N Korea helping Iran with nuclear testing

G

GeoffreyG

Member
That’s all good and well, but how do we know this to be true? It sounds like absurd propaganda, if it was in fact true, do you think Iranian Government would publicize it, I doubt it.

Yes, there really are crazy people, or more correctly crazy governments out there, they go around invading and pillaging, and are also the same lot that have nuked another country.

The biggest threat to global security is not Iran or North Korea, these are relatively peaceful compared to the country which starts several wars every decade, I'm sure you can figure out who that is.
 
I

islandhobbler

Member
The US was in many ways responsible for their coming to power in Iraq.
That doesn't mean that it was exsclusively the domain of the US. But they, as always had vested financial interests in someone like Saddam being getting to power and staying there... that is until it suits them.

Again - read between the lines.
It's not an either or proposition.
There have been many other western countries involved in Iraq.
Again... that's obvious.
 
L

laurajeanne79

New member
Awww... schuckums... did you get your feelings hurt because someone didn't see one of your questions.

Well fret not little one. I shall answer it.

Your question was:



I'm not sure how you arrived at that.
If I wanted to say that... I'd have stated it in no uncertain terms.
Since when on MAP have I ever had a problem saying what I really thought?

I think the issue of Iran having nuclear weapons is overblown.
When you have a country like the US that goes into Iraq and takes over and makes a mess out of things the likes of which hasn't been seen in quite some time - all under the false pretenses (WMD anyone?) - then I have a hard time taking their shouts of 'The sky is falling' seriously just because Iran is about to develop nuclear capabilities.

I think the US and their lackeys have worked themselves into a bit of a corner on this one. They've unwittingly managed to assist the shifting of the power balance in the region towards Iran. They realized that quagmire in Iraq isn't panning out for them and they need to keep up military spending up and shift focus off the failure that is the Iraq war. Bush well realizes that talking about energy in the address to the nation was pretty much seen for what it was... waffling.

It's certainly in their best financial interests to try and reign Iran in. Lord know's they've tried just about everything else but all out war with Iran. Their failed puppet governments in countries like Iran are largely responsible for the hardliners being able to come to power and stay there.

I don't think America wants someone in the middle east to be able to tell them to sod off... which is basically what the Iranians have done for some time. With all the pro Israel camp in Washington, and Irans views on Israel.... it's no surprise that the hawks are coming out. None.
 
L

Les_Football_Mom

New member
But when an anti-US rant along the lines of "The US supported Saddam" becomes your only reply to any thread about the Middle East, perhaps it needed to be pointed out again.
 
E

Edgar

Member
Your talking out of your hat.
Go back and read the threads.
That's not been my only reply.
Far from it.

There's been a ton of other points on the middle east threads over the past several months. If you fail to see them that then that's your problem.

It's a relevant point when discussing the issues and judging by the amount of people are unaware of it or choose to ignore it... then it's worthy of underscoring yet again.

If you don't like my stance on Iran I really could care less.
 
B

bocwtonuk

Member
I have no idea what your stance is on Iran. You've never actually said whether you're for action against their nuclear research, or against it, except to launch a load of rhetoric at US policy in general.
 
Z

Zelmakins

Member
http://www.ihav.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1075358&postcount=45

yet again.

Maybe you should read and respond.
Instead of just running on.
 
P

PateelM

New member
Try not editing in your response after posting and I might have known it was there.


Sorry if my psychic powers deserted me for a moment, I didn't know you'd gone back a page.
 
N

Nibby

New member
What crybaby.
If you don't like what was posted or when then go cry to someone else.

That's what the edit function is for at MAP.

And FYI it was edited directly after it was posted... which is to say about 10 seconds after it was originally posted.

Additionally the link to that exact post as it stands now was posted twice within 3 minutes of each other.
 
R

RandyJ

Member
LMAO. I'm not crying about what you wrote. You tried to make a sarcastic comment about "eyeglasses" because I didn't read an older post that you'd gone back and edited... apparently "10 seconds" after you posted.



My reply:




Last edited by slipthejab : Today at 10:30 AM.


10 seconds?

I guess they didn't teach you read a watch at school?



And you're saying you typed this:




In 10 seconds? Wow, that's some special typing skillz you've got.
 
B

BlueWolf

New member
And as soon as I saw the link, I was able to read it... not before, as I wasn't really to know you'd gone back to edit a ten minute old post.

So if you can stop trying to divert the argument with misplaced "insults" (if you can call them that, not so much offensive as laughable) we can get back on topic.
 
E

Escape

Member
Do you mean that in the general sense of Iran's attitude historically, or the more literal "we've got a bomb and we can't be pushed around" sense?





But you don't think it's in the public's interest? When you say the Iranian bomb threat is "overblown", do you mean you don't think they're going to try to get a bomb?
 
H

helpmeplz

New member
Anytime you want to respond to that post feel free to.
You're the only one whining about an edited post that was edited shortly after it was posted.

I know it's hard but perhaps it's time you realize the world doesn't revolve around you or your time schedule.
 
Top