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.
People would be very wise to stop trying to antagonize Iran and North Korea and forcing them to develop more advanced weapons. I know the idea is to start another war, but it's unprovoked and we don't need another war.
Your policy would result in the attaining of nuclear weapons by radical and irresponsible regimes. That would lead to cataclysmic war. Appeasing The Islamic State of Iran will not stop it's march toward nuclear weaponization. The "idea" of sanctions is not to provoke war but to make the military option unnecessary.
That would muss up the Care Bear, world image, that 0bama is trying to create for himself.
I found this interesting:
"Bottom line: It allows us to put our finger right on the pressure point where Iran is the weakest, and that is gasoline," said Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer of New York.
Just like our stupid policy of refusing to drill for our own oil has manufactured an artificial "pressure point" of our own in this country. I'm sure that Schumer is incapable of any of this type of out of the box democrat thinking.
Your policy would result in the attaining of nuclear weapons by radical and irresponsible regimes. That would lead to cataclysmic war. Appeasing The Islamic State of Iran will not stop it's march toward nuclear weaponization. The "idea" of sanctions is not to provoke war but to make the military option unnecessary.
Your policy would result in the attaining of nuclear weapons by radical and irresponsible regimes. That would lead to cataclysmic war. Appeasing The Islamic State of Iran will not stop it's march toward nuclear weaponization. The "idea" of sanctions is not to provoke war but to make the military option unnecessary.
The world is full of those people, military pressure is off the table, and so too is tough political pressure, we would not want to "antagonize" the enemy, its best just to sit back and wait until they get nukes, or maybe better still to wait until they use them a few times before you start talking tough.... but wait.... then they WILL have nukes.... probably best not to antagonize them then either...... where was that web site again www.crawlinaholeandpullthecoversovermyhead.gov?
People would be very wise to stop trying to antagonize Iran and North Korea and forcing them to develop more advanced weapons. I know the idea is to start another war, but it's unprovoked and we don't need another war.
fatchance,
I was just thinking that if you replace "Iran and North Korea" in your post with "Germany and Japan" it presents a history lesson. There were people in the US in 1939 saying exactly that. They put pressure on Roosevelt and delayed the US entry in the fight against Nazi Germany for years. That resulted in a longer war and more lives lost. Neville Chamberlain also tried it your way, and we know how successful that was.
I was just thinking that if you replace "Iran and North Korea" in your post with "Germany and Japan" it presents a history lesson. There were people in the US in 1939 saying exactly that. They put pressure on Roosevelt and delayed the US entry in the fight against Nazi Germany for years. That resulted in a longer war and more lives lost. Neville Chamberlain also tried it your way, and we know how successful that was.
Bull****. Neville Chamberlain offered Poland a worthless alliance, one he knew he couldn't fulfill. That was his mistake--not refusing to go to war over Czechoslovakia.
The US had no business entering the war, we were roped in because Roosevelt desperately wanted war and baited the Japanese. It's a great shame they took the bait, but doesn't absolve Roosevelt, the great bastard, for what he did to get us into that spot.
Your policy would result in the attaining of nuclear weapons by radical and irresponsible regimes. That would lead to cataclysmic war. Appeasing The Islamic State of Iran will not stop it's march toward nuclear weaponization. The "idea" of sanctions is not to provoke war but to make the military option unnecessary.
I'm not sure how you can say my "policy" will lead to them attaining nuclear weapons and cataclysmic war any more than I can say that yours would. At the moment yours seems to be making good progress in that direction. We assassinated these people's democratically elected leader after WWII and placed a despotic monarch on the throne. They had around 20 years of Pax Tyrannis. The people grew ever more restive as the monarch developed cancer and lost his grip on power while the USA fanned the flames of Islamic Fundamentalism in Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan. Now that the Soviet Union has fallen we've decided we don't like Islamic Fundamentalism anymore and they still haven't been selling us cheap oil since the guy we put on the throne said F***k You 30 years ago So now we're going to apply sanctions, as we did with Iraq and North Korea. North Koreans get to watch their children starve to death in front of them thanks to us, and there is no longer a Korean alive who does not have excellent reason to passionately hate us from the moment of birth. Rather than discourage a nuclear program this compels them to pour money into one in the midst of unimaginable poverty, knowing that it is the only possible way to defend themselves against the paunchy over-the-hill Global Bully. Iran is more prosperous and better educated than the Koreans, and arguably moreso than we are. They have plenty of trade partners with no interest in the greed and folly of our foreign policy or the arrogance of our demands. The idea that we have some God given right to dictate to the world who is allowed to have what technology is a symptom of the disease that has destroyed our once great country. We were prepared to defend ourselves against the great and powerful Soviet Union and we are more than prepared to defend ourselves against these two small countries should they ever develop into a threat to us, whichtheyhavenot. The mere possession of nuclear or rocket technology does not come close to qualifying, nor does the fact that we don't like their religion. I have not suggested that we appease anybody. I have suggested that we stop behaving like the arrogant Godless immoral inhuman Great Satan they describe, and start acting like the United States of America and once again provide the world with some leadership other than just trying to turn everyone's pockets inside out.
Last edited by fatchance2005; 04-29-2009 at 06:21 PM..
I was just thinking that if you replace "Iran and North Korea" in your post with "Germany and Japan" it presents a history lesson. There were people in the US in 1939 saying exactly that. They put pressure on Roosevelt and delayed the US entry in the fight against Nazi Germany for years. That resulted in a longer war and more lives lost. Neville Chamberlain also tried it your way, and we know how successful that was.
What is it the guy said? There is some formula that says no matter what topic you start with there's a mathematical function of time that predicts exactly when somebody introduces Nazi's into the conversation? I thought it was goofy when I heard it, but I haven't seen an exception yet. I suppose that I should respond to this anyway, although my response to the post is on my previous response. My suggestion that we stop goading, taunting, and provoking these two small countries who have done us no harm in more than 20 years is nothing like Chamberlain and Nazi Germany. England had not been trying to push Hitler around and consequently Chamberlain did not tell them to stop.
Couldn't Venezuela and Russia offset the sanctions? If so, what actions would you take against them for doing so?
Bingo... Lets not forget China, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Malaysia, Serbia and Bahrain either, not to mention Iraq which if I'm not mistaken recently signed some trade agreements with Iran. Not even to mention that Iran has the worlds second largest proven gas and oil reserves in which many countries and most notably, all of Europe depend upon.
10 bucks says there will be no sanctions because they would be totally ineffectual on our behalf and would if anything, likely send oil prices heading skyward again.
you stop trading with OPEC and they will be back to bedouin camels and single shot rifles in a jiffy.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
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.
