How about we not invade Iran

[long]

Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 . Anyone think this will be enough to put a halt to the neocon rhetoric pushing the US towards another illegitimate war? I have my doubts; those people have no shame.

[jewbird]

There are still unresolved questions, chief of which is why Iran's energy program focuses exclusively on nuclear power?

I don't think it should come to war, but that's a legitimate question that demands to be resolved.

[jewbird]

I suppose as long as Iran is cooperating with the IAEA, nuclear power shouldn't be an issue. That should be the determining factor.

It's interesting to me, the Palestine issue - yes, the Bible does talk about the return of the Jews to the holy land and that God gave it to them. On the other hand, Israel as a nation is a construction of financiers and politicians. There's really no justification for evicting the people who were living there because the ones doing the evicting had no moral justification as it's not comparable to other situations in the past, because those involved immoral societies and the institutions involved in the creation of the Israeli state have been artificial and clumsy.

On the other hand, some feel that only by bringing about the Antichrist can Biblical policy be fulfilled.

[long]

I agree with everything you put forth there. As far as I can tell they've been cooperating consistently with the IAEA in the recent past. The Security Counsel's position regarding sanctions seems unjustified to me. The Iranian issue boils down to an Israeli security issue from what I can see, but then I really am pretty weak on this subject.

[jewbird]

I think that's what it fundamentally is. Although the Jews are not unjustified in their blanket paranoia that everyone is against them, and Ahmanijedad was irresponsible (hopefully deliberately so) with the timing of some of his announcements and there are murmurs of political repression in Iran, the policy case for military action in Iran does not exist and the notion of revisiting the holocaust, and especially the causes, nature, and repercussions for society as a whole are a worthy subject of academic study, if it is done with sufficient analytical rigor.

[Altan]

Not invading Iran is a good idea. I'm not a fan of any kind of war. Especially if my tax money goes toward it. I see other problems at home that needs to be funded first.

[long]

sam said:

the notion of revisiting the holocaust, and especially the causes, nature, and repercussions for society as a whole are a worthy subject of academic study, if it is done with sufficient analytical rigor.

- I agree that this should not be illegal as it is in a good # of European countries (or so I've heard). But since this is soo offensive to a great many people the subject needs to be treated with enormous amounts of discretion and tact.

Is anyone here surprised that Iran is not actively pursuing weapons? Does anyone feel misled? Did anyone trust the American war machine in the first place?

[jewbird]

One of the main bones of contention is Iran's refusal to recognize Israel, which is why Ahmanijedad's actual statements have gotten blown out of all proportion, in addition to the economic incentive to sell advertising space.

However just as survivors of the holocaust are not unjustified in thinking everyone's out to get them, Iranians have justification in being suspicious of the motives of the Jewish bankers who were responsible for Israel's creation in the first place.

I think his attitude is more one of, by all means, let the Jews return to the land of their fathers if they so wish, but there's no need to use all the money and influence in the world to redraw political boundaries and evict the people already living there to do it, simply because you can.

In Iran's history, there is the case of Cyrus the Great, who after sacking Babylon, simply told the Jews they could return to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple if they wished and his policy in the holy land apparently did not extend beyond that. For this he is mentioned in the Bible 23 times, by name, 150 years before his reign.

[Mr Brad Pitt]

chakkaphak said:

Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 . Anyone think this will be enough to put a halt to the neocon rhetoric pushing the US towards another illegitimate war? I have my doubts; those people have no shame.

Military war is nowadays a mean of retards.

But the assumption that Iran hasn't stopped its NW program, or possesses NW weapons and/or chemical ones is justified.

[jewbird]

It's naive to think that it's possible to evolve past the need for war. I'm reminded of that episode of The Simpsons where Lisa wished for world peace, got it, and then a couple of space aliens enslaved humanity with a club and a slingshot.

[long]

oranginarouge said:

[

But the assumption that Iran hasn't stopped its NW program, or possesses NW weapons and/or chemical ones is justified.

- Did you read the article? Did you mean was justified? Cause that was the whole point.. they've definitely stopped.

[Mr Brad Pitt]

sam said:

It's naive to think that it's possible to evolve past the need for war. I'm reminded of that episode of The Simpsons where Lisa wished for world peace, got it, and then a couple of space aliens enslaved humanity with a club and a slingshot.

Lulz.
Just said its justification has become retarded, not that it would stop.

[Mr Brad Pitt]

chakkaphak said:

- Did you read the article? Did you mean was justified? Cause that was the whole point.. they've definitely stopped.

My point was not about Iran actually having NW program/weapons or not; I evoked that there was a mere possibility and that questions about all this ruckus were justified.
Because we're talking about Iran, not Finland (though the latter relies heavily on nuclear plants...).

[long]

Sorry to be redundant but.. did you read the article? ;D

[Mr Brad Pitt]

No, but I hope you won't mind if I just reacted to your post and not to the article ;D