Forums - General Discussion - President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran is a man of peace.

Samus Aran said:

I'm just saying there's no 100% that Iran has nuclear weapons, I have yet to hear a single official report that said there's hard solid proof Iran has nuclear weapons.

What would be the point of that deal if Iran already can and knows how to make nuclear weapons? If the USA really had proof that Iran has nuclear weapons then it would make no sense to try and make that deal. It would only make sense if Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons, but not yet succeeded(which is something I never denied).

You have to have a great fantasy if you actually believe Iran would throw nuclear weapons on Israel. What would they gain from it? Nothing. What would they lose for it? Everything.

When one reads about the pressure that the US and UK Governments put on such countries as Iran and North Korea I find it hard to believe that they themselves are so negligent in taking care of their own weapons. I also find it so hard to believe that they have such high moral standards when trying to stop Weapons of Mass Destruction, but are prepared to use such "evil" weapons themselves.

If the USA wants to appear credible then they should be the first to remove *all* of their nuclear weapons.(alongside Russia).
Cause it's wrong for other countries to have them, but not for the US right?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the US is also the only country in the world to have abused these nuclear weapons(not including nuclear tests).

Pakistan also has nuclear weapons, and it's also an unstable and very strict Muslim country. It's also a country that supports terrorism and has a big hatred for India. They have yet to throw nuclear weapons on it however. I find it hard to believe Iran would throw nuclear weapons for no reason just to randomly destroy something. It would bite them back harder and I'm 100% positive they're fully aware of that. The last thing Ahmadinejad would do is throw nuclear weapons if he wants to remain in power. Which won't be for too long anymore as the country is about to break out in a revolution if this keeps going(Because of his crappy leadership, see I'm not defending him as you seem to think.)

It's no great fantasy to think that I fanatical muslim who runs a tyrannical theocracy and calls for the death of entire countries would do something irrational and use a nuclear weapon.  Yes the USA is the only country to use the weapons, they are also the only country making actual international efforts to dismantle all these weapons.  What country got Russia to drop their current stockpile?  The US,  which country dismantled a lot of their own nuclear stockpile without any pressure from another nation?  The U.S. again.  You say we shouldn't demonize other nations we don't like, but that's all you have been doing for the US.

 

I know you're not defending him but you're denying that he obviously is attempting to obtain nuclear weapons, which has been what I've been arguing this whole time.

 

What you're saying though about the fact that Pakistan has not attacked India yet does not convince me of anything.  The same could be said about the Holocaust before it happened, just because a certain action seems so horrible that it would be unlikely doesn't mean that it won't happen.  What did Germany stand to gain by eliminating the lesser races?  Nothing but the rallying of their people under Hitler's ambitions.  What would destroying Israel do for Admadinejad?  Nothing, but rally his people under his ambitions.  If you don't think the people of the middle east hate Israel with an unbelievable furor then you simply don't know many of the people in that area.



Around the Network
Samus Aran said:
Slimebeast said:
Samus Aran said:
highwaystar101 said:
He is a peaceful man.

It's just that the kind of peace he wants will only come about by threatening the rest of the world to conform on pain of death... Kinda defeats the object.

Cause the Western peace is so much better right? You know except for the fact we're destroying our world and the south is paying for all the ecological and social costs while the north is leeching from their back.

With north I mean Europa/USA and with south I mean mostly Africa, but south america and parts of Asia as well.

Because of our global economical system 9 million people die of starvation each year in AFRICA alone. It's destroying the local agriculture which is/was the primary source of survival for many people in the world. A lot of people will die for our global economical system. A lot. 

You shouldn't listen to so much socialist propaganda.

It's not socialist propaganda, it's the hard cold truth. I my self vote for N-VA(Nieuw-Vlaamse Alliantie), which is a right wing party. So, I'm not a socialist, far from it actually. I actually don't give a shit about the environment and couldn't care less if 9 million people died because of starvation each year. I just don't deny the fundamental problems of our globalist economical system. And do I want our system to change? Yes, but only because our economy would grow as well if the south wasn't so extremely poor. 

You should stop being a negationist if you think it's just socialist propaganda. Or perhaps you just don't have a clue about globalization and it's impact on the world.  

I don't see how NA/European nations caused the problems in Africa. I think the african nations are the ones causing their own problems.



@ Kasz:  it's hard to tell, but it looks to me like the numbers are similar on average but more stable, and going up. 

@ the OP:  I think Clausewitz would agree with you:  "The conqueror is always a lover of peace; he would prefer to take over our country unopposed."



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Wtf, how does this site work? I just posted a long post and now it says something else? And what's up with the extremely terrible layout? 


 

Currently playing: Zelda: Ocarina of time, Zelda: The twilight princess, Zelda: Majora's mask.

