TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Those pesky Iranians at it again.
Pages (12): « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 »

quote:

Originally posted by CHRles I'll be happy to hold you to that. I'm gonna bookmark this page and see what happens when war breaks out with Iran. But hey, why wait - feel free to go burn yourself with gasoline right now. It sounds like you've got a BURNING sensation to do it anyways

That's lame as hell. You are even less funny than Louie Anderson.

Why are they lasting out this whole entire situation? Parading naval personel on television reading out silly statements. Just hand them over get back to the table and discuss it rationally.

I don't enjoy seeing Iranian students throwing bricks at our Embassy, It's fueling the fire even more because Brits are looking at them pictures and it's not painting the Iranian people in a brilliant light, even though it's a minority of stupid idiots participating.

quote:

Originally posted by venomX They're both proven liers. You're preference of believing your side of the story is a clear bias of living in the US. Now the interesting question is, if you have that bias, wouldn't others also have it? And if you can understand this concept, wouldn't you also espouse the belief that this type of intimidation and warmongering doesn't amount to anything else than escalation which will surely be followed by more war, more instability, more hunger and more suffering. Notice that in that list you'll never find anything positive, as with all wars. No war has ever brought any good, only of course the spoils for the victor. And if that is the point, the spoils, why cover it up and pretend you're doing good?

nice obfuscation. it has totally replaced your notion of war into a convenient utopian worldview.

you are the prototypical modern liberal. IOW "In order to eliminate discrimination, the modern liberal has opted to become utterly indiscriminate."

quote:

Originally posted by Marc Summers That's lame as hell. You are even less funny than Louie Anderson.

he's kinda right though. i mean if you are serious about setting yourself on fire, or doing anything destructive, why not do it now? you're just waiting for someone to give you an excuse?

that in itself is pretty lame given IT'S IRAN ffs!

It'll all be over in 1-2 weeks, just slightly amusing to see the doomsayers and warmongers come out of the closet around the same time screaming the worst.
But 1-2 weeks is about all that this is worth as a news story, after that they'll hand them back and neither England or Iran will mention how or why, tinpot dictator shakes his fist on TV angrily, proudly displaying "LOOK MA! WE MADE THE NEWS!" on international TV for that time.

All part of being a tin pot dictator in the first place- need to get on TV and be in the news because once you're on the news, you look important and even more special when it's foreign news. Doesn't matter 'why' you're on the news because essentially you control all the media outlets anyway so for all the proles know the marines could have been busted for getting drunk and driving into Iranian waters accidentally and where detained by the Revolutionary guard before they could commit any more blasphemy...

Why are they doing this?
Because the americans have proved time and time again they can reach out and touch, grab and drag off pretty much whoever they wanted from Iran and that's kind of embarrassing when you're a tin pot dictator.
That makes you look like a weakling who can't secure their boarders and hence the claims from Iran recently that they could run out and snatch anyone they wanted anywhere in the world in the lead up to this.
Now, tinpot dictator has some proof of this and in a chest thumping, testosterone mentally retarded male dominated society, it's the ugg things in life that matters to your cowering in fear loyal followers.
Might makes right.
Weenie waggling in the breeze, but that's all it's going to amount too, England might be a bit of a snaggle tooth old dog with a pretty crap military which has been downsized for the last 30years, but it's still enough to ream Iran and possibly destabilise tin pot dictator.
You don't want that as a tin pot dictator, your job is to stand there and look tough for the course of your natural or unnatural life may be if your underlings get any wise ideas... and they will too if several million of your citizens get killed.

