Should the rest of the world trust the United States?

Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by Drifterwood, Jun 6, 2008.

  1. Drifterwood

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    15,724
    Likes Received:
    386
    Location:
    Fingringhoe (GB)
    So another Bogey Man is charging over the horizon, and Chickenlicken is running around telling us that the sky is falling in. At which point do we stop believing the cry of Wolf, or WMD?

    Here are some thoughts:-

    The CIA has reported that Iran stopped its fledgling nuclear weapons programme in 2003.

    Ahmadinejad does not control Iranian Foreign Policy (the Supreme Leader does).

    Ahmadinejad does not control either the nuclear fuel programme nor any possible nuclear weapons programme (the Supreme Leader does).

    There is very strong and active opposition to Ahmadinejad in Iran. The previous reformist President would not allow him to attend cabinet meetings, which had previously been the right of the Tehran Mayor (Ah Mad's job before becoming President). Have a look at the link

    BBC NEWS | World | Middle East | Political problems mount for Ahmadinejad

    How was this relative unknown newcomer able to come to prominence by popular vote? The more fundamentalist and radical Islamic Mosques apparently networked which sounds somewhat familiar to George W's support from hardcore christians in the States. And yes, the lovely war against Iraq polarised opinion across the world, not just the Islamic world, and this is what you get. Ah Mad is there because we were there illegally; we are reaping what we sowed yet again, and yet again blaming them.

    But why were they able to mobilise a radical vote when the country had previously been enjoying a period of reform? Oh yes Iraq, and the last Bogey Man with WMD. At least Saddam was an Authoritarian leader with power to produce WMD, though of course now we admit he hadn't.

    So why are certain elements running around trying to sink us into another war? Does the US military need another theatre to blow off the latest toys? Is it simply that Bogeymen are good National Unity and control?

    I personally have no idea, but a triumvirate of Bush, Olmert and Ahmadinejad, is not a pretty cocktail. The two latter gentlemen are up on corruption allegations and the former, well you know what most of the rest of the World thinks of him.
     
  2. The Dragon

    The Dragon New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,278
    Likes Received:
    6
    One gets rather tired of hearing the saber rattling coming from Washington.
    It will either be about Iran or North Korea.
    All one can do is shake their head and wonder how the the devil they could afford to wage another war on another front?
    What are they going to do?
    Throw rocks and sticks at them?
    It is past time to put the old war horse put out to pasture or better still the glue factory.
     
  3. B_cigarbabe

    B_cigarbabe New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    Messages:
    4,005
    Likes Received:
    7
    Location:
    Boston,Mass.
    How about making Bushburgers out of him?
    cigarbabe:saevil:
     
  4. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    Under the current administration? Absolutely not.

    The lie to us, their own citizens, at nearly every turn...it doesn't take much stretch of the imagination to envision how little regard they have for anyone else in the world.

    All I can tell you is to hold out hope for next January. It might feel like a long-shot now, but a majority of Americans might turn out and do the right thing this time around.

    How about we try him for war crimes and gross betrayal of his oath of office?
     
  5. TinyPrincess

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Messages:
    7,179
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,464
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    London (GB)
    I always try to be an optimist, so I still believe the Americans will realise they are a major part of most problems around the world. If not now then hopefully soon. Or am I just dreaming again...
     
  6. Flashy

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2007
    Messages:
    8,097
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    at home
    well thank goodness it is the Supreme Leader who is in charge.

    since he has been totally supportive of the lunatic president.

    makes sense since the "Supreme Leader" is the figurehead of the conservatives and is also a total lunatic.


    This is the part where you tell us how Iran is not run and controlled by Islamist Radicals and a State whose laws and philosophy are Sharia, and the whole purpose of the government is to safeguard the Islamic Revolution.

    After all, why should we be worried about the "Supreme Leader" who elects half the guardian council, and who can disqualify and vett candidates for office, and who has spent the last several years undoing the very modest reforms that had occured?

