to discuss facts, but your self-centered little view of the world. As well meaning as you try to be in regards to killing, you are far more responsible, with your lack of concern with the real world, than Bush is for the next nuclear war. Hope it makes you happy to help cause millions of deaths. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Bobert Date: 24 Feb 05 - 10:15 PM You have no interest in discussing *facts*, bb, but reiterating the Bush PR talking points, which bear little resemblence to fact... When you and yet kind are willing to admit that yer guy was trugger happy the last time around, did everything in it's power to discredit folks who actually had *facts* that went against the PR for war, then we can satrt to talk about this time around... As long as, given the mountain of evidence that yer guy was in way too much of a hurry last time around, then there is nuthin' that my side has to offer you this time... If you want continue to believe any and everything that comes outta George Bushe's mouth then as far as I am concerned: Discussion over with yer ignorant, nationalistic self 'cause yer mind is like a parachute bag with a pad lock on it... Yeah, if that's all you wanta discuss then leave me out 'cuase that ain't no discussion but a bb lecture of PR talking points that have nuthin' to do with fact... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Feb 05 - 09:35 PM Sorry, Bobert. I disagree with your assessment of the facts of the matter. Too bad you can't discuss THEM, instead of your delusions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Bobert Date: 24 Feb 05 - 09:25 PM Problem with you, bb, is that the information *was* there the last time. There were plenty of folks with lots of information, which your hero silenced, your hero's media silenced and that you *flat out* didn't want to hear. Just like now! Youi don't want to hear anything that will deprive you of yer nationalistic right to blow up other folks. Fine. Go enlist... But you won't. Why. Because you like gettin' yer jollies watchin' it on TV. Knock yerself out but in the final accounting, you *will be* judged for the war monger you are. Just like yer hero... If you want outta the prison of narrow mindedness that you have built around you there are alot more sources of news than Fox and the Big Three. But you feel all smug and comfy in yer little prison... "Sealed dead in my armor..." That song was about you... And don't give me that right winged mantra that we on the other side don't listen to the right wing side becauswe one can't escape it. It's everywhere you look. You and yer war mongin' world criminals have taken over 99% of every media outlet on the planet so please save us that little mindless rebuttal, thank you... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Feb 05 - 08:52 PM LH Israel has NOT stated that it has the goal of the total destruction of Iran or any other country. Iran, among other Arab nations, HAS made that statement about Israel. Or do you think the Iranians are lying about their goal? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Feb 05 - 08:47 PM Peace is devoutly to be wished for- the problem is that I do not see that allowing Iran to continue a program it is obligated by UN treaty to end will allow for any peace in the region. You seem (IMO) to differ in the assessment of the situation. And if my comments are "crap", why is it you ( collectively) insist on ad hominim arguements instead of addressing the facts I am bringing up? Could it be that since you can't fault the facts, you have to attack the messanger? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Amos Date: 24 Feb 05 - 08:34 PM Bruce: You do that to others frequently, in case you haven't noticed. You define others' points of view for them according to some twisty idea of your own and then mock them for having an idea they never claimed to have. You did it in this thread with that crap about the Mideast up thread. I do hope you get over your mad, Bruce. Peace. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Feb 05 - 08:01 PM Bobert, YOU have stated "you were one of the folks who believed Condi Rice's "mushroom cloud" and Bush's "We could be a attacked in as little as 45 minutes" story???..." I said that there was, FROM THE INFORMATION KNOWN AT THE TIME, a real danger that Iraq was capable of WMD ( INCLUDING biological and chemical, which you ignore that they ALREADY had used) If you insist on defining what I believe in spite of what I say, then blame me for believing it, you are a real shit for brains. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Bobert Date: 24 Feb 05 - 07:58 PM Yeah, bb, and you were one of the folks who believed Condi Rice's "mushroom cloud" and Bush's "We could be a attacked in as little as 45 minutes" story???... Talk about talkin' from one's posterior, pal, after the last fiasco I would think you, and yer buddies, would have pulled up your pants by now... But keep firin' them lies... but would ya please take 'um down wind? They don't smell any better than the last time... Nasty... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Feb 05 - 07:21 PM Frank, give me a year, 30 pounds of thorium, and about $50k for parts, and I could build a 30-60 KT nuke. No problem at all. Lots easier than an internal combustion engine. So long as I don't care about surviving long after making it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Feb 05 - 07:14 PM But I guess if we give him a choice between a few thousand killed and millions, he will opt for the largest number of killed and injured, just as a matter of principle. Got to blame the US , you know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Feb 05 - 07:13 PM Sounds like Bobert is talking out of his ass, to me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: Bobert Date: 24 Feb 05 - 07:11 PM Sounds like bb is talkin' about the US of A to me, LH... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Feb 05 - 07:05 PM LH, So you feel that is it ok for a country that has threatened the annihilation of another country JUST BECAUSE it exists to be deserving of violating it's treaty commitments and continuing with a nuclear program, againsts all UN pleas? Thank you for revealling that you are in favor of the destruction of the Mideast as a habitat for life. |
