The Rampant, Irresponsible Political Thread

[David Panzer]

And me too. Although I don't care since virtually every religion in the world says I'm going to their version of hell because I don't believe in their god-claims.

[Der Mike]

Actually in islam, jews and christians are considered "people of the book", in that they're monotheistic; share the same prophets; belive in life after death, divine judgment, and heaven; and share the same creation stories.

The term "infidel" in islam applies to atheists and followers of religions which aren't "people of the book". The milliant muslims are too lazy to bother with this, as they're too busy blowing shit up

They also demand you live life as a second-class citizen (dhimmitude) and that you are constantly under the thumb of Muslims.

In other words, the myths they spread about Palestinian treatment at the hands of Israelis is reality with Muslim treatment of dhimmis.
-=Mike

[Dr Maturin]

Technically, if I were to worship pie and pie alone, I'd be monotheistic.

[Towelmaster]

I worship Genesis, just another kind of Genesis.

Anyway, we are moving in the right direction : Denmark in trouble, Iran boycotting Denmark, the EU saying that that is a boycott against the whole EU, America and Israel contemplating an attack on the nucleair facilities in Iran, the United Nations is of course(...) 'in session', and even the Ruskies say that they consider terrorism the greatest threat and the Iran should be kept away from nukes.

I think we're all set for a little WW... And later generations will indeed look upon this as 'The Cartoonwars'...

Where is Popeye when you need him?

[Jan]

And later generations will indeed look upon this as 'The Cartoonwars'...

Heinlein was right-these really *are* the crazy years.

Jan

[Dr Maturin]

and even the Ruskies say that they consider terrorism the greatest threat and the Iran should be kept away from nukes.

Russia is on the wroooong side.

UNITED NATIONS ù Russia's foreign minister warned against threatening Iran over its nuclear program Monday after Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld reportedly agreed with a German interviewer that all options, including military response, remained on the table.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183919,00.html

Totally useless NY Rep. Charles Rangel has joined with the Russians on the issue, too.

[Towelmaster]

Russia is on the wroooong side.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183919,00.html

Totally useless NY Rep. Charles Rangel has joined with the Russians on the issue, too.

Check out the actions of the other - and somewhat more important - people in Russia too. Like Putin's recent speech. I'll see it I can find the link. Absolutely against every and any form of terrorism and fundamtalism, Iran is specifically mentioned.

Of course he will use this as an excuse to suppress some minority-group in Russia, because Putin is at best an enlightened dictator. But it is still a different noise than what we have been hearing. My guess is that the military threat from Iran is starting to outweigh the possible damage to the Russian economy.

BTW : They are not that far apart : http://www.themoscowtimes.com/storie...11/21/002.html


BTW Update : the 'No-Smoking-Joints-Here!'-signs that the Amsterdam police put up kept getting stolen. So - this is typically dutch - they decided to sell them for about a hundred dollars.

So far they have had a turnover of over 75.000 dollars already. Mainly coming from Americans buying the signs...

[Andrew_Swallow]

Totally useless NY Rep. Charles Rangel has joined with the Russians on the issue, too.

The USA and Britain are not ready to go to war with Iran yet. They are still stuck in Iraq. This is the equivalent of 1937 - time to build army training camps, recruit men, infiltrate spies and devise new war machines. A mixture of threats and appeasement will place the blame on the other side until we are ready.

[Dr Maturin]

Thing is, Iraq isn't really a war anymore. It's a rebuilding effort plagued by terrorist attacks. If we fought an old school war with Iran, it'd be different. I still don't think Iran knows what it's getting into. They're bordering almost on the insane.

[David Panzer]

How is Iran the States' problem? Iran made comments about wishing Israel to be wiped out. Therefore it's Israel's problem, and last time I checked Israel has no trouble in defending itself. They won a war which only took 6 days.

[Karachi Vyce]

If you don't think that the States will get involved, and I mean militarily, should Israel and Iran get into a war with one another, you're either naive or a fool.

And it's not just an "Israel" problem. Iran hasn't just made comments about Israel. Iran has made it known that if they get the bomb, they will produce more nuclear weapons and are willing to distribute them to other Islamic states / groups. A continuing, current fear is that some group like Al-Qaeda will be able to buy a 'dirty bomb', but things get a hell of a lot scarier should there be an actual rogue nation like Iran openly providing fundamentalist regimes / organizations with nuclear weapons.

If Iran doesn't give up on their nuclear amibitions, NATO should strike immediately. I doubt they'll have the courage to, given the state of things in Europe.

[David Panzer]

A fear for you, maybe. There isn't anything I fear though

[Towelmaster]

To allow Iran to have a nucleair arsenal would be to introduce an uncertain unstable factor in an already unstable world. They won't throw that bomb at us once they have it. It could take years. And even if it would never happen, there would be no way to threathen Iran into normal behaviour. That goes straight out the window once the other side has nukes.

And I am not even *talking* about supplying that stuff to rogue groups and then sit back and watch...

Scenario : Iran supplies a nuke to Al Qaida who detonate it in Egypt.
Doomsdays : Israel gets the fall out and decides to act as if they were themselves the target. Who knows they weren't? Put the nuke at the border. It isn't like you can actually *see* the impact. Egypt is no more, thus giving the more militant regimes/countries the chance to take over. After an extensive investigation America finds out where the nuke came from; No More Iran. But will they have hidden two or three nukes outside of Iran? No one knows.

Scenario : Iran invades Iraq after the Americans are gone. America cannot act against a superpower(see first scenario). Greater Iran threathens Saoudi Arabia; comply or be destroyed. The Saoudis do not have nukes....

Now ask yourself : what would happen to the oil-supply?

I can think of 10 of those scenario's. Tom Clancy can come up with a hundred. Yes, I'm worried.


So many democratic countries have decided not to have nukes. And *those* countries, mainly arabic if not muslim, just can't wait. Obviously we may have learned something when we bombed Japan, the Middle East did not have that experience.

Let me ask you this : If Hitler would have had the bomb, a button right there in the bunker in 1945. Do you honestly think Europe would still exist?



Now let me put this in a better form on my blog.

[Andrew_Swallow]

Iran has medium range missiles.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3051418.stm

The surface-to-surface missile, first tested in 1998, has a range of 1,300 kilometres (800 miles).

North Korea is working on a longer range missile.

[Night Marshal]

Port security issue

I have to say for the first time in almost two years Demarcates and Republicans are not breaking along party lines. While this issue itself ranges from Racism of Muslims to the issue of nation security. I honestly am sitting back and trying to learn more before I take sides but I'm happy to see some civil discussion coming back to American politics even if that civil discussion has yet to make it to the US congress.