US pions fear the US people hearing Ahmadinejad ... why?

[Castle]

Zealots? It's quite ironic coming from someone who is defending a guy who is planning the second holocaust of the jews while denying the first.

“Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury,”
- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Ironic indeed! ....... and rather sickening that some here hang on this cur's every word.

-Castle

 

[berreal]

This gets at the very heart of why anyone bothers to study history. We study history to learn from the mistakes (and triumphs, though granted there are precious few of those) of the past. We use that study to help us to influence how we make decisions today.

Take, for instance, our lovely friend Mr. Bush. He figured invading Iraq would be a grand old idea - partially because he figured we'd be welcomed as liberators (I think Rumsfeld was the one who came out with that beauty of a line).

He (they?) failed to consider the long history of distrust between the West and the Middle East. He failed to consider the ramifications of calling the war in Iraq a "crusade" (one little slip, I know...still, that must have made a HUGE propaganda point for the other side). He failed to consider the lingering prejudice against English-speaking peoples in Iraq (the British weren't the nicest occupying authorities between the wars - Winston Churchill was actually the first person to suggest using gas against the Kurds to keep them in line). He failed to consider that the last time the West promised freedom from tyrants (the Ottoman Turks) to Iraq, it took thirty years of European occupation before they followed through on it. He failed to consider the widely publicized "military police actions" of the Cold War, so many of which seemed to crush popular sovereignty instead of grant it. Historically speaking, Iraq had no reason to trust us, and, in my opinion, that's the reason the Iraqi government isn't making any progress - they'd prefer to do it their way without us looking over their shoulders, because they don't trust our intentions.

How does this have anything to do with Mr. Ahmadinejad? While Mr. Bush failed to consider the historical ramifications of his actions, Mr. Ahmadinejad wishes to fabricate historical ramifications for his own political ends. What would you be saying now if George Bush had claimed that the people of the Middle East always welcomed our actions?

Ever set a trap for a rat? Two rats pass by see the cheese one tries to get it and gets killed..the other escape. Well set the same trap a few minutes later and turn the light off ...out comes the second rat going again after tha same cheese. Thats how these right wing zealot are... geeze ..we just saw what happened in Iraq ...and back they come ..hell bent on the same fear and scare garbage!

In fact Ahmadinejad said something I've been saying for quite some time now.
He empahtically made the point how our politicians sell the ...fear and scare.. to carry out their dirty work!!

We armed Saddam ..
we gave Saddam chemical weapons to kill Iranians...
we plant spies and assasins in their country
We destroyed a democracy they had because we wanted their oil
They mistreat women ...oh pleeze look at our track record
They kill people indiscrinately ...HELLO ...WE HAD SLAVES FOR 100's of years!!

And yet ..these zealots just eat up the FEAR and SCARE ...like rats!

Mr Ahmadinejad in addition said ...how the hell can a country who want to want to lead the world ..refuse to talk to people.

In many instances ...if I saw the rhetoric on paper and then asked who are the MULLAHS ...it would seem to be Americans!!
Talk about burying your head in the sand!!

Zealots? It's quite ironic coming from someone who is defending a guy who is planning the second holocaust of the jews while denying the first.

This is the political ..FEAR and SCARE .. Mr. Ahmadinejad talked about today.
How long has the present Iranian regime been in power? Ever wonder how all of a sudden they are about to destroy the world in your mind?

Its the same way Saddam was about to explode NUKULEER explosions on the street of America ...you dam looney!!

How dunce can you be??

 

[Bunz]

I dont think either of them are right. In the grand Bush vs. Whatever other international leader whether it be Chavez, Putin, Kimmy Ill, or
Ahman-Icantspellhisname. They all are playing to thier domestic audience bases. It is unwise for any world leader to ignore another one, especially when the discussion revolves around them.
A few things though, Berreal, name me one weapons system that the US sold to Iraq. Name it, I hope you can. Because it was the Soviets, French, British and Germans who armed Saddam. I wont disagree that Iraq is just about FUBAR. But because the Iranian leader is down on Bush doesnt mean he is at all better, but in my opinion he is much worse. I dare you to go to Iran, and transpose the things you wrote about Bush with Ahmadinejad. See how long you will last before having to explain yourself.
Look, there are plenty of us who think Bush is doing a piss poor job. I am one of him, but this nutjob from Iran is worse a flat out psycho.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

Berreal -- you're going to have to tone it down and refrain from all the namecalling. Be civil in your tone and people might actually take you seriously. Until then, your just another ranting and raving lefty with nothing substantial to say.

 

[Bunz]

Berreal -- you're going to have to tone it down and refrain from all the namecalling. Be civil in your tone and people might actually take you seriously. Until then, your just another ranting and raving lefty with nothing substantial to say.

He isnt even a lefty, more like a wacky and I dont think it really matters what Ahmadinajad really said, he was dead set on agreeing with everything that Mr. Iran was going to say, just because he knew it would be divisive. Ahmad could have claimed World War Two didnt really happen and Berreal would have agreed. It was just a misunderstanding between neighbors that turned into a brief skirmish.

 

[vyo476]

A few things though, Berreal, name me one weapons system that the US sold to Iraq. Name it, I hope you can. Because it was the Soviets, French, British and Germans who armed Saddam.

Well, actually...we did too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran-Iraq_war

Iraq was even temporarily removed from the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism so that we could give them weapons.

 

[drippinhun]

We can't say anything civil about the leader of a nation we are going to concoct reasons to go to war against. It has become the American way.

Three questions:

How many countries has Iran militarily attacked over the same time period the United States has been in existance?

How many countries has the U.S. militarily fought since 1945?

