Thread: "We must attack Iran."

"Are you Fcuking kidding me???"

No, I'm absolutely serious.

"Hey, Lipo- you think it's such a good idea? You lead the way, old son:"

Thanks. I recently called my Congressional representatives. They know precisely what I think. I might even write another letter to President Bush.

"Get back to us when you've put your money where your mouth is. Or do you think selling real estate in Florida is a much more valuable contribution to National and International Security?"

Why not both? Sounds good to me.

Originally Posted by nigegilb

Agree with White City to a certain extent, but the window to negotiate with Iran passed when Bush chose not to extend the hand of friendship to the previous president. There is no possibility of negotiating with the current regime. Another tragedy caused by Western leaders with no clue about strategy. It is with great reluctance, but I now prefer the military option, unless something radical happens in the near term, within Iran.

OK. Got your argument now. :D

We've raided one china shop and broken most of the contents. Haven't got a clue as to how we can get the business up an running again. Noticed that one of the other shop owners is doing rather well, even lobbing the odd stone into our windows for fun. So, to solve our problems, we're going to raid another china shop too!

Originally Posted by nigegilb

The incident off the coast of England was a forced boarding of a container vessel thought to be carrying a nuclear device. If they could, they would.

Right. So an incident 6 years ago (strangely coinciding with our initial hurragh into Afghanistan) that you "believe the boys were looking for a nuclear device" proves that Iran is out to nuke us. That's worse than the attempt by the US to link Iraq to al-Qaida by a story made up about meetings in Prague!

nigegilb,
You come across as an intelligent and thoughtful sort of chap. But in the last couple of days, you have done nothing other than repeat the Bush/Blair mantra about why we should attack Iraq - except you've inserted Iran in its place. Do we really have to make the same mistake again?

Pleased you've joined us again Lipo. Any more cunning plans to offer us on how to become a fascist dictatorship?

Originally Posted by gnuorder

Originally Posted by Blagsta

Originally Posted by gnuorder

Racism comes into play when people like you believe all Arabs or Persians are Muslim.

I'm well aware that not all Arabs are muslim. Are you aware that not all muslims are Arab.

Well since you just quoted me mentioning Arabs or Persians being Muslim, most would guess that's a yes. Are you aware that Arabs and Persians are not the same? I'll leave your troll bridge now.

So what you are saying is that anyone who disagrees with you about Islam or states they don't like Islam is a troll and a racist.

Explain to me why I must like Islam ?

In my avatar you'll see 2 people one is me and the other is a Christian Arab, we were mates. The pic was taken on the hills overlooking Beruit.

"Pleased you've joined us again Lipo. Any more cunning plans to offer us on how to become a fascist dictatorship?"

I suggest possibly calling everyone with whom you happen to disagree, a fascist.

Don't you see that by devolving into acrimony, you harm your argument? It tells me you've given up on reason because you are unable to defend the indefensible.

Originally Posted by Lipo

"Pleased you've joined us again Lipo. Any more cunning plans to offer us on how to become a fascist dictatorship?"

I suggest possibly calling everyone with whom you happen to disagree, a fascist.

Don't you see that by devolving into acrimony, you harm your argument? It tells me you've given up on reason because you are unable to defend the indefensible.

Which could actually be said of you, too, pazzo. :D :D :D

MsG

Originally Posted by Lipo

Don't you see that by devolving into acrimony, you harm your argument? It tells me you've given up on reason because you are unable to defend the indefensible.

devolve
/divolv/
• verb 1 transfer (power) to a lower level, especially from central government to local or regional administration. 2 (devolve on/to) (of duties or responsibility) pass to (a deputy or successor). 3 (devolve on/to) Law (of property) pass from one owner to (another), especially by inheritance.
— ORIGIN Latin devolvere ‘roll down’.

so, that's your level of education clarified. Defeated by a 2-syllable word. Try 'dissolving' you ignoramus.

Also your irony bypass funtioning at 150%. :D

Originally Posted by Stonker

Also your irony bypass funtioning at 150%. :D

Septic/Irony: Does not computer. Please re-enter data...

Originally Posted by Lipo

"Pleased you've joined us again Lipo. Any more cunning plans to offer us on how to become a fascist dictatorship?"

I suggest possibly calling everyone with whom you happen to disagree, a fascist.

