patrick.net

Yes, and the holocaust didn't happen. Ahmadinejad told me!

not germaine.

you mean, not German.

No sweetie, I think they meant "germane":

adjective
1. closely or significantly related; relevant; pertinent: Please keep your statements germane to the issue.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/germane

And they're correct, for at leat two reasons.

But the broader point is that based on history Iran is not the threat all the propaganda (and yes I think that's the proper term) we've been hearing and hearing and hearing claims. In fact, further to the point, EVERYTHING they've been doing in regards to their nuclear programs & dev is well within their right to do so under international law, according to nuclear treaties that they and other countries - including the USA- have signed.

Our government by now probably killed more people around the world than Hitler ever could. All in the name of life, liberty, and reckless pursuit of control.

kentm says

No sweetie, I think they meant "gemane":

Okay, so you missed the pun. It wasn't that funny, but not getting it and then going on to correct my spelling. well that takes you to a whole new level, sweetie.

See if you can follow:

Nut-job "truther" posts that, hey, Iran isn't as bad as us on the day after Ahmadinejad once again denied the holocaust happened. I point this out and tin-foil head answers "not germaine". I notice the typo and correct the wacko with "not German" because of the holocaust thing and, well...never mind.

FortWayne says

Our government by now probably killed more people around the world than Hitler ever could. All in the name of life, liberty, and reckless pursuit of control.

Freedom 1789-2012

Holy fuck. You're joking, right?

I fixed your disinformation-graphic (I may have missed something though):

*Edit* see below for updated graphic.

And, yes Iran operates on a much smaller scale than the US, but you are kidding yourself if you think that they are a benign live-and-let-live country.

Add in terrorism to that list. Iran supports terrorism in lots of countries. USA - none.

Raw says

USA - none.

This is a joke right? The US has supported plenty of terrorism. It's just not called terrorism when we do it.

Raw says

Add in terrorism to that list. Iran supports terrorism in lots of countries. USA - none.

Yeah, I only added Hezbollah because I think that is the only admitted and confirmed terrorist connection.

leo707 says

Raw says

Add in terrorism to that list. Iran supports terrorism in lots of countries. USA - none.

Yeah, I only added Hezbollah because I think that is the only admitted and confirmed terrorist connection.

And Hamas and Taliban. And groups we have never heard of. Lets not forget Iran itself.
Those who stone women to death practice terrorism.

bob2356 says

Raw says

USA - none.

This is a joke right? The US has supported plenty of terrorism. It's just not called terrorism when we do it.

We've supported a lot of puppet regimes - not a lot of terrorists. Supporting death squads is not "terrorism". We usually side with the guys in power. We used gorilla terror tactics in the Revolutionary War. Is that what you are talking about?

This is getting ridiculous. Has the USA done some badass shit over its 200+ years. No doubt. But fuck, saying that today we are more of a threat than Iran (w/ the implied nuclear weapon) is just nuts.

This reminds of the line in Moonrise Kingdom when the girls says to the orphaned boy that she wishes she could have been an orphan.

He answers "I love you but you don't know what you are talking about."

Raw says

And Hamas and Taliban.

Actually the Taliban and Iran are traditional enemies, but you are right about Hamas.

Fixed again...

*Edit* see below for updated graphic.

Raw says

Lets not forget Iran itself.

OK, I left our Iran itself, but added in other attacks around the world done by Iran.

leo707 says

I fixed your disinformation-graphic (I may have missed something though)

You missed more than one thing.

The Dhofar rebellion was supported by the Saudi's not Iran. The only time Iran was involved is when the Sultan requested military assistance in `1974. The British fought with the Sultan. If the US wasn't so busy in Vietnam, there probably would have been US troops there also.

I thought Mike Hoare along with his merry band of SA's and Belgians were the only foreigners involved in the Congo in 1960 until the ONUC (united nations operation congo) was formed. Iran sent a few troops to the ONUC but so did 25 or 30 other countries. Iran was asked to send troops by the UN. That's not exactly the same thing.

Never heard of Iran in the Golan Heights. What did they do there?

Iraq invaded Iran. There is a certain justification to fighting when an army marches across your border. Letting it develop into a 8 year stalemate was dumb.

Iraq supported the Afghans fighting against the russians then against the taliban. So did the US. Hard to condemn people for doing the same thing as you are.