    Yeah...the Supreme Leader is a regular humanitarian.



    Go ahead and tell us all about Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.


    You cannot possibly be this ignorant about the theocratic and despicable regime that rules Iran.


    You are either an Islamofascist yourself, or are totally deranged.

    I am betting deranged, since you have been banging on about how the "radicals" and relgious nuts are no longer in control in IRan for about a week now.

    the hardliners won the parliamentary elections in 04, and then with the help of the Supreme Leader and The Guardian Council, half appointed by Khameni, then disqualified 44% of the candidates for election.


    This man, who is apparently not a radical and a lunatic, had this to say about music education

    "In late 1996, following a fatwa by Khamenei stating that music education corrupts the minds of young children, many music schools were closed and music instruction to children under the age of 16 was banned by public establishments (although private instruction continued). Khamenei stated: "The promotion of music [both traditional and Western] in schools is contrary to the goals and teachings of Islam, regardless of age and level of study"

    why don't you ask the peaceful people of the Bahai faith about mr. not too radical?

    apparently, he is so not radical that he said this recently
    When discussing religious hardline cleric Mohammad Taghi Mesbah Yazdi,
    Khamenei praised his books and thoughts as being original, very useful, solid and correct. He also stated that the Islamic world needs these ideas today more than any time in the past. Mesbah Yazdi advocates a return to the values of the 1979 Iranian Revolution and a hardline and prominet opponent of the reformists

    you are absolutely nuts.


    i am going to bed, but you can rest assured we will pick this up tomorrow mr. reform.
     
  7. Wyldgusechaz

    Wyldgusechaz New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,259
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Looks like you did not completely read the article. Ah Mad is standing firm on developing nuclear weapons. Israel cannot allow a country whose leader has vowed to wipe Israel from the earth to go atomic. Period. The Jews have no where else to turn. If Iran does not stop in its efforts to get the bomb, Israel will have to destroy Iran and they can.

    Here is what your pal, the guy with the control of the Iranian nuke program has to say, the Supreme leader Khamenei.

    >>>>TEHRAN, May 27 (Xinhua) -- Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Tuesday said Israel has become "helpless" in confronting the Palestinian people, the official IRNA news agency reported.

    "The Zionist enemy has become helpless in fighting the lonely, innocent but resistant nation of Palestine," Khamenei was quoted as saying when he met with visiting Hamas politburo chief Khaled Mashaal.

    "Thanks to the Almighty God, the Zionist enemy, which seemed to be invincible, has been weakened in facing the oppressed and patient people of Palestine," the Iranian supreme leader said.

    He said the only way for liberation of the occupied territories of Palestine "is resistance and reliance on God."<<<<<

    Does this sound like a man you can negotiate with? He is not beholden to any public entity and HE has the nuclear wand? If these so called moderate Persians want peace, why not just throw out Khamenei and Ah Mad? Give up the threat to Israel, work on your economy and live and let live. Nope. "We want the Zionists wiped from the earth? and they put it black and white. If I were Israel i would be readying missles and bombers to destroy as much of Iran's nuke abilities as i could.
     
  8. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    People seem to be overlooking the obvious...

    Nuclear warfare is deterred by the reality of mutually assured destruction. It's a no-win proposition to launch a nuclear assault on another nation armed with the same destructive capability.

    Furthermore, Israel encompasses the holy lands that Muslims seek to lay claim to. They can't very well do that if it's been turned into a glowing hotspot for the next 20,000 years, now can they? That makes about as much sense as firebombing your downstairs neighbor.
     
  9. The Dragon

    The Dragon New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,278
    Likes Received:
    6

    Yes that would be true if you didn't belive that you would go to heaven and the enemy would go to hell in the case of a nuclear retaliation.
    Sense has very little to do with it in the face of relgious zeal.
     
  10. prince_will

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2006
    Messages:
    2,102
    Albums:
    6
    Likes Received:
    39
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm not too fond of the U.S. The whole war in Iraq just seemed like a totally shady affair to me, and the nosiness in other countries' affairs becomes annoying after a while. Plus, it's amazing with all the power they seem to have.
     
