The French attack on Iran.....

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Shirrush RE:So there is a crazy neighbor with a gun threatening to kill your family 11/3/2005 12:37:50 PM

Great link you gave us here Galrahn. The message couldn't be clearer: the Iranians need the World to help them free themselves of the mullah's tyranny. I think I'll take a walk around the few Iranian opposition websites that are in languages I can read. This way, maybe I can find some of that great Persian music that the mullah's have banned, and download it for free?

Quote Reply

Pseudonym RE:So there is a crazy neighbor with a gun threatening to kill your family 11/3/2005 2:00:27 PM

"who is being talked about here.... this view works for both sides.... :-)" There are a few parallels. Unfortunately there also glaring descrepancies. Like the fact Iran states PUBLICLY it will wipe Israel from the map. Israel on the other hand, threatens only to respond to aggression. Not to arbitrarily kill every muslim on the planet. Israel is not the threat, they are the threatened. If I was the Israeli Leader, I would seriously be considering Pre emptive nuclear war with Iran.

Quote Reply

Alexis Latin link, and another thread 11/3/2005 2:07:33 PM

What Reductio ad Hitlerum means : link Apart from that, I have posted here : link a very interesting and balanced analysis by Adler in Le Figaro. Here is a guy who is not losing his calm, and has things to say about Ahmadinejad.

Quote Reply

Shirrush RE:Latin link, and another thread 11/3/2005 4:49:21 PM

Oops! this time I stuck myself with the Latin, as you'd say in French. I was just trying to reenact the Latin grammar centurion in Monty Python's The Life of Brian. I truly hated Latin (and it hated me back with a vengeance) when I was at school, and I must confess that I truly identify with the movie's graffiti offender. Wish me better luck and a funnier result the next time. :^) I do, however, plead innocent of your reductio ad hitlerum accusation. The point I was aiming at was reminding you that moral equivalence and a view on the value of human life as casual as finding it a legitimate alternative for weapon guidance systems is a hallmark of all fascisms, and I was not at all thinking about calling you a nazi. You see, we have fascists here too, that cannot be reduced ad hitlerum at all since they're both Jews and not true racists, and can only be squeezed a little bit ad mussolinem and ad rekhav'amze'evem or ad kahanae, that think that some people's lives are more valuable than others. I don't. I still urge you, therefore, to become aware of the moral bankruptcy of failing to mark the difference between a power that might use cruise missiles in self-defense, and one that directs suicide bombers in order to mask the true origins of it's agressions. Please note that I somewhat resent you opening a new thread with the Adler article and posting it in French. See you there.

Quote Reply

Jimme RE:About Iraq and Iran - to Jimme 11/4/2005 12:42:53 AM

<<" No. Iraq went to great lengths to first destroy its WMDs & WMD programs, then to prove it to the UNSC. But as the saying goes, "the worse deaf is the one who doesn't want to hear". From the mid-1990s on, it was clear that Iraq had no more WMDs, and the Iraqis expected reasonably their compliance to result in termination of the UN sanctions put in place during the 1990 crisis, prolonged for years after that and which caused massive sufferings among their civilian population. France, Russia and China wanted that termination because they had no interest in continued embargo against Iraq, but America and Britain had other plans and other interests and they could block UNSC.">> -Alexis Thats funny because as i remember, that was not the case even in 2002, way past the so colled mid-90s you say Iraq forfilled its obligations. Lets see what Wiki comes up with: {United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 is a resolution by the UN Security Council, passed unanimously on November 8, 2002, offering Iraq "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions (Resolution 660, Resolution 661, Resolution 678, Resolution 686, Resolution 687, Resolution 688, Resolution 707, Resolution 715, Resolution 986, and Resolution 1284), notably to provide "an accurate full, final, and complete disclosure, as required by Resolution 687 (1991), of all aspects of its programmes to develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles". Resolution 1441 threatens "serious consequences" if these are not met. It reasserted demands that UN weapons inspectors should have "immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access" to sites of their choosing, in order to ascertain compliance.} Wikipedia ; link Notice its states UNANIMOUSLY, that means France Russia and China all agreed that Iraq had not yet furfilled its obligations. this is in 2002, well after the mid 90s you claimed the French,Russian,Chinees trio thought Iraq did. For the full Resolution look here: link Even after the ispectors were allowed back... {Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei presented several reports to the UN detailing Iraq's level of compliance with Resolution 1441. On January 30, 2003 Blix said that Iraq had not fully accepted its obligation to disarm, and the report was taken broadly negatively. However the report of February 14 was more encouraging for Iraq, saying that there had been significant progress and cooperation; however the issues of anthrax, the nerve agent VX and long-range missiles were not resolved}-(Wikipedia) A full year after 1441 and 12 years after 687 the weapons inspectors still report "Iraq has not fully accepted its obligation to disarm". Even if I granted you the Feb 14th so called "positive" report it still stated "the nerve agent VX and long-range missiles were not resolved". 12 years 6 resolutions later and at its best 3 important factors are NOT RESOLVED? Now this isn't about the right or wrong of the Iraq war just to rebuff the rediculous claims of yours that Iraq was some how complying but got a raw deal, please spare me, and lets not even get in to the whole illegal food for oil thing which was a direct violation of the UNSC resolutions. <<" "The same needs to be realized about the communist elements in China as well who have also taken a liking to slapping the EU in the face."-Jimme "Not at all.">>- Alexis { 2005-05-12, 05:27 AM The European Union yesterday handed a long list of human rights demands in the two sides' highest level meeting since plans for a quick end to the EU's arms embargo collapsed. The EU said it was up to China to "improve the climate" and allow the arms ban, imposed after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, to be lifted. But the idea of any linkage was rejected immediately by the Chinese.}-(Richard Spencer) In other words the EU tried to get bold and make some demands on what essencialy was the core issue of the Arms Embargo,at the same time extending an Olive branch after the break down of the earlier Arms discussion. Seemed reasonable enough, however China gave it a quick screw you and brushed it off. I would call this a SLAP IN THE FACE!

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8