Don't you see that by devolving into acrimony, you harm your argument? It tells me you've given up on reason because you are unable to defend the indefensible.

There is no argument in my post. Yesterday you advocated introducing legislation that leads governance of the US closer to a fascist dictatorship. I was just asking if you had any other similar gems for us today.

It's really not that difficult Lipo, however hard you deliberately try to make it.

Originally Posted by Lipo

"'Do you expect us (me) to give a flying * whether Iran wants to talk to you or not?"

Yes. It is quite obviously in Great Britain's national interest.

No. Not in the long term, the quicker we distance ourself from the exalted eagle the better, but I'm certainly not about to discuss potential future foreign policy choices with you. The Atlanticism you seem so fond of, seems to be a little like a dependency to me (cultural, military, economic to some degree, psychological, linguistic, and historic....oh yes and bubblegum), Britain needs to enrol on a 12 step programme; seems AA is not just for Alcoholics...

The 12 Steps of America Anonymous.

1.) We admitted we were powerless over America--that our lives had become unmanageable.

2.) Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.

3.) Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.

4.) Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.

5.) Admitted to God, to ourselves and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.

6.) Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.

7.) Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.

8.) Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.

9.) Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.

10.) Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it.

11.) Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.

12.) Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to the Americanised, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.

"No, Not long term, but I'm certainly not about to discuss potential future foreign policy choices with you. The Atlanticism you seem so fond of, seems to be a little like a dependency to me (cultural, military, economic to some degree, psychological, linguistic, and historic....oh yes and bubblegum), Britain needs to enrol on a 12 step programme; seems AA is not just for Alcohol..."

That's an extremely large chip perched on your shoulder.

Might you work in the Foreign Office? It would explain quite a lot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5JJMVcWrj8

Originally Posted by Lipo

"No, Not long term, but I'm certainly not about to discuss potential future foreign policy choices with you. The Atlanticism you seem so fond of, seems to be a little like a dependency to me (cultural, military, economic to some degree, psychological, linguistic, and historic....oh yes and bubblegum), Britain needs to enrol on a 12 step programme; seems AA is not just for Alcohol..."

That's an extremely large chip perched on your shoulder.

Might you work in the Foreign Office? It would explain quite a lot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5JJMVcWrj8

Actually its pommes frites. The irony for the copy of that is clip is priceless 'We watch FOX so you don't have to', not just irony but applicable on multiple levels...

By far my favourite parts are...

'...its not the first option to pursue...its the last resort...' (0:33-0:39)

Straight out of Rhetoric 101...its 'your' last resort as you have missed options for probably at least 50 years, certainly 27/28...could have eat humble pie in '79...

'...part of a different plan Iran has...an effort to project power throughout the middle east, globally, its reflected in the nuclear weapons programme, its reflected in their extensive political and military interference in Iraq...'(2:02-2:16)

Irony overload!!!!!!!

'...and its refelected in their continuing and expanding support for terrorist groups like Hizbollah and Hamas' (2:16-2:22)

go figure...

Originally Posted by Nehustan

Originally Posted by nigegilb

FP, didn't pretend they were my words, don't even agree with the sentiment, I was attempting to second guess the chances of a strike on Iran and came across the article when looking for info on a pre-emptive strike on Iran. UK and US and Israel like to do pre-emptive strikes you see. The more we understand the sentiment of US and Israel the easier it is to see the way ahead, because France and to a lesser extent the UK will have b*****r all to do with any decision to attack Iran. No point in looking in the Le Monde archive I am afraid.

I actually started a thread, which must have been considered very very dull, as no one has replied to it. I was actually putting forth a question about Zarkozy and the forth coming elections in France, the parliamentary ones. France figuring in an alliance against Iran would be great political capital. Not a chance? I think its quite feasable right wing president voted in on domestic issues, manages to take control of the senate and the assembly. Such a repositioned France would help sway political opinion across the EU. The very fact that France stayed out of the Iraq war (ok it was a different 'administration') could be used to supply the 'ok we were wrong about Iraq, but...' rationale.

Actually in relation to this thread subtext (re: Sarkozy) Bolton gives away a psychological tell, six degrees of separation at play me thinks...

'...with new leaders in France and soon in the United Kingdom...' (2:49-2:52)

...you don't need to be indoctrinated with discursive analysis to work that one out...open like a book...