The Big DebateIf you feel the need to get your teeth stuck right into a heavy debate on a subject you feel really passionate about, then this is the place to do so. Post about religion, politics, laws and all things juicy like that here.
Persia and Iran is the same place, I know you all know this but there is a small chance an American might be reading this so they can learn an amazing new fact to amaze all their colleagues. In the Senate or whatever.
Look at that bloke 'Ahmed In A Jihad', weird how if you pronounce that properly in Farsi it comes out exactly the same as Ahmadinejad. But it is a coincidence, don't forget that.
Iran are the current pariah state for wanting to make nuclear bombs and pretending they only want power stations, it's so obvious that everyone looks upon them as imbeciles and crazy nutters.
Recently I have developed a slightly different view. Just put yourself in the position of an Iranian politician, all the kids want the internet and Bruce Willis films, Israel have these weapons that could utterly level Tehran at the touch of a button, and American forces are kicking their heels bored in Iraq, blaming Iran for every RPG that gets fired their way.
They are in the shit.
Historically, Iran or Persia have been pretty neutral about things, even now they are selling oil to Russia when their refineries are rusting to shit and can't even supply theirselves. It must be worth it since oil has become so expensive.
Iran don't hate us, they are majority Islamic and have all the laws associated with that ******ed fairytale, but the young people don't swallow it anymore. Sort of like here with Christianity.
I think these guys would be great allies. They are nuts but they're not stupid. Britain could go it alone and become friends with them without America's permission, like Thatcher did with Russia. They are sat right in the middle of our problem area for them suicide spastics and could help root them out for us and we could help them back with G3.5 fission plans, or sell them outdated Tornado jets or something. Jets we could easily neutralise but which would make them safe against most of their neighbours. (apart from those Typhoons we sold Saudi) Obviously we overspent on R&D otherwise we would never give them (Typhoons) away, but they are clearly only half turned-on because we also sold the avionics from the Eurofighter to the yanks for their Raptor. No way would the yanks allow 'A-rabs' the same avionics they have.
If I was a high ranking diplomat, I would learn Farsi quick-smart and get these fuckers on our side if I could. The media tries to portray them as evil and stuff but they don't look evil to me, just scared. Rightly so.
Politically i think the sooner we stop supporting America's war of/against terror the better as its not really gaining us any friends and gets us associated with and involved in some pretty stupid things.
I quite like your suggestions regarding Iran and i agree its no wonder they feel like shit given America have invaded their neighbour and equipped their local enemys with modern weaponary. They may be bastards, who knows but its pretty easy to spot fault with people when their backs against the wall. Its way too easy to rant this thread off topic, but id quite like the idea of allying with Iran and Russia and would be okay with them having nuclear weapons.
I feel kinda sorry for the people who signed up to the services thinking they would learn a profession while protecting their countries, only to become involved in invading undeserving countries without their nations support, unless of course they signed up to pick fights with poorly armed ragheads.
I don't really know what I'm on about so here's a load of random thoughts.... I think Iran are always going to dislike us as long as we appear to be "interfering" in the goings on of arabic nations for our own benefit and we aren't going to stop doing that. In theory us westerners are totally hypocritical when it comes to dealing with the likes of Iran but who seriously wants a country that has the concept of Jihad written into one of it's core texts armed with nuclear weapons? I suppose we are condescending in our belief that they are not to be trusted with such power and it is no surprise that they take offense. I don't forsee any change in their ambitions for a nuclear defense considering they have enemies such as Isreal who are armed to the teeth with nukes and have threatened some form of military attack if Iran don't do as they are told.
I don't know how 2 countries with such opposing ambitions are ever going to be friends unless we somehow disarm Isreal and gtfo of the region as a whole. I suppose we could take a lead from the US and Isreal scenario, we arm Iran with nukes and they can be our best buddies in the region and simultaneously piss the USA off just for the joy of it.