  11. D_Ivana Dickenside

    D_Ivana Dickenside New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2007
    Messages:
    4,864
    Likes Received:
    3
    if you don't trust the rest of the US, at least trust me when i say not all americans are conservative bush supporters. i can't wait to get his ass out of office in november.
     
  12. Guy-jin

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    3,835
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    669
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    Most Americans don't trust the current US government.

    Why would you?
     
  13. Wyldgusechaz

    Wyldgusechaz New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,259
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Israel can't allow the Arabs to get to the point of MAD. Islamic fundamentalist prove that weekly with their suicide bombings. Take a moment and think: there is no more valued commodity to the Western World than life, l'chaim. There can be no more precious life to a parent than that of his child. Yet Islamic fundamentalist parents will strap high explosives to their child have him/her blown into tiny little pieces, like bloody confettii, in order to destroy a Jew. How do you negotiate with that mindset? You fucking tell me. I am not Jewish but the phrase *NEVER AGAIN* resonates with me in a profound way. NEVER AGAIN trust the world to protect the Jew. NEVER AGAIN be in a position to allow the people that hate you and want you wiped from the earth to have dominion over you. NEVER AGAIN. And that means if a lunatic radical religious zealot has an atomic bomb, you kill him. That simple. Before he kills you.
     
  14. Drifterwood

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    15,724
    Likes Received:
    386
    Location:
    Fingringhoe (GB)
    You forgot the bit about it not being Ah Mad's call, and you should also know Khamenei is on record as sayng that he believes nuclear weapons are unislamic - quite a strong statement, and one that I would agree with.

    Most of the world believes that the Palestinians have a right to "resist" what at best can be euphemistically described as "disputed territory", otherwise known as occupied homeland. Of course it would be wonderful if this resistance were peaceful, but there are two sides that make this very difficult.
     
  15. scottbud

    scottbud Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    667
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    115
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    North Shore Auckland New Zealand
    What better way to stop people noticing what a shitty leader you are than creating the biggest distraction possible, War.

    Bush should never have been elected I hope all the voted for him feel badly about it.

    Bring on any of the new candidates any of them would do a better job.
     
  16. jason_els

    jason_els <img border="0" src="/images/badges/gold_member.gi

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    25
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warwick, NY, USA
    Everyone should be suspicious of any government, and no nation should ever completely trust any other nation. Governments exist for their own benefit and, sometimes, for the people they rule.
     
  17. Flashy

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2007
    Messages:
    8,097
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    at home
    Of course you'd agree with it...

    strange, that since it is Khamenei's call, and he is so "against nuclear weapons as un-islamic", that he, with the ultimate power hasn't simply stopped the Iranian program of enrichemnt of uranium.

    uranium only needs to be enriched to 5% for peaceful civilian purposes.
    uranium needs to be highly enriched to be weapons grade.

    strange that Iran would then reject stopping their own Uranium enrichment programs, when suitably enriched nuclear fuel for civilian purposes has already been delivered by Russia and offered by Russia as part of a comprehensive long term peaceful nuclear fuel source for civilian energy.

    One might find it curious, why they insist on continuing to try to enrich uranium, when already enriched uranium is already being offered to them for their use in order to stem the conflict their "peaceful program" is creating with the rest of the world, not just the United States and Israel.

    SignOnSanDiego.com > News > World -- U.S., EU criticize Iran's defiance on nuclear work

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/04/world/middleeast/04iran.html?ref=middleeast


    as always, Drifterwood can be counted on to be the mouthpiece for an Islamofascist regime, that represses and abuses women, homosexuals, free speech, art, free press, free election, reform and religious tolerance.