 



"Paul the Octopus is a symbol of western decadence and superstition." President Ahmadinejad . Iranian President is a  good strong leader who is seen as a good leader in the eyes of the Iranian people. To the western world he is portrayed as a mad dictator  by Western propaganda . The US media make him out to be a terrorist because he is against the US Imperialists way of life. Anyone who speaks out against US Imperialism and Globalisation is considered a terrorist. 

President Ahmadinejad is a man of peace.  Murdoch media has  ruined the reputation of Ahmadinejad through lies and misrepresentations. 



Around the Network

First of all, let me clear this up: Ahmadinejad is a fuckhead. He is anti-semite, he probably is a holocaust-deniar, etc. But that doesn't mean everything people claim about him is automatically right.

Armads said:

Rigging elections ( 10 million votes missing)

There is still absolutely no evidence for this. In fact, the by far most reliable pre-election polling (and the only one carried out by a western institution, "a company whose work for ABC News and the BBC in the Middle East has received an Emmy award", quote Wikipedia) suggested that Ahmadinejad would win with even a few percent more.

This poll was carried out three weeks before the election however, so opinion could have changed. But after the election, with all the rigging accusations , the american polling agency "World Public Opinion" then did an even bigger post-election poll. All the results from this poll were extremely close to the official election numbers, and 83% of the respondents said they were confident that the declared election results were correct. This is quite interesting since the protests directly after the election should tend to cause people to doubt the official results.

What's true however is that Ahmadinejad is rather unpopular among young people and in the big cities. And that is where the protests actually happened, so the images seen on TV gave a very unrepresentative impression when it comes to Iran as a whole.

So the Iran election was not anything like the Afghanistan election a short time later, where there was absolutely clear evidence the election had been rigged in favor of the US-favored Hamid Karzai.

Armads said:

Creating nuclear weapons (evidence previously provided)

There is still no evidence for this either. Just a few weeks there was a CIA report that claimed that Iran might be able to build a nuclear bomb within two years, but they had no evidence whatsoever that Iran is actually trying to build one. In fact, they didn't even have any evidence that Iran even wants to build the nuclear bomb.

But, to be honest, it is quite clear to me that Iran really wants to build the nuclear bomb. It's the only thing that could prevent Iran from being attacked by the USA or Israel. Even one of the leading israeli military strategists said that after the US-invasion of Iraq, Iran would be "crazy" not trying to build the bomb.

While I personally believe that Iran really wants to have the nuclear bomb, I consider a nuclear armed Iran a no bigger threat than any other nuclear armed country. There are US intelligence reports that estimate the chance of Iran attacking another country with nuclear weapons at about 1%. Unlike most other countries in the world, Iran has been a very peaceful country for far more than one hundred years. The real threat intelligence reports see when it comes to a nuclear armed Iran is the realistic chance of a nuclear retaliatory strike.

Armads said:

And here's a fun quote “As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map,” coming from a man who is attempting to (or already has) create nuclear weapons, this doesn't sound like playful banter to me.

I would have thought that by now everyone had heard that this was nothing but a completely wrong translation. What he actually said had more to do with israel's occupation of palestine.

Btw., israeli prime minister Netanyahu on the other hand really uttered the threat of wiping Iran off the map - and this man really has nuclear bombs. Probably hundreds - nobody really knows, since Israel denies giving information about their nuclear arsenal.



numonex said:

"Paul the Octopus is a symbol of western decadence and superstition." President Ahmadinejad . Iranian President isa  good strong leader who is seen as a good leader in the eyes of the Iranian people. To the western world he is portrayed in Western propaganda Murdoch media he has his reputation tarnished. The US media make him out to be a terrorist because he is against the US Imperialists way of life. Anyone who speaks out against US Imperialism and Globalisation is considered a terrorist. 

President Ahmadinejad is a man of peace. 


Considering there's no freedom of speech in Iran it's pretty hard to know the Iranian people's true opinion of him. And I'd take globalisation over sharia law any day of the week.

Finally, how can you defend a man who picks on a poor defenseless octopus??? Shame on you! Shame on you!!!



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

Final-Fan said:

@ Kasz:  it's hard to tell, but it looks to me like the numbers are similar on average but more stable, and going up. 

The point MrStick was making was specific to the US, Kasz's graph is oil production overall and doesn't focus on the eventual destination or even the nationality of the oil companies profiting from the oil.

IIRC when the oil deals were all set up in Iraq there was not a single US company with a contract.  That was more the point MrStick was getting to...if the US invaded for oil it did a really terrible job of capatlizing on it.

In the meantime we've built a 'shitload' of schools ('shitload' being a highly technical term of course) and repaired all of the infrastructure damage caused from the invasion to the point of it being better than before the war pretty much universally (I'm sure a few exceptions still exists, but the vast majority of locations this is true for).