On the subject of Isreal (which I also know fk all about really but here's a load of offensive, made up hyperbole just for fun) the irony of a people who receive worldwide simpathy for the bad deeds committed against them historically, becoming probably the most aggressive and offensive nation in the whole region is, well, quite big. I am sure it is totally coincidental that that other great aggressor, the USA also has a large and powerful Jewish community. They do say that the abused are more likely to become abusers. It would be almost amusing if Isreal caused the 3rd world war and hitler might have actually turned out to have been a pre-emptive, inadvertant world saviour if we hadn't stopped him.
Is this the first one of my posts you have read? You're not supposed to know the answer because it's a thread starter, fishing for opinions. People can take it any way they want to.
lol, i've read hundreds of posts and threads by you and still have to step back sometimes to make sure i'm getting it in the context your intending...
Personally, I can't actually say how I feel on this issue without coming across as a demonised racist bigot, so i'll refrain. Suffice to say in a very limited version, while I consider the west guilty of demonising certain countries, as the proverbial cliche goes, it takes two to tango and this is an international ballroom dance, with more than enough dance partners to go round.
On a slightly lesser evil for me to join in... Cultures and beliefs are different between peoples of different places as we all know. The way I see it, is that until the people and governments of the world learn to live with each others differences, there will never be anything that resembles anything other than giant global powder keg sitting waiting to be lit, the match being any excuse the aggressor wants to use.
Somehow, a significant number of American's have been brainwashed into thinking that invading Iraq was related to 9-11. Those who haven't fallen into that trap tend to agree that going into Iraq was a bad idea. The upcoming presidential election has been described by Obama as "a referendum on the war."
However, just because we shouldn't kill them all doesn't mean that they have been model citizens of the world, or would make good neighbors. (yes "They" is a sweeping generalization)
The US defended Kuwait when Iraq invaded. They will defend Israel for a long time to come (and England and Japan as well. Even France if they ask nicely).
Iran has a record for saying and doing bad things. It is difficult to wait for them to make the first move, when the first bomb will be a big one. That said, I don't advocate invading Iran (or Iraq either).
Iraq used to be Mesopotamia, which was once the center of the most advanced society on the planet.
In modern times, the most stable societies with the highest standard of living are those who respect the lives of others and who respect property rights.
All of us have dust-bunnies under the bed. No nation has a perfect record.
Babylon-ing.
You're right though, the Middle East was by far the most advanced civilisation until Islam came along and kicked them into some mad cryogenic cultural stasis.
You mean like the ones which wiped out thousands of Kurds, the very same ones that got Chemical Ali his nickname by his own people.
Theyre not "WMDs" of the scale the american government was trying to convince us that Iraq had, with suggestions of them launching chemical/nuclear weapons at europe. The main basis of the invasion was because saddam was allegedly hiding WMDs and it turns out all he was hiding was oil... what a suprise.
Theres plenty of countries around the world that are in awful states, people dying for whatever reason, yet they never seem to bother intervening there. Not to mention that if they can all be executed for killing thousands of kurds, cant George Bush be executed for killing thousands of random iraqis, allied troops and causing the civil unrest which is killing thousands more... please.
You mean like the ones which wiped out thousands of Kurds, the very same ones that got Chemical Ali his nickname by his own people.
well yes I agree they did have WMD and did use them then, but the suposed inteligence service claimed that they had them still a long time after that.
theres some argument that the evidence for such WMD later on was in fact fabricated but by wich side ...
my point is about the fact that they were wrong about there being any at the time they claimed. to even think about going after another country just becuase they are developing nuclear power, and are suspected of having the posibility to make nuclear weapons, and a country that has shown suport and constraint in recent times is absurd.
what makes one of the countires that do have them and have used them and have been involved unfavourably in a lot of overseas ventures have the right to essentialy dictate to other countries.
Iran what used to be called Persia
but its pretty easy to spot fault with people when their backs against the wall. Its way too easy to rant this thread off topic, but id quite like the idea of allying with Iran and Russia and would be okay with them having nuclear weapons. 
Linear Mode