    A regime which insists upon an active head-on collision with the EU, the US the UN the IAEA and just about everyone else over an alleged "peaceful" nuclear program, when in fact, the world has offered them all the free nuclear fuel they want, to prove that their intentions are truly peaceful.

    the fact is, Bush will be gone in 8 months...but the Islamofascists in Iran will still be there. Just as insane and radicalized as ever.

    way to go.
     
  18. Drifterwood

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    15,724
    Likes Received:
    386
    Location:
    Fingringhoe (GB)
    I appreciate that Israel is your main interest in all these things, Flash, but dare I say it, Israel is a pawn in the bigger picture. This is about the end of the Petro Dollar.

    From CNN.

    Larijani said it is "logical that every country be in charge of its own fate regarding energy and not put its future in the hands of another country, even if that country is a friendly country."

    Moscow had offered to enrich uranium in Russia for nuclear fuel and have it sent to Iran. The offer was backed by the United States and by Britain, France, and Germany, which have tried to negotiate a solution to the Iranian issue.

    Iran and Russia have substantial economic ties, and Russian President Vladimir Putin has openly disagreed with U.S. President George W. Bush about Tehran's intentions with its nuclear facilities.

    Larijani said Tehran is willing to discuss having some nuclear fuel created outside the country. But he said his nation must operate some of its own reactors to produce nuclear fuel "at our own disposal, without having to rely on another country."

    Oh my, a policy of energy self-sufficiency - whatever next :eek:

    Energy self sufficiency without the once mighty US$. Remember Saddam threatened to trade Iraq's oil in Euros, now the world's most powerful economy. Silly man.

    And please don't try to say that the Russian nuclear fuel, and the EU offer before was free, they (we) stood to make Billions out of Iran. They are choosing to do it themselves. Yes they may be tweaking the West, but it's time to get those old imperial and modern economic Imperial notions out of your head.

    So, should we trust the US?
     
  19. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    The impertinence...the audacity! Can you imagine? :rolleyes:

    :yup:

    :no:
     
  20. Flashy

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2007
    Messages:
    8,097
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    at home
    1. The United States is my main interest, not Israel. Israel is my secondary interest.

    2. Israel may be a "pawn" to others...but a pawn can still kill a king...and when the pawn has 200+ nuclear weapons at its disposal, and is being threatened with being taken off the chess board forever, I assure you, they do not take the approach of a pawn.

    3. This is not about the end of the petro dollar. This is about a rogue islamofascist nation, Iran attempting to obtain nuclear weapons. NObody is saying they cannot have nuclear power plants or nuclear energy. What is being said is that they cannot have ENRICHMENT programs. PRe-enriched nuclear fuel will be provided to them by an established economic partner and ally (Russia) and its use and disposal will be monitored at every turn by internationally agreed upon monitors.

    Big difference between saying they can't have nuclear power for energy and they can't have a uranium enrichment program for nuclear power that CAN be used to make weapons grade nuclear material.

    4. "logical that every country be in charge of its own fate regarding energy and not put its future in the hands of another country, even if that country is a friendly country."

    Iran is in fact in charge of its own fate regarding energy. Iran has the second largest proven oil reserves in the world since Canada's shale/and non-conventional is discounted.

    Since Iran has not bothered to develop its oil refinery capacity, it is the second largest oil importer in the world.

    Iran also has the second largest proven natural gas reserves after Russia, with massive potential for more.

    5. Irrespective of Iranian and Russian economic ties, irrespective of George W. Bush, Iran is not a country that has an energy problem. Iran is not a country looking for a program of "oh my" energy self-sufficiency...they already have that.

    They are looking for nuclear weapons.


    6. Their energy self-sufficiency would be guaranteed without the US $ anyway. They need to spend more of their money on refinery, exploration and production of their good fortune in having such massive petroleum reserves, instead of spending it on trying to make a Shiite nuclear power that can dominate the region.

    "Some skeptics also argue that energy and economic considerations would not justify Iran's nuclear power program, since "if Iran really were short on energy, it could build gas-fired power plants at much lower cost, or make better use of its vast hydraulic resources;" and that the huge investment needed for nuclear power would pay greater returns if used to maintain or upgrade Iran's basic oil industry infrastructure.

