Obama defends Iran policy

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#26
[VOS]Heresh duh ting[/VOS]

If Palestine/Iran just magically POOF! disappeared off the planet tomorrow... Israel would live in relative peace and harmony with the rest of the civilized world.

Now... if Israel just magically POOFEDED off the planet tomorrow... Palestine/Iran would take all the the hatred they had for Israel, and INSTANTLY... without missing a beat... they'd refocus their savage fu on the rest of the civilized world.

[VOS]THAT is the diffrensh[/VOS]
Shi'ites and Sunnis massacre each other in much MUCH greater numbers than they massacre Jews. Without Israel as a distraction it would be even way way worse. Just look at the Jihadis in Syria. They hate Shi'ites WAY more than Jews.
 

WadsOfShit

Dead to Everyone on Wackbag.
#27
Oh look, it's another one of these douchebags. Run along before this gets unpleasant.

Dude, none of what you wrote here makes one ounce of sense.
No NeonTaster, I insist. Please enlighten me on how I'm a fucking douchebag. What do you think I'm a Islamic sympathizer? That I support Sharia Law? That I think all the terrorists are fighting for a just cause? Please tell me how I'm a douchebag.
 
Last edited:

Creasy Bear

gorgeousness and gorgeousity made flesh
Donator
#28
You mean the global consensus of the 2007 and 2011 National Intelligence Assessment that had every single intelligence agency
in the United States flatly declare that Iran didn't have a nuclear weapons program? Not even Israel said Iran had one.

Face it, people have been crying wolf about a nuclear bomb in "3 to 5 years" in Iran since the Ayatollah of Fatwah Rock N Rolla seized power in the 1970s.
It is just a bunch of crap to hurt Iran because a weak Iran is good for Israel and Saudi Arabia. That is all it ever was.
There is absolutely no downside to dealing with Iran as if they DO have a viable nuclear program.

There could be VERY dire consequences to dealing with Iran as if they DON'T have a viable nuclear program.
 

Neckbeard

I'm Team Piggy!
Donator
#29
Oh, the IAEA. The organization that said Iran doesn't have a military program for nuclear weaponry and was enriching less uranium under Rouhani.

OH NO. WE'RE 3 TO 5 YEARS AWAY FROM IRAN HAVING THE BOMB. GLASS PARKING LOT.

Are we?

:rolleyes:
 

Creasy Bear

gorgeousness and gorgeousity made flesh
Donator
#30
Shi'ites and Sunnis massacre each other in much MUCH greater numbers than they massacre Jews. Without Israel as a distraction it would be even way way worse.
[GRUMPY CAT]Good.[/GRUMPY CAT]

Just goes to show you what animals they are... they have no problem killing their own kind.

Another reason to NEVER consider these skunk your allies or friends... or trust them past the range you can lob drone missiles on their heads.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#31
No NeonTaster, I insist. Please enlighten me on how I'm a fucking douchebag. What do you think I'm a Islamic sympathizer? That I support Sharia Law? That I think all the terrorists are fighting for a just cause? Please tell me how I'm a douchebag.
Alright, if you insist...

:meh: Israel is as uncivilized as the rest of the nations in the Middle East with their constant missile attacks on the Gaza strip, because one Hamas missile attack on illegal settlements in the West Bank that might not even kill anyone merits a Patriot missile barrage from the Israeli army that ends up killing 30+ people.
1. Israel is a democratic country with full separation of powers, independent courts, police, etc. They have equal rights for women, and some pretty pro gay policies (not perfect but getting there). No other country in the region can claim these things.

2. Hamas is in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority is in the West Bank. Gaza doesn't fire missiles at the West Bank because they can't - it's too far away. They fire their rockets ONLY at towns and cities inside Israel proper - and by that I mean territory that is not even in dispute like Be'er Sheba, Ashkelon, Sderot, etc.

3. Patriot Missiles are anti-Missile Missiles and not Surface to Surface missiles, so you wouldn't use them to bombard ground targets anyway.

4. Israel has never, and does never, carry out ballistic missiles strikes on Gaza or the West Bank. They use precision artillery fire, and precision fire from helicopters, jets, and drones.