Iran is supporting Hezbollah financially only. Not something I agree with, but it's makes sense to them supporting Shia groups.

No country is a benign live and let live country. But Iran has been pretty low key in the grand scheme of things. That could change, especially if Israel gets aggressive. Any citizen of the US has no room at all to talk about other countries meddling in international affairs.

rooemoore says

We've supported a lot of puppet regimes - not a lot of terrorists. Supporting death squads is not "terrorism"

I'm sure the victims of death squads understand the subtle difference.

Thanks for the list Leo.
Now lets fast forward 10 years, and Iran has nuked tiny Israel. There is no more Israel.
The following years New York and Washington are gone. 911 will look like a walk in the park.
Can we make sure the list does not ever expand to this nightmare scenario?
Thank You everyone for not supporting Iran getting nukes.

bob2356 says

Any citizen of the US has no room at all to talk about other countries meddling in international affairs.

Agreed, my point was not to complain but to point out that Iran's side of the graphic should not be "empty".

Also, apparently Iranian citizens don't have much room to talk either.

bob2356 says

The Dhofar rebellion was supported by the Saudi's not Iran.

An Iranian Army brigade was sent in to assist the Sultan's Armed Forces in 1973. Iran had about 15 KIA.

bob2356 says

Iran sent a few troops to the ONUC but so did 25 or 30 other countries. Iran was asked to send troops by the UN. That's not exactly the same thing.

Right, but it is on the USA side of the list as well, so...

bob2356 says

Never heard of Iran in the Golan Heights. What did they do there?

UN peace keeping, similar to the Congo.

bob2356 says

Iraq invaded Iran. There is a certain justification to fighting when an army marches across your border.

True, but the list is not about "right" or "wrong" actions.

bob2356 says

Iraq supported the Afghans fighting against the russians then against the taliban. So did the US. Hard to condemn people for doing the same thing as you are.

Not a condemnation, just a list of getting involved in foreign affairs. (the USA side also lists Afghanistan)

bob2356 says

Iran is supporting Hezbollah financially only.

They also have been known to help with training and organization. Hmmmm...but what does all that money buy...?

rooemoore says

Okay, so you missed the pun.

I take you for a right winger based on your posts. Right wingers on this site are so humorless I thought it was best to assume you were serious. I thought the sweetie part was a nice touch.

rooemoore says

We've supported a lot of puppet regimes - not a lot of terrorists

Untrue. Of course it depends on how you define "terrorist". Mabe you call them "freedom fighters", but it all depends on who they fight for or against. I guess our most famous freedom fighter was Osama bin laden, until he stopped fighting FOR and suddenly became a terrorist.

Really at this point, the term "terrorist" means nothing more than who the go wants to demonize.

kentm says

rooemoore says

Okay, so you missed the pun.

I take you for a right winger based on your posts. Right wingers on this site are so humorless I thought it was best to assume you were serious. I thought the sweetie part was a nice touch.

You like to label folks pretty quickly, huh? Take a look at my posts and you will see you were mistaken.

Funny thing is that you don't realize how similar you are to the humorless right-wing nuts you mock.

Oh the "sweetie part" was fucking hilarious.

kentm says

Untrue. Of course it depends on how you define "terrorist".

So you are saying it is untrue unless we have different definitions of terrorism. We do. So I guess it is not "untrue".

Raw says

Thanks for the list Leo.

Now lets fast forward 10 years, and Iran has nuked tiny Israel. There is no more Israel.

The following years New York and Washington are gone. 911 will look like a walk in the park.

Can we make sure the list does not ever expand to this nightmare scenario?

Thank You everyone for not supporting Iran getting nukes.

Right on, only the US is allowed to drop nuclear bombs for the greater good!

leo707 says

Agreed, my point was not to complain but to point out that Iran's side of the graphic should not be "empty".

Also, apparently Iranian citizens don't have much room to talk either.

No it shouldn't be empty but in the big scheme of things Iran is a not really a big player in meddling in other nations affairs. I don't consider being asked by the UN to participate in peace keeping missions as something that should be on either side of the list .

Raw says

Thanks for the list Leo.

Now lets fast forward 10 years, and Iran has nuked tiny Israel. There is no more Israel.

The following years New York and Washington are gone. 911 will look like a walk in the park.

Can we make sure the list does not ever expand to this nightmare scenario?

Thank You everyone for not supporting Iran getting nukes.