    In another story the Economist magazine argued that "learning to enrich uranium—a hugely costly venture—still makes questionable economic sense for Iran, since it lacks sufficient natural uranium to keep them going and would have to import the stuff."

    Another analysis of the economics of Iran's investment in nuclear fuel cycle activities, including mining, conversion, enrichment and fuel fabrication, condludes that they are poor energy investments compared to capturing and generating electricity from natural gas that is currently flared from oil fields.

    Skeptics also argue that other countries, such as Russia and France, have offered to provide uranium for power generation, and that Iran is fully capable of having nuclear power without needing to enrich its own uranium."



    7. "And please don't try to say that the Russian nuclear fuel, and the EU offer before was free, they (we) stood to make Billions out of Iran."

    Indeed the initial offers of nuclear fuel for the Iranian program were contingent on gratis free shipments to begin the initial phase of development.

    Once again you are wrong about how much money could be made out of it, since the deal would be with the Russians, and the EU would make nothing from it. Coal and NAtural gas are both more expensive fuels then nuclear fuels, and that is a fact. The Iranians have already said they don't trust wester europe to provide them with nuclear fuel, so how exactly are you going to make money off of it, Chancellor of the Exchequer?


    8. "Yes they may be tweaking the West,"

    Only a lunatic like yourself would consider the constant threatening of existential destruction of a UN member state "tweaking". If you consider that to be "tweaking", you won't want to be around when the object of that tweaking decides that tweaking one about their very existence, is in fact not something to be taken lightly anymore.



    9. "but it's time to get those old imperial and modern economic Imperial notions out of your head."

    Yeah...coming from you, a citizen of a country that perfected the " Old Imperial" model...it is also amusing that we have some "modern economic imperial notions" in our heads about Iran when we have not had virtually any relations with them economic or otherwise in nearly 30 years.


    10. "So, should we trust the US?"

    Frankly, I don't care. Every nation makes foreign policy on what is good for them. The Untied States has no obligation or care whether you trust our government. That only happens when allied countries act in concert for shared goals...when those goals are not consistent, nations act in their individual best interests

    Should you trust the French? People in Francafrique might say no. Should you trust the Chinese? The Tibetans and Taiwanese might say no. Should you trust the Turks? The Greeks might say no. Should you trust the Spanish? Catalonia and the Basque country might say no. Should you trust the South Koreans? The JApanese might say no. Should you trust the Australians? The aborigines might say no...

    As it is, this is just another America bashing thread from you. Hardly unique.

    But whatever your view, Iran ha the ball in its court, and with stuff like this being said, it would be wise for them to back off:

    Robert Joseph, the Under-Secretary of State for Arms Control reportedly told IAEA director Mohammad ElBaradei: "We cannot have a single centrifuge spinning in Iran. Iran is a direct threat to the national security of the United States and our allies, and we will not tolerate it."


    but know this...when even France is against what you are doing, it is a safe bet, that there is going to be trouble, and that is certainly not the fault of the US alone.

    French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner warned that the international community had to be prepared for the possibility of war in the event that Iran obtains atomic weapons. "We will not accept that such a bomb is made," Kouchner said. "We must prepare ourselves for the worst," he said, specifying that that would be war. He did not elaborate on what kind of preparations that could entail. "We have decided, while negotiations are under way ... to prepare for eventual sanctions outside the United Nations, which would be European sanctions," he said.
    Kouchner was not specific about what penalties Europe might impose, other than to say they could be "economic sanctions regarding financial movements." "Our German friends proposed this. We discussed it a few days ago," he said. "The international community's demand is simple: They must stop enriching uranium," Kouchner said. "Our Iranian friends want to create, they say, civilian nuclear energy. They have the right to that, but all that they are doing proves the contrary. That is why we are worried," he said.





     
Draft saved Draft deleted