5. Please show me this instance of 30+ people being killed. Never happened. In fact, during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, Israel had over 99% accuracy with several hundred aerial sorties. No military action within a civilian population (especially with people who intentionally hide behind civilians) ever has zero collateral damage, but Israel does better than the U.S., France, Britain, or any other country involved in military action. I'll repeat that again just to make it clear: Israel kills fewer innocent civilians in their military action THAN ANY OTHER COUNTRY. That's not me making shit up. That's statistics.

6. The "disproportionate response" argument is invalid. Did we go easy on Iraq or Afghanistan because they didn't have weapons as advanced as ours? Firing rockets across an international border is an act of war, and you don't get to dictate how harsh the response will be to an act of war that you initiated. On top of that, these mythic instances where dozens of people die simply don't exist. I mean, I can think of one incident in the 9 years since disengagement from Gaza that was due to a legit targeting error and not the result of indiscriminate fire. One. Out of thousands and thousands and thousands of precision strikes under conditions no one else has to deal with.

7. The settlements, despite what the media tells you, are not illegal. I can prove this to you but it will take a while and it's exhausting. The point is it's a disputed territory. It doesn't belong to the Palestinians because there was no such thing as Palestinians until 1967 when Israel conquered those territories from Egypt (Gaza strip) and Jordan (West Bank) who controlled them previously. And even if they were illegal, firing rockets at a kindergarten puts you in no position to complain about the severity of the response.


Is that a good enough explanation or should I go on some more?
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#32
Oh, the IAEA. The organization that said Iran doesn't have a military program for nuclear weaponry and was enriching less uranium under Rouhani.

OH NO. WE'RE 3 TO 5 YEARS AWAY FROM IRAN HAVING THE BOMB. GLASS PARKING LOT.

Are we?

:rolleyes:
They said that when they were being controlled by an Egyptian who later acknowledged that he wasn't hard enough on them. Stop it. You know these things and you're just fucking trolling at this point. This scenario is playing out exactly like it did with North Korea and you know it. Just stop with this fucking act already.
 

Neckbeard

I'm Team Piggy!
Donator
#33
They said that when they were being controlled by an Egyptian who later acknowledged that he wasn't hard enough on them. Stop it. You know these things and you're just fucking trolling at this point. This scenario is playing out exactly like it did with North Korea and you know it. Just stop with this fucking act already.
It isn't an act. I personally don't think Iran has ever had a weapons programs nor has one now. I don't understand how Iran can do all the right things and get punished with hundreds
of billions of dollars of economy wrecking sanctions. As NPT signatories, not only is Iran entirely in its right to use peaceable nuclear technology, the other signatories are supposed to help them out!
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#34
It isn't an act. I personally don't think Iran has ever had a weapons programs nor has one now. I don't understand how Iran can do all the right things and get punished with hundreds
of billions of dollars of economy wrecking sanctions. As NPT signatories, not only is Iran entirely in its right to use peaceable nuclear technology, the other signatories are supposed to help them out!
Under the NPT you must submit to inspection, which they haven't done. They put themselves in this bullshit.

And dude, you seriously are out of your fucking mind. The evidence that they have is overwhelming, and these sanctions or this deal wouldn't even be necessary if anyone in the world actually agreed with you. Otherwise why stop them from doing anything they aren't going to do? The way the world is treating Iran is proof that EVERYONE knows they want a bomb, or at the very least are untrustworthy enough to sell nuclear materials to other bad people. Everyone. To deny that is to be willfully ignorant.
 

Neckbeard

I'm Team Piggy!
Donator
#35
The evidence is so overwhelming that you've shown me nothing and had nothing to say about the 2007 and 2011 NIE reports.

Oh, @NeonTaster
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#36
The evidence is so overwhelming that you've shown me nothing and had nothing to say about the 2007 and 2011 NIE reports.

Oh, @NeonTaster
I just explained to you what makes it overwhelming. Nobody is sanctioning Switzerland if they decide to build a nuclear reactor. Much like North Korea, the world understands that Iran cannot be trusted, which is why this whole nuclear issue even came up.
 

