What's new

US and IRAN...reach NUKE deal !

Status
Not open for further replies.
townpete said:
Welcome to the club....
 
5u2uee.jpg
How reactionary of you. Someone says something you don't like and you label them a terrorist
sympathizer. All I did was state a fact. I know you don't like facts but you really can't get around them in this case.

Iran does not have the ability to invade Israel. Iran's chief proxy in the region Hezbollah is
bleeding itself dry in Syria. Iran is pouring money and "advisers" into the fight as well. End
result, Assad's position is even more tenuous now than at the beginning of the civil war.

So my suggestion is to layoff the talk radio and Fox News. But if you want to look like an ignorant fool that's fine to.
 
Regime Change...
Well... Where have we heard that before..?





THE ACTUAL QUOTE:

So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in farsi:

”Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad.”

That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e. It is the word “Regime“, pronounced just like the English word with an extra “eh” sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase ”rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods” (regime occupying Jerusalem).

So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want “wiped from the map”? The answer is: nothing. That’s because the word “map” was never used. The Persian word for map, “nagsheh“, is not contained anywhere in his original farsi quote, or, for that matter, anywhere in his entire speech. Nor was the western phrase “wipe out” ever said. Yet we are led to believe that Iran’s President threatened to “wipe Israel off the map”, despite never having uttered the words “map”, “wipe out” or even “Israel”.
 
southwind said:
Last time I checked Iran was the only country that has stated it wants to wipe another country off the face of the planet.
Not only that, I thought the United States didn't negotiate with terrorists. Guess BaRack missed that memo!
Google North Korea genius.
 
southwind said:
Not only that, I thought the United States didn't negotiate with terrorists. Guess BaRack missed that memo!
Your right, we sell them weapons. Cough, cough Reagan.
 
KCFlyer said:
 
This is going to be difficult to explain....we have more to fear from a country that doesn't have nukes, but says "death to America"  because they are Mooslim than we do from a country that DOES have nukes and has stated numerous times that they want to flatten Washington DC.  I'm not sure they could find North Korea on a map.  
 
Its not that hard for someone that has half a brain cell.
 
North Korea is somewhat isolated and has minimal influence. The biggest threat they they pose at least is to South Korea.
 
Iran sponsors has massive influence with past and existing terrorist groups thru money and weapons. They sit extremely close in the current middle east conflagration. Go look at a map of NK and then IRAN. And now we are giving them billions of dollars to further their said agenda.
 
At what point do you take someone at their own words?
 
When they repeatedly say they want to kill you or when they actually do it?
 
Then what buttercup?
 
southwind said:
Last time I checked Iran was the only country that has stated it wants to wipe another country off the face of the planet.
Not only that, I thought the United States didn't negotiate with terrorists. Guess BaRack missed that memo!
 
What does Iran/Contra mean to you?   If you recall (Reagan couldn't), just 5 years earlier, Iran was holding Americans hostage for over a year.   Then we sold them arms.  So yeah...technically, we didn't negotiate with them.
 
townpete said:
 
Its not that hard for someone that has half a brain cell.
 
North Korea is somewhat isolated.
 
Iran sponsors has massive influence with past and existing terrorist groups thru money and weapons. They sit extremely close in the current middle east conflagration. Go look at a map of NK and then IRAN. And now we are giving them billions of dollars to further their said agenda.
 
At what point do you take someone at their own words?
 
When they say they want to kill you or when they actually do it?
 
Then what buttercup?
 
My half a brain cell tells me that North Korea HAS nukes and has threatened the US.  North Korea needs money far more than Iran, so if a terrorist were to want to procure nukes....who might they seek out...the country that has them....or the country that might?  KOrea has threatened to "annihilate" the United States.  They have nukes.  But Iran is a bigger threat.  Granted...North Korea is a long way off from being able to hit New York or DC with their nukes.....but while you are flapping your gums about nukes that Iran MIGHT get....what will you do should NOrth Korea take a practice shot at Seattle? 
 
But you DO get credit for recognizing that North Korea isn't in the middle east. 
 
777 fixer said:
How reactionary of you. Someone says something you don't like and you label them a terrorist
sympathizer. All I did was state a fact. I know you don't like facts but you really can't get around them in this case.

Iran does not have the ability to invade Israel. Iran's chief proxy in the region Hezbollah is
bleeding itself dry in Syria. Iran is pouring money and "advisers" into the fight as well. End
result, Assad's position is even more tenuous now than at the beginning of the civil war.

So my suggestion is to layoff the talk radio and Fox News. But if you want to look like an ignorant fool that's fine to.
 
 
You mean like labeling a regime who funnels money and support to terrorists?
 
Ignorance is your bed buddy buttercup.
 
lol
 
KCFlyer said:
 
My half a brain cell tells me that North Korea HAS nukes and has threatened the US.  North Korea needs money far more than Iran, so if a terrorist were to want to procure nukes....who might they seek out...the country that has them....or the country that might?  KOrea has threatened to "annihilate" the United States.  They have nukes.  But Iran is a bigger threat.  Granted...North Korea is a long way off from being able to hit New York or DC with their nukes.....but while you are flapping your gums about nukes that Iran MIGHT get....what will you do should NOrth Korea take a practice shot at Seattle? 
 
But you DO get credit for recognizing that North Korea isn't in the middle east. 
 
If you cant tell the geopolitical difference and influence between the two then your're a lost cause.
 
Gotta love the monolithic obedience and lack of critical thinking the left has to their dear leaders.
 
They could say "go jump off a ledge" and they will defend it to their very core.
 
townpete said:
You mean like labeling a regime who funnels money and support to terrorists?
 
Ignorance is your bed buddy buttercup.
 
lol
You mean we shouldn't talk to countries that funnel money to terrorist organizations? If that's the case then we should never have negotiated with the USSR. If you had an even basic understanding of history you would know that the USSR funneled money to various terrorist organizations in it's time. But I'm going to guess you were unaware of that little fact.
 
townpete said:
And somehow the pro-sodomy left are all giddy over this Iran deal, while ignoring how they treat the very people they empathize with.
 
http://observer.com/2015/05/how-iran-solved-its-gay-marriage-problem/
 
While we debate whether gay men and women have a right to marry here in the United States, gays in Iran fight simply to be allowed to breath and survive.
People like you seem to spend an awful lot of time thinking about sodomy. Something you want to tell us?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top