Wars are just as bad for tyrants as they are for 'democratic' leaders, there won't be any war.

quote:

Originally posted by Lilith It'll all be over in 1-2 weeks, just slightly amusing to see the doomsayers and warmongers come out of the closet around the same time screaming the worst. But 1-2 weeks is about all that this is worth as a news story, after that they'll hand them back and neither England or Iran will mention how or why, tinpot dictator shakes his fist on TV angrily, proudly displaying "LOOK MA! WE MADE THE NEWS!" on international TV for that time. All part of being a tin pot dictator in the first place- need to get on TV and be in the news because once you're on the news, you look important and even more special when it's foreign news. Doesn't matter 'why' you're on the news because essentially you control all the media outlets anyway so for all the proles know the marines could have been busted for getting drunk and driving into Iranian waters accidentally and where detained by the Revolutionary guard before they could commit any more blasphemy... Why are they doing this? Because the americans have proved time and time again they can reach out and touch, grab and drag off pretty much whoever they wanted from Iran and that's kind of embarrassing when you're a tin pot dictator. That makes you look like a weakling who can't secure their boarders and hence the claims from Iran recently that they could run out and snatch anyone they wanted anywhere in the world in the lead up to this. Now, tinpot dictator has some proof of this and in a chest thumping, testosterone mentally retarded male dominated society, it's the ugg things in life that matters to your cowering in fear loyal followers. Might makes right. Weenie waggling in the breeze, but that's all it's going to amount too, England might be a bit of a snaggle tooth old dog with a pretty crap military which has been downsized for the last 30years, but it's still enough to ream Iran and possibly destabilise tin pot dictator. You don't want that as a tin pot dictator, your job is to stand there and look tough for the course of your natural or unnatural life may be if your underlings get any wise ideas... and they will too if several million of your citizens get killed. Wars are just as bad for tyrants as they are for 'democratic' leaders, there won't be any war.

i totally agree lilith, however this involves much more than just a tinpot dictator and his whimsy. this can not and should not be dismissed considering who we are dealing with. i'm not saying you are dismissing it but we (Americans) have never gone to war over hostages, and we've had experience. Iran 1979, U.S.S. Pueblo (which bears eerie similarities) TWA 847 to name a few.

and what is the tolerable limit, if there is such a thing, as to how long they should be held? anybody?

quote:

England might be a bit of a snaggle tooth old dog with a pretty crap military which has been downsized for the last 30years,

We've got a brilliant military. The downsizing has effected it, getting rid of historical regiments such as Blackwatch was seriously wrong and seriously against this countries military tradition. Also the fact some of politicians at Whitehall don't listen to logistical needs of the officers. Rule number 1 let the Army officers run the army not politicians that's the biggest problem we face.

Other then that we're revamping the navy with 3 new aircraft carriers due in a few years time, the Euro fighters in circulation for the airforce, the Army are getting extra helicopters for transportation and logistical purposes and additional benefits pension funds etc for the grunts.

right but Her Majesty's Royal Navy, even more importantly the concept of her, isn't a minuscule fraction of what it once was.

thats not a material issue, it's an ideological one. and it's a damn shame.


now her submarine force...that you should be proud of.

Oh I'd never dismiss Iran out of hand, they're quite adept at destabilising things on the sly and the people in charge are/where absolutely fanatical. Kind of like the current US administration since WW2 in a lot of respects if you where to compare them, both are reliant on the religious forces in the country to keep them in power, either by elections or consent and they aren't the most reasonable of people when it comes to diplomatic relations.
And the tolerant, moderate majority in both countries tend to be the people with the least effect on their respective societies, to keep them onside you have to keep 'polarising' them to the effect that they at least are pro-government in power.

Several ways you can do that, media manipulation (aka Propaganda), social rewards for supporting, punishment for not supporting and every ones old favourite... national pride.

For now it's a show-trial so to speak, rallying up support.


Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not pro-Iranian!
Indeed, stick me in the same room as some of these misogynistic despots and they'd be being carried out with some fatal injuries.

quote:

Originally posted by Dj O'Callaghan *I'll chop it down to size*

Key point is, that at the moment England is certainly not in any position to blow up a country on our own (nuclear force not withstanding) for a few years, still suffering from the downsizing of the 80's and 90's to the point where it's extremely difficult to project the force needed.
Certainly don't think economically England is up to shape either.

i also heard as late as last month, Blair is set to mothball 44 warships and at that time HMRN will be smaller and less effective than the French

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo i also heard as late as last month, Blair is set to mothball 44 warships and at that time HMRN will be smaller and less effective than the French

They're planning to replace a lot of ships with newer ones so it can't be too bad. In all honesty we don't have a massive empire anymore, I would like a big navy but we're not running colonies all over the place so there isn't the need, for a traditional sense though I would like to see a lot more ships.

quote:

Key point is, that at the moment England is certainly not in any position to blow up a country on our own (nuclear force not withstanding) for a few years, still suffering from the downsizing of the 80's and 90's to the point where it's extremely difficult to project the force needed.