Neckbeard

I'm Team Piggy!
Donator
#37
I just explained to you what makes it overwhelming. Nobody is sanctioning Switzerland if they decide to build a nuclear reactor. Much like North Korea, the world understands that Iran cannot be trusted, which is why this whole nuclear issue even came up.
The country that hasn't had a war of aggression in over 1000 years but Major War Every 15 Years, "Samson Option" Israel can have them and
get paid 3 billion a year to their military when Iran gets sanctioned? Oy vey, I'm all verklempt at the hypocrisy.
 

lajikal

Registered User
#38
Whatever happens, I hope gas prices rise. I was sick of the $1.09 per gallon back in the late '90s and would hate to go back to that.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#39
The country that hasn't had a war of aggression in over 1000 years but Major War Every 15 Years, "Samson Option" Israel can have them and
get paid 3 billion a year to their military when Iran gets sanctioned? Oy vey, I'm all verklempt at the hypocrisy.
You wear your antisemitism on your sleeve like a Nazi party armband. And like I said, Israel has had them for what, 40 years? How many times have they threatened anyone with a nuclear strike? Conversely, how many times has North Korea done that? And ISRAEL DIDN'T SIGN THE NPT YOU FUCKING RETARD!!! Stop comparing this to Israel you fucking anti-Semite. We get it, you hate Jews. Now fucking drop it and focus on the country that executes homosexuals and killed hundreds of Americans via jihadi attacks in Iraq. Fucking christ.
 

Neckbeard

I'm Team Piggy!
Donator
#40
Focus on the country that killed Americans in a terrorist attack, you say?



Even if I did quote unquote "hate Israel," why does that mean having an antagonistic relation with a country with
80 million people and some of the largest natural gas and petroleum reserves in the world is worth it?
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#41
Focus on the country that killed Americans in a terrorist attack, you say?



Even if I did quote unquote "hate Israel," why does that mean having an antagonistic relation with a country with
80 million people and some of the largest natural gas and petroleum reserves in the world is worth it?
Go fuck your mother, asshole.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#43


I don't care either way.

:p

:action-sm
No, you've already been bitchslapped on the Liberty bullshit so pulling it up now proves that you're not having a discussion. You're just grandstanding like a piece of shit who doesn't want to actually listen to what the other person is saying. So in that case, go fuck yourself.
 

Hate & Discontent

Yo, homie. Is that my briefcase?
#44
It isn't an act. I personally don't think Iran has ever had a weapons programs nor has one now. I don't understand how Iran can do all the right things and get punished with hundreds
of billions of dollars of economy wrecking sanctions. As NPT signatories, not only is Iran entirely in its right to use peaceable nuclear technology, the other signatories are supposed to help them out!
If they just want peaceful nuclear energy, why are they refining uranium over 80%?

From Wikipedia - Responding to criticism, President Ahmadinejad said, "Why do they think that 20 per cent is such a big deal? Right now in Natanz we have the capability to enrich at over 20 per cent and at over 80 per cent, but because we don't need it, we won't do it."

The Bushehr I reactor is a light water reactor, which only needs around 3% enriched uranium to function. A heavy water reactor (which, by the way, can be used to make weapons grade nuclear materials) doesn't need anywhere near 80% enrichment level to operate. So why the fuck would Iran need (and admit to having) the ability to enrich over 80% with centrifuges?

Because they want people to know they are working on the bomb. They think it will keep their perceived enemies in check, but it won't be quite overt enough to draw the full wrath of Israel. It also allows the current administration to play dumb, which slows down Israel's response since they can't rely on the US for support.


TL;DR - Go fuck yourself.
 

Neckbeard

I'm Team Piggy!
Donator
#45
No, you've already been bitchslapped on the Liberty bullshit so pulling it up now proves that you're not having a discussion. You're just grandstanding like a piece of shit who doesn't want to actually listen to what the other person is saying. So in that case, go fuck yourself.
Still said nothing about 2007 and 2011 NIE reports nor IAEA statements about Rouhani's moderation and slow-down on uranium enrichment.

You. got. nothing.

Wah wah wah. And when you were losing the argument, all you fucking did was cry anti-semitism and unfairly compare Iran to the worst fucking country on Earth.
 
#46
Ok so hate Israel for whatever reasons you want no matter how rational or irrational but defending Iran? :confused:
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#47
Still said nothing about 2007 and 2011 NIE reports nor IAEA statements about Rouhani's moderation and slow-down on uranium enrichment.
The NIE thought Khomeini's book was a fake and missed 9/11. Excuse me if I don't trust their overly cautious political attitude.

The slowdown of Uranium enrichment is irrelevant since it is still ongoing, with more centrifuges and more facilities being put in. Once Iran reaches threshold status, they can whip up a bomb in 6 months if they want to, and at that point it doesn't matter if they have one or not. They will effectively have one. Period.

