| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
freethought
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:12 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
Ah, yes, the world concern expressed over Iran and North Korea's insistence on acquiring nuclear weapons is just a political spat. |
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't think Iran was insisting on acquiring nuclear weapons. Aren't they merely claiming to be developing nuclear power?
I realize that the technology can easily lead from one to the other, I'm just curious as to what Iran's stated position is. |
Iran's position is a very tricky one. Their stated position is that they are doing it for power. Most people, myself included don't really buy that claim. The problem is that the aim of having 'alternative' fuel sources to oil has been a stated goal for Iranian governments pre-dating the fall of the Shah. Iran is an oil powerhouse, but their reserves are considerably smaller than Iraq's or Saudi Arabia's. They've also been pumping oil for a very long time and have used up a larger percentage of their supply than most other countries. They wont be running out of oil any time soon, but they're not going to be in the game nearly as long as some of their neighbours. So when they say they're doing it for power, that's likely legit, the problem is that they're also doing it for 'power' in a much larger sense... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Iran's stated position is whatever suits its immediate needs to forestall inspections, drag out diplomacy, and obfuscate long enough to get the bomb. Only naive, wishful thinking foolish liberals and leftists actually believe there's a chance the ayatollahs are sincerely negotiating.
The new weapon is great news--anything that keeps us ahead of those Islamofascist animals.
But then Hite and his hive of buzzing leftists don't care whether America can protect itself. They have no stake in the claim. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| Correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't think Iran was insisting on acquiring nuclear weapons. Aren't they merely claiming to be developing nuclear power? |
Yeah, that's right. And W. Bush says the Middle Eastern wars are all about "democracy."
Since when do we take what any govt says at face value and then repeat its official line?
Amazing how many posters here are falling all over themselves to perform as Tehran or Hezbollah's PR agents. "Not 'wiped off the map!' He was misunderstood! They just want to defend themselves!"
Beyond naive... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| Correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't think Iran was insisting on acquiring nuclear weapons. Aren't they merely claiming to be developing nuclear power? |
Yeah, that's right. And W. Bush says the Middle Eastern wars are all about "democracy."
Since when do we take what any govt says at face value and then repeat its official line? |
That's not the point. Saying that the Iranians are "insisting on nuclear weapons," when they are not, is a misrepresentation of their official position.
| Quote: |
Amazing how many posters here are falling all over themselves to perform as Tehran or Hezbollah's PR agents. "Not 'wiped off the map!' He was misunderstood! They just want to defend themselves!"
Beyond naive... |
I'm falling over myself to defend Tehran or Hezbollah?  It's amazing how some posters here will go out of their way to misrepresent other poster's positions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
huffdaddy:
| Quote: |
| That's not the point. Saying that the Iranians are "insisting on nuclear weapons," when they are not, is a misrepresentation of their official position. |
Who gives a rat's as-s, bruddah? Fact is there PM is going around ranting to crowds about destroying Israel and meeting with other tin-pot dictators making veiled threats to the U.S. and Europe as well.
I think you'd be better off devoting your nit-picking moments to a nice sit-down chat with your Kim Jong Il puppet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Octavius Hite
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemcgarret wrote:
| Quote: |
| Who gives a rat's as-s, bruddah? |
This is exactly how the American public got tricked/lied into war. Stop asking questions Huffdaddy, you are crazy/unpatriotic/islamofacist/etc when you ask questions. Just trust Cheney and company to figure it out for you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
huffdaddy:
| Quote: |
| That's not the point. Saying that the Iranians are "insisting on nuclear weapons," when they are not, is a misrepresentation of their official position. |
Who gives a rat's as-s, bruddah? Fact is there PM is going around ranting to crowds about destroying Israel and meeting with other tin-pot dictators making veiled threats to the U.S. and Europe as well.
I think you'd be better off devoting your nit-picking moments to a nice sit-down chat with your Kim Jong Il puppet. |
Thanks to you and Gopher for restoring my faith in the right-wing. I was beginning to think it was only the left-wing 9/11 nutters who were unable to take truth and logic into consideration. Now I remember why I stay away from the red staters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:36 pm Post subject: ... |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Amazing how many posters here are falling all over themselves to perform as Tehran or Hezbollah's PR agents. |
McGarret has spoken in favor of strikes.
I believe I've explained my position.
Perhaps you could explain yours. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
huffdaddy:
| Quote: |
| That's not the point. Saying that the Iranians are "insisting on nuclear weapons," when they are not, is a misrepresentation of their official position. |
Who gives a rat's as-s, bruddah? Fact is there PM is going around ranting to crowds about destroying Israel and meeting with other tin-pot dictators making veiled threats to the U.S. and Europe as well.