You'll always need people on the ground but warfare has changed. With the use of air power, cruise missles etc there isn't the need to send 500,000 odd people charging onto a beach.

I'm totally against the downsizing and mergers for the fact I think you always need a decent size army.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z LOL, do you guys really love war and falling for classic FFs that much?

It is disturbing to me that the people who consider themselves the "progressive thinkers" can't "think".

DAAAAAAAAAAMMMMNNN

More military practices more talkings more preperations

WTF

quote:

Britain has sent a written response to the Iranian government regarding the 15 detained sailors and marines, the Foreign Office has said. It follows a letter received by the British Embassy in Tehran from the Iranian government earlier this week. Foreign Minister Margaret Beckett said Britain had responded by diplomatic note to Iran's capture of the naval personnel. "We had a diplomatic note and we have made our response." The two sides were now talking, she said. "We have made our response and we are now beginning to discuss. As you may know it's a holiday period in Iran and it's perhaps not too helpful."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...31/wiran931.xml

For my great astonishment that the Sunday Telegragh
raising the escalation of the crisis
1st. The iranian TV shows that these sailors are well treated
well temperament,...
2nd. How many great doubts and confussions will be reached to
the British people if the iranian TV didnot shows these videos
3th. THE both sides insist on their own positions
4th. So If any doubts about entering the Iranian water
so IT MUST taken As "Openness and understandings Needing Tact Policy"Many matters
are resolved.



STOP TALKING ABOUT WAR

quote:

Originally posted by Dj O'Callaghan They're planning to replace a lot of ships with newer ones so it can't be too bad. In all honesty we don't have a massive empire anymore, I would like a big navy but we're not running colonies all over the place so there isn't the need, for a traditional sense though I would like to see a lot more ships. You'll always need people on the ground but warfare has changed. With the use of air power, cruise missles etc there isn't the need to send 500,000 odd people charging onto a beach. I'm totally against the downsizing and mergers for the fact I think you always need a decent size army.

Someone want to come over and explain this to our country???

Actually our current PM (Harper) is actually doing something about our military after several decades of mothballing and ignorance from the previous Liberal Party stranglehold.
Hard to believe that our Navy was once the 4th largest after WWII and now, can't even patrol our own coast (which admittedly is frickin' huge).
*sigh*
/rant

quote:

Originally posted by M.Johan DAAAAAAAAAAMMMMNNN More military practices more talkings more preperations WTF http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...31/wiran931.xml For my great astonishment that the Sunday Telegragh raising the escalation of the crisis 1st. The iranian TV shows that these sailors are well treated well temperament,... 2nd. How many great doubts and confussions will be reached to the British people if the iranian TV didnot shows these videos 3th. THE both sides insist on their own positions 4th. So If any doubts about entering the Iranian water so IT MUST taken As "Openness and understandings Needing Tact Policy"Many matters are resolved. STOP TALKING ABOUT WAR

Well, if anyone has experience in dealing with foreign negotiations, it should be Britain...especially that region.
Lets hope for the best.

quote:

Originally posted by venomX They're both proven liers. You're preference of believing your side of the story is a clear bias of living in the US. Now the interesting question is, if you have that bias, wouldn't others also have it? And if you can understand this concept, wouldn't you also espouse the belief that this type of intimidation and warmongering doesn't amount to anything else than escalation which will surely be followed by more war, more instability, more hunger and more suffering. Notice that in that list you'll never find anything positive, as with all wars. No war has ever brought any good, only of course the spoils for the victor. And if that is the point, the spoils, why cover it up and pretend you're doing good?

I already said I'm prone not to believe anything from either side. However, for the most part, the West has been pretty quiet on the matter. Yes, we have gotten condemnations and such, and the British were vocal at first. However, Iran has released a new confession, video or press release concerning the sailors or further acts against Iran literally every day. If you say nothing, it's hard to lie, but if you're constantly pushing out more crap to the media, in order to one-up your last release I am "biased" into believing that they *might* be lying.