NY and Washington are in a lot more danger from Pakistani nukes than Iranian. Our "ally" Pakistan sold nuke technology to anyone and everyone for 20 years. I'm against Iran having nuclear weapons, but the fact is any nation that has enough resources can make nuclear weapons. There is simply no way to stop it.

rooemoore says

You like to label folks pretty quickly, huh?

yeah, my bad, pardon. But the sweetie part was a nice touch. Don't be so prickly.

So I take then your definition is operating from the power structure of 'any one who is WITH us is NOT a terrorist'. "Us" being the US government and who ever they say is their friends at the moment. Anyone who fights against the current interests of the US gov is a "terrorist". Is that correctly defining your definition?

Mine is slightly different. I don't care what the prevailing opinion of the US government is and I think anyone who fights in a way that affects the lives and localities of common people, like you and me, like the people in Iraq and Syria, are the terrorists. It doesn't matter to me if they're sanctioned & supported by our gov, or ARE the official army.

I think there is nothing more valuable than the heath and happiness of people and their families and communities, people, like you and me. If you consider and accept that then you have to reassess who has been the leading sponsors of terrorism throughout the world. Its irrelevant what the opinions and definitions of the various gangs are at whatever moment you happen to pick, and the definition of "terrorism" becomes just one more cynical tool in the chest to advance political agendas, constantly changing, always morphing, to influence our support for whatever political goal is relevant to the power elites at the moment.

Raw says

Thanks for the list Leo.
Now lets fast forward 10 years, and Iran has nuked tiny Israel. There is no more Israel.
The following years New York and Washington are gone. 911 will look like a walk in the park.
Can we make sure the list does not ever expand to this nightmare scenario?
Thank You everyone for not supporting Iran getting nukes.

Can we instead make sure we stick the best available facts as we know them and not rely on made up fantasies that just happen to support whatever political leanings you may happen to have?

By all facts and judgements North Korea and China are more threats to the US than Iran... why are you so focused on Iran and making up stories about them attributing actions and capabilities to them that they do not possess and have never shown inclinations toward? If you compare Israel and Iran, the country that has been threatening nuclear attack and actually has the capability and actual has a record of attempting the invasion of other countries - is Israel. Why are you inventing stories that completely reverse that fact?

Thanks goodness there's are some rational folks on this thread.

Iran does not have a delivery system to hit the US. Your projection of a nuclear attack on the US by Iran would require smuggling a nuke into the US.

If you're going to run with that scenario, what's to prevent Pakistan from smuggling nuke or heck, Israel could smuggle in a nuke and then frame Iran? (It's not like that is an outrageous scenario based on what we know about the Mossad's actions in the US).

Frankly, if Iran came that close, the more probably scenario is that the Israelis would nuke them first, right???

apologize for the typos!

kentm says

By all facts and judgements North Korea and China are more threats to the US than Iran...

Agreed.

kentm says

why are you so focused on Iran and making up stories about them attributing actions and capabilities to them that they do not possess and have never shown inclinations toward?

OK, so they don't have certain capabilities, sure...but what inclinations are they not showing?

Iran has shown inclinations towards the desire to gain nuclear weapons.

Iran has show more than just inclinations, but an active policy of meddling in the internal affairs of other countries and a desire to "throw it's weight around" internationally.

kentm says

If you compare Israel and Iran, the country that has been threatening nuclear attack and actually has the capability and actual has a record of attempting the invasion of other countries - is Israel.

Yes, Israel has threatened nuclear attack. I am no big fan of Israel, but I think that the nuclear threats made were "defensive" in nature.

Iran on the other hand has made many statements to the point that Israel should be wiped from the earth. They also actively train, fund and generally support groups that kill Israel citizens.

It's the double standard. Every time israel threatens it's defensive... but if Iran does it's warmongering. One thing we do know, clearly, is that it's israel that has attacked multiple other nations multiple times and is currently engaging in the brutal repression of palestians, Iran has not and does not.

Regarding the 'wiped from the earth' statement, the reported quote was not wiped from the 'face of the earth' it was "pages of time" I think. And that has been commonly regarded as a misinterpretation, officially retracted, by the original translators themselves and by the paper that initially reported it - NYT I think? It was not meant as the threat it's conveniently repeated as in order to support the warmongering inclinations currently underway against Iran.

Raw says

USA - none.

Yea, sure. And who created Al Qaeda?