I think you'd be better off devoting your nit-picking moments to a nice sit-down chat with your Kim Jong Il puppet. |
Thanks to you and Gopher for restoring my faith in the right-wing... |
Only on this board do I appear "right-wing," Huggybear.
And thank you for confirming my belief that you came here intending to defend the Iranian govt's official position.
PR spokesman. And a one-sided one at that.
How many times, Huggybear, have you so vigorously defended the W. Bush Administration's official position when others here have maliciously mischaracterized it...? Hmm...? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:55 pm Post subject: ... |
|
|
| Quote: |
And thank you for confirming my belief that you came here intending to defend the Iranian govt's official position.
|
And what's your position? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 12:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
huffdaddy:
| Quote: |
| That's not the point. Saying that the Iranians are "insisting on nuclear weapons," when they are not, is a misrepresentation of their official position. |
Who gives a rat's as-s, bruddah? Fact is there PM is going around ranting to crowds about destroying Israel and meeting with other tin-pot dictators making veiled threats to the U.S. and Europe as well.
I think you'd be better off devoting your nit-picking moments to a nice sit-down chat with your Kim Jong Il puppet. |
Thanks to you and Gopher for restoring my faith in the right-wing... |
Only on this board do I appear "right-wing," Huggybear. |
So on what board do your left-wing socks appear?
| Quote: |
And thank you for confirming my belief that you came here intending to defend the Iranian govt's official position.
PR spokesman. And a one-sided one at that. |
You're worse than EFLTrainer. What statement have I made to indicate in any way, shape, or form that I'm a one-sided PR man? All I've done is ask a couple questions and pointed out a couple of facts. Why does that make you and your boy toy stevie so defensive?
| Quote: |
| How many times, Huggybear, have you so vigorously defended the W. Bush Administration's official position when others here have maliciously mischaracterized it...? Hmm...? |
Read any of the 9/11 threads. Then come back with an apology. If you're man enough. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 2:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
huffdaddy:
Let me spell it out for the ethically challenged. The mere fact that you insist on beating this dead hobby horse of a point as to whether it constitutes an official Iranian position is sufficient indication to me that you are either a Persian apologist or a whining little school marm. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 2:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
huffdaddy:
Let me spell it out for the ethically challenged. The mere fact that you insist on beating this dead hobby horse of a point as to whether it constitutes an official Iranian position is sufficient indication to me that you are either a Persian apologist or a whining little school marm. |
I posted one question asking someone to confirm my understanding of the situation and made one follow up response when you brushed off my question as irrelevant. And now three posts to respond to your and gophey's attacks on me and my yet unstated position. That's beating a dead horse?
And yes, the issue of what Iran's official position is is important. At least to those who are interested in a solution and not just bellowing hot air. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 6:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| And yes, the issue of what Iran's official position is is important. At least to those who are interested in a solution and not just bellowing hot air. |
Great, then.
So let us apply this evenly. We ought to bring "democracy" and "mass-destruction weapons" back into our Iraqi War discussions. Those of us interested in solutions and not just hot air ought to take care to appreciate and not mischaracterize any govt's official line, no...?
Unless it is your position, huggy, that Washington lies but Tehran tells the truth...?
In any case, you have stated again and again that you have not stated an opinion here. Very well. Please put this matter to rest. What is your position on these issues? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 7:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
In any case, you have stated again and again that you have not stated an opinion here. Very well. Please put this matter to rest. What is your position on these issues? |
Ahh, the issues. What a novel concept.
Basics that I'm working from:
One: The US doesn't really have a right to prevent other nations from acquiring the technology for nuclear power.
Two: Iran should not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons.
The remaining are points of discussion I'm interested in (that is, my opinion is still being formed):
1. Do we ever consider allowing one, knowing that two may very well follow?
2. How do we allow one without allowing two? If we allow one, Iran can cheat and get two. If we don't allow one, Iran can still cheat and get two.
3. In which of these scenarios are we more likely to garner international support and cooperation? Preventing the outright acquisition of nuclear power technology or preventing the development of nuclear weapons? Remember that other countries are under no obligation to prevent one, but according to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, should not allow two.
4. Given that Bush has already blown his credibility, both domestically and internationally, how does the US prevent two? Until the proof is in the pudding, i.e. nuclear test, will the US ever be able to sway Iranian allies that two is on the way? Without that support, what chance do we have of preventing either one or two? And without the support of Congress, what chance does Bush have of playing a decent hand?
That's probably enough for now. Now let's see how long you can discuss the issues without mischaracterizing or attacking me for my opinions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