Is there any historical reason why Iran may distrust Western intentions?

 

[Bunz]

Well, actually...we did too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran-Iraq_war

Iraq was even temporarily removed from the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism so that we could give them weapons.

Look at what weapons they were sold. Who sold them and how much here. The US role is very inconsequential.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_sales_to_Iraq_1973-1990
The US government sold directly to Iraq roughly 100 helicopters that were/are far from effective in combat. Mostly used as liason choppers. Worth about 200million dollars. Roughly a half a percent of the rest of the military equipment the world provided to them.
There are plenty of accusations about dual purpose stuff, and while i dont discount a bunch of that. Keep in mind it was IRAN who took 52 Americans hostage for 444 days and the lives of 8 people trying to rescue them.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

 

[9sublime]

Berreal is a more coherent Roker isn't he?

Irans leader is a bad man, but in the end America did sell weapons and did support the very same leader they end up touting as the most evil man in the world. Its embarassing.

 

[Bunz]

The Americans/British did it more than once. Can anyone say Stalin? Hindsight is always 20/20, and foreign policy often makes for interesting bedfellows. Despite what one wants to say about how evil the west is, and the whole blame America first movement that seems to be going on, Stalin was the enemy of Hitler, also our enemy. Without the Soviets the western powers probably would not have won.
Saddam was the enemy of Iran, therefore a useful ally to the west. Saddam owed buckets of money to Kuwait, who refused to forgive the debt. Saddam invaded Kuwait. UN Coalition ejects Iraq from Kuwait. Sanctions imposed, WMD disarmament etc...eventually leading to the current situation.
100 helicopters 25 years ago, is a drop in the bucket. Hell France/Germany sold them exponentially more materiel including a nuclear reactor.
I guess what I am trying to sum up this whole thing, it is this. If you were PotUS Reagan, in 1981 and after you secured the release of the hostages in Iran, and Iraq invaded Iran. You would be wise to support that endeavour. You cannot predict the future especially under those circumstances.

 

[drippinhun]

Support how? Aircraft parts for money to be funneled to the vestiges of a brutal, expelled dicatorship in Nicaragua? Or helping the other side with chemical weapons that we later ostracized them for using? I believe some trash hiding behind Reagan, living at the former Superintendent of the Naval Observatory's residence, was profiteering from every angle. It seems to be in that family's blood.

 

[palerider]

Berreal is a more coherent Roker isn't he?

.

No. On occasion, roker did attempt to substantiate his positions with actual arguments of a sort. bereal does not. when he is challenged on any level, his answer is name calling without fail.

 

[jb_1430]

Well, actually...we did too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran-Iraq_war

Iraq was even temporarily removed from the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism so that we could give them weapons.

Your link doesnt mention even one such weapons system. You think you are refuting his point while in fact you are making it for him.

 

[vyo476]

Your link doesnt mention even one such weapons system. You think you are refuting his point while in fact you are making it for him.

You just don't like me, do you?

He said that the Soviets, the French, the British, and the Germans armed Saddam. I said we did too. If you look up the list you'll find that in his last response to me he made mention of the 100 helicopters that we did sell to Saddam.

Yeah, we didn't do as much as the others he mentioned. In the interests of honesty though we ought to recognize that we did contribute to Saddam's military inventory.

 

[berreal]

You just don't like me, do you?

He said that the Soviets, the French, the British, and the Germans armed Saddam. I said we did too. If you look up the list you'll find that in his last response to me he made mention of the 100 helicopters that we did sell to Saddam.

Yeah, we didn't do as much as the others he mentioned. In the interests of honesty though we ought to recognize that we did contribute to Saddam's military inventory.

Let me make it plain and clear. I don't really know who Mr.Ahmadinejad is ... like everyone else in this forum. But I do remember one of the things bush did with Saddam was to work to cut off dialogue. ...ensuring we went to war. Saddam wanted a public debate .....no you don't do that ...but there was no reason why bush or his surrogate couldn't get in a room with him ..shut the door and ask Saddam WTF is up? Instead what bush did was pretend he wanted dialogue by using threats and ultimatums.
I was soo sure back then that this war was contrieved!

In a similar way ...we see bush and the jews working to ensure the American people never hear Mr.Ahmadinejad ..... and try to formulate their own opinion.

Instead like a sheep we should believe only what they tell us. It reaks of cronyism!!

Ahmadinejad doesn't appear like somebody who wants to stay in his hole (like bush) and rattle his sabre ...this man has made every attempt to meet the American people half-way(at least in talking). And look how many here are reacting.

Step back and just look at situation ...and tell me ...looking at the situation on paper ...who look more like a backward ignorant nation??

One of the biggest reason why we attacked Saddam ...was because we knew it was a mis-match. We spent years checking, and checking ...and re-checking to ensure war with Saddam would be a major mis-match!

If you understand how the KKK operate here in the US you'd see a stark similarity. Many times they attack single victims in packs. You'd see that they work for a long time to make it illegal for blacks to own gun ..ensuring a clear advantage!!

And so ..with this known advantage... a valid reason to attack becomes irrelevant! The fact that you can take down your victim becomes paramount.

Oh but bush had a reason ...but he also understood the phsychie of the people in his base!


I was shocked when I heard the lap-dogs crowing when bush declared victory ...like ..jeeze what did you expect?

Bush capitalize on the chicken-hawk support ..people who knew going to war would have little or no consequence on them. Many come to forums like these to rattle their sabres after being spurred on by even more chicken-hawks on the radio (Shawn Hannity/Rush Limbaugh etc.) This is why I would favor a draft ...its only then people would stop and think.