Compare this to wars in world history and you'll see why I personally LOL when people impugn the US' motives.  Throughout history when a country invades and achieves victory it either claims the invaded territory or demands that the defeated country pay them to cover the cost of having to invade them (in a lot of cases both were done actually).

The US?  After we win wars we forgive debts, waste billions and trillions to rebuild, and let them choose their new form of governance.  The only real demands we levy are things like we did with Germany and Japan in regards to what kinds/amounts of arms they were allowed to amass after the war.

I think our war profiteering is pretty anemic compared to true empires throughout history.  If anything we probably should have taken more for ourselves...or at least not forgiven so much debt.  Alas we did, and now we are the "Great Satan" to much of the world.

PS - Just for the record I'm not saying that the US' actions re: rebuilding aren't "the right thing to do", I think to an extent they are and past that point we took it a bit too far.  I'm just saying I find it hard to take seriously the people who honestly think our goals are purely for war profiteering -- cause people who believe that would have to also believe that we are godawful at it as well.



To Each Man, Responsibility
ArnoldRimmer said:

What's true however is that Ahmadinejad is rather unpopular among young people and in the big cities. And that is where the protests actually happened, so the images seen on TV gave a very unrepresentative impression when it comes to Iran as a whole.

So the Iran election was not anything like the Afghanistan election a short time later, where there was absolutely clear evidence the election had been rigged in favor of the US-favored Hamid Karzai.

We know that he was hugely unpopular in urban areas, yet these happened to be the areas in which he did the best in.  Which makes absolutely no sense.  The area was heavily in favor of his opposition, then they change their minds and vote for him, then change their minds again and protest him getting into power?  No what happened was that the votes in urban areas weren't counted.  He won even in Tabriz, Mousavi's capital city.

You should read this article detailing how one can deduce fraudelent vote counts by analyzing the numbers and comparing it to human behaviour.  When humans make up numbers they usually don't cross check them to make sure that they line up with what is the statistical average for a number to pop up, so you have huge spikes in certain numbers and massive drops in another number being used. 

"
We expect each digit (0, 1, 2, and so on) to appear at the end of 10 percent of the vote counts. But in Iran's provincial results, the digit 7 appears 17 percent of the time, and only 4 percent of the results end in the number 5."

This is not a normal situation and the likelihood of this event happening naturally is akin to winning the lottery.  Did Ahdmadinejad win the lottery in every district he won, or had the numbers simply been fabricated?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/20/AR2009062000004.html

 

Armads said:

Creating nuclear weapons (evidence previously provided)

There is still no evidence for this either. 

It's quite odd to claim there is no evidence when I already provided it.  They've hidden nuclear facilities, refused to accept nuclear fuel that would work for energy but not for weaponry, and have been acquiring nuclear trigger devices.  What more do you need?

Armads said:

And here's a fun quote “As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map,” coming from a man who is attempting to (or already has) create nuclear weapons, this doesn't sound like playful banter to me.

I would have thought that by now everyone had heard that this was nothing but a completely wrong translation. What he actually said had more to do with israel's occupation of palestine.

Btw., israeli prime minister Netanyahu on the other hand really uttered the threat of wiping Iran off the map - and this man really has nuclear bombs. Probably hundreds - nobody really knows, since Israel denies giving information about their nuclear arsenal.

 

I'm pretty anti-israel, I think they're a terrorist state, but I'm not for their genocide.  But Iran still calls for death to our nation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92myDzAFgU4   (he also claims Iran has cured AIDS at one point, lawl; got to wonder if the translation is totally accurate though) 



Slimebeast said:
Samus Aran said:
highwaystar101 said:
He is a peaceful man.

It's just that the kind of peace he wants will only come about by threatening the rest of the world to conform on pain of death... Kinda defeats the object.

Cause the Western peace is so much better right? You know except for the fact we're destroying our world and the south is paying for all the ecological and social costs while the north is leeching from their back.

With north I mean Europa/USA and with south I mean mostly Africa, but south america and parts of Asia as well.

Because of our global economical system 9 million people die of starvation each year in AFRICA alone. It's destroying the local agriculture which is/was the primary source of survival for many people in the world. A lot of people will die for our global economical system. A lot. 

You shouldn't listen to so much socialist propaganda.

Socialists oppose wars, we do not want to die in  wars which profit the ruling capital class. Ruling capital class started wars in the  Middle East to fight against socialist freedom fighters. Wars are started solely for profiting the ruling elite and lives are sacrificed for profits. 

Iranian President is a man of peace. He does not want war but he fears that the US will invade his sovereign nation of Iran. Sharia law has worked effectively in Iran. Why is everyone against Sharia law?