Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyRider
I bet if you get pushed you'd say they are entitled to have one. US has them, why not Iran?
|
No. Nobody should have a nuclear weapon. It is explicitly designed to kill as many innocent people as possible, and even one innocent person dead is a moral tragedy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyRider
20,000 Hezbollah rockets and 5000 Hamas rockets that were actually fired at Israel is not evidence? Oh, they are real alright. And where did they come from? Why is Hezbollah fighting tooth and nail to keep Assad in power. They want to keep their bridge to Iran open. And what do they need Iran for?
|
I'll give you Hezbollah in terms of Iranian influence, but not Hamas. That's just Israeli propaganda to comport to the "poor-little-Israel" narrative from guys like Dennis Prager and Michael Savage and their ilk... the kinds of zionists that argue that Israel is this poor little state that doesn't do anything to anyone and is surrounded by enemies that would pounce on them in a second if not for their U.S. military alliance. This narrative is garbage and the same people who concocted it are the ones trying to draw a Hamas-Iran connection deeper than the one that exists. Certainly, Iran has payed lip service to Hamas' fight and there
is evidence of tacit, if meager, support. But to claim that they're under Iranian control is madness.
And as for Hezbollah, that's not entirely accurate either. It should be noted that Hezbollah formed as a reactionary group to the Israeli occupation of Southern Lebanon and their hand in the Sabra and Shatila massacres in the first place. They're not some rogue Iranian-backed psuedo state whose purpose for existence is to wipe Israel out. They're terrorists, no doubt, but they're resistance-based terrorists, and almost all of the horrible things they've been blamed for doing spontaneously for terrorist motives were, by the State Department's own admission, generally retaliatory for Israeli attacks. That is not to justify what they do, or even their existence. That is just to point out that they're not constantly threatening Israel with destruction and chaos in the way that Bibi and his cronies would love for us to believe.
Also, they're not involved in Syria just to keep their Iranian lifeline open, although I'm sure they'd love that. They're primarily involved in Syria to keep the ISIS loons from wiping out the Shia population of the Levant; as the primary Shia resistance movement in the Arab world, and probably the best-trained Arab army, many of their leaders have spoken of considering it a "duty" to do what they're doing. I disagree completely, but again, I'm just using this to show that the "constant-threat-to-Israel" narrative is really more media scaremongering than anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim_a49
Do you visit earth much.
|
Yes. And, as is characteristic of the Iran-has-a-nuclear-weapons-program crowd, you didn't actually give me any evidence, you just try to character assassinate me. Most of the IAEA reports that the media points to are twisted in such ridiculous ways that they are made to appear to say almost the exact opposite of what they actually do. Case in point, there was recently this huge uproar (like a week ago?) about a kilogram of missing Uranium in Iranian nuclear facilities. The report went on to say that the special IAEA seal was not broken, and the original contents of the drum had not actually been weighed, only estimated on two separate occasions, and that each estimate was subjective and it did not indicate that any Uranium had been removed. The U.S. and Israeli media, however, spun that to read that the Iranians had taken a kilogram of unprocessed Uranium and diverted it to a weapons facility, which they supported with the "evidence" of the discrepancy between the two reports, leaving off entirely the IAEA's
own conclusion that there was nothing significant whatsoever about the discrepancy. This has happened ever since '79 when they became bogeyman #1 to the American media.
Like I said, if anyone can give me
real evidence that hasn't been debunked by
actual experts or journalists (and David Albright is neither an "expert" nor a "journalist" so save me any of that fraud's work) then I'd be happy to change my opinion. Problem is, there just isn't any out there.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