I'd also argue that wars can bring about good. You can debate "end justifying the means," all you want, but when it means removing a proven, ruthless dictator (ala WWII and Hitler) who without military intervention would have had no problem dominating the entire planet via his agenda, I'd say war does bring about relative good. It should always be a last resort, however when dealing with irrational people, war is sometimes the only means of preventing far worse atrocities than war brings.

quote:

Originally posted by NeoPhono I already said I'm prone not to believe anything from either side. However, for the most part, the West has been pretty quiet on the matter. Yes, we have gotten condemnations and such, and the British were vocal at first. However, Iran has released a new confession, video or press release concerning the sailors or further acts against Iran literally every day. If you say nothing, it's hard to lie, but if you're constantly pushing out more crap to the media, in order to one-up your last release I am "biased" into believing that they *might* be lying. I'd also argue that wars can bring about good. You can debate "end justifying the means," all you want, but when it means removing a proven, ruthless dictator (ala WWII and Hitler) who without military intervention would have had no problem dominating the entire planet via his agenda, I'd say war does bring about relative good. It should always be a last resort, however when dealing with irrational people, war is sometimes the only means of preventing far worse atrocities than war brings.

the best ex. Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by LazFX It is disturbing to me that the people who consider themselves the "progressive thinkers" can't "think".

LOL, that means a lot coming from you, and I've never really considered myself to be a "progressive thinker" but whatever.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo nice obfuscation. it has totally replaced your notion of war into a convenient utopian worldview. you are the prototypical modern liberal. IOW "In order to eliminate discrimination, the modern liberal has opted to become utterly indiscriminate."

Are you still whining about liberals???

The liberals can look at your face, point and say "I TOLD YOU SO"

So stick a carrot up your ass

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo he's kinda right though. i mean if you are serious about setting yourself on fire, or doing anything destructive, why not do it now? you're just waiting for someone to give you an excuse? that in itself is pretty lame given IT'S IRAN ffs!

He's not "Kinda" right. He's not right at all. Why would I do it now? Because of Iraq? The invasion already happened, I can't change that. The only thing that bugs me about Iraq is the lack of Everything being invested into the stabilization process. Nothing is being done right. It's certainly nothing to fret over, in my opinion.

If Iran is invaded by the United States, it's just aggression, plain and simple. When I see my country as aggressive, something needs to be changed. I may not burn myself (That would hurt, and taking pain killers would defeat the purpose of burning myself in protest, in my opinion). I definitely would go on a hunger strike, it seems reasonable. I have enough money to take a many weeks off from work, so it would be no problem. I will go to Washington, D.C., and go on an hunger strike if an Invasion of Iran occurs.

And "It's Iran"?

It's our planet. If we invade Iran, expect another Cold War (Not with Russia, necessarily), or even another World War. I care about consequences on a broader scale.

Bill Has All the Answers....

quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King Are you still whining about liberals??? The liberals can look at your face, point and say "I TOLD YOU SO" So stick a carrot up your ass

Come on guys, we can agree to disagree, but the 5yr old antics can really stop anytime...

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo nice obfuscation. it has totally replaced your notion of war into a convenient utopian worldview. you are the prototypical modern liberal. IOW "In order to eliminate discrimination, the modern liberal has opted to become utterly indiscriminate."

Calling someone a liberal is not sufficient grounds for a counterpoint.

quote:

Originally posted by Lilith Key point is, that at the moment England is certainly not in any position to blow up a country on our own (nuclear force not withstanding) for a few years, still suffering from the downsizing of the 80's and 90's to the point where it's extremely difficult to project the force needed. Certainly don't think economically England is up to shape either.

I know it's a small kinda off topic point... but one of the guys is Scottish. And it is more the British armed forces. (just kinda like saying Scotland is in England at a time when nearly 50% want to leave Britain never mind being a separate country to England)

But I recon it won't even go as far as sanctions.

The whole thing is stupid. Absolutely disgraceful.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.