You. got. nothing.

Wah wah wah. And when you were losing the argument, all you fucking did was cry anti-semitism and unfairly compare Iran to the worst fucking country on Earth.
You keep mentioning Israel even though it has ZERO to do with it. "Israel has them so why can't Iran?" THAT'S your argument? That's the basis for your argument? OK, then I explained to you - you can't compare them to Israel because Israel did not sign any treaties committing to not do it. There. That argument is now dead. Null and void. And yet you keep bringing it back to Israel. I'm not crying anti-Semitism. You are fucking screaming it in my face, and not a single person reading this thread would disagree.

Besides, I've been doing nothing but mentioning facts and sources. For you to suggest that I'm simply saying this because I can't handle criticism is victimization culture crap. Next you'll call me sexist, you fucking woman.
 

Neckbeard

I'm Team Piggy!
Donator
#48
What am I saying that is "anti-semitic?"
Why should the U.S. care if a constantly inspected treaty signatory has a totally legal nuclear program when they seem content to let a country sign no treaties
and have hundreds of nuclear weapons? Why should the treaty signing country get villified while the treaty-spurning rogue nuclear nation get billions of U.S. dollars
every year?

The only reason the so-called "nuclear weapons program" that is supposed to "make a bomb in 3 to 5 years" (since the 1980s, pfft) is because a weak Iran helps
Israel and Saudi Arabia and hurts Russia and China. This isn't about nuclear weapons. This is just bogus and transparent realpolitik. That is it.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#49
What am I saying that is "anti-semitic?"
I explained why. You keep mentioning Israel for no reason. Whether or not Iran should have nukes is entirely related to Iran itself and no one else.

Why should the U.S. care if a constantly inspected treaty signatory has a totally legal nuclear program when they seem content to let a country sign no treaties
and have hundreds of nuclear weapons? Why should the treaty signing country get villified while the treaty-spurning rogue nuclear nation get billions of U.S. dollars
every year?
This isn't the U.S., it's the world, and not all countries of the world are equal, and Iran was not, is not, and is not willing to be, a constantly inspected country, and Israel has already proven that its possession of nuclear weapons poses no threat to anyone. Any more reasons you want to keep bringing up again after I already explained them?

The only reason the so-called "nuclear weapons program" that is supposed to "make a bomb in 3 to 5 years" (since the 1980s, pfft) is because a weak Iran helps
Israel and Saudi Arabia and hurts Russia and China. This isn't about nuclear weapons. This is just bogus and transparent realpolitik. That is it.
Right, The U.S. just wants to help Israel and Saudi Arabia, which is why it did THE EXACT OPPOSITE of what Israel and Saudi Arabia want. In fact, this decision is so bad that Saudi Arabia is reportedly letting Israel uses its airbases in case of a strike against Iran. Do you understand how fucking bananas that is? How exactly is this scenario catering to Saudi Arabia and Israel? Please tell me because this would be a great time for you to explain further than just repeating some dumb talking point.
 

Neckbeard

I'm Team Piggy!
Donator
#50
I explained why. You keep mentioning Israel for no reason. Whether or not Iran should have nukes is entirely related to Iran itself and no one else.



This isn't the U.S., it's the world, and not all countries of the world are equal, and Iran was not, is not, and is not willing to be, a constantly inspected country, and Israel has already proven that its possession of nuclear weapons poses no threat to anyone. Any more reasons you want to keep bringing up again after I already explained them?



Right, The U.S. just wants to help Israel and Saudi Arabia, which is why it did THE EXACT OPPOSITE of what Israel and Saudi Arabia want. In fact, this decision is so bad that Saudi Arabia is reportedly letting Israel uses its airbases in case of a strike against Iran. Do you understand how fucking bananas that is? How exactly is this scenario catering to Saudi Arabia and Israel? Please tell me because this would be a great time for you to explain further than just saying shit.
Maybe this situation isn't, but you don't think the last 60 years of U.S. policy have been just a smidgeon kinder to Israel and Saudi Arabia than Iran?

If this does get the total cessation of a nuclear industry in a peaceable way that helps U.S./Iran foreign relations, wouldn't that be good for the U.S., Israel and Saudi Arabia?
So what are you bitching about.
 
Top