IBTG81 Posted July 15, 2006 Posted July 15, 2006 You never get sick of making these a--hole comments, do you? Good luck driving your manmobile sans gasoline, champ. 723385[/snapback] "its not that they don't get it, they just don't hear you. you're kinda drowned out by the sound of all the hippie's singing...Koom-bay-ya BushBad! Koom-bay-ya"-/dev/null
RuntheDamnBall Posted July 15, 2006 Posted July 15, 2006 Har-dee-har-har. Keep that fresh humor coming, genius. I'll be ignoring it.
IBTG81 Posted July 15, 2006 Posted July 15, 2006 Har-dee-har-har. Keep that fresh humor coming, genius. I'll be ignoring it. 723391[/snapback] "And the rockets red glare, Iran and Syria bursting through the air..."
Typical TBD Guy Posted July 15, 2006 Posted July 15, 2006 Why the sad face? It's about time some of these ME countries turn into dust. Here's hoping to an Israeli invasion, dragging Iran and Syria into it. Buy a map right now, because in three years, Iran, Lebanon, and Syria won't be on it. 723370[/snapback] I'm actually hoping Iran gets dragged into this. Might give us and Israel a good excuse to finally go demolish Iran's ongoing nuke program, which is BY FAR the most dangerous situation currently in the Middle East.
IBTG81 Posted July 15, 2006 Posted July 15, 2006 I'm actually hoping Iran gets dragged into this. Might give us and Israel a good excuse to finally go demolish Iran's ongoing nuke program, which is BY FAR the most dangerous situation currently in the Middle East. 723416[/snapback] Ding ding ding, we have a winner! I'm thinking the same.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 15, 2006 Posted July 15, 2006 I'm actually hoping Iran gets dragged into this. Might give us and Israel a good excuse to finally go demolish Iran's ongoing nuke program, which is BY FAR the most dangerous situation currently in the Middle East. 723416[/snapback] ...and hello $6.00/gallon gasoline.
Typical TBD Guy Posted July 15, 2006 Posted July 15, 2006 ...and hello $6.00/gallon gasoline. 723422[/snapback] So we should just let Iran fully develop its nuclear weapons arsenal? What would THAT do to oil prices and overall Middle East stability?
cromagnum Posted July 15, 2006 Posted July 15, 2006 "its not that they don't get it, they just don't hear you. you're kinda drowned out by the sound of all the hippie's singing...Koom-bay-ya BushBad! Koom-bay-ya"-/dev/null 723389[/snapback] Remember this little dity? Over the top statements released by an over the top website with music http://ftp.radio4all.net/pub/archive/05.29...s_own_words.mp3
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 15, 2006 Posted July 15, 2006 So we should just let Iran fully develop its nuclear weapons arsenal? What would THAT do to oil prices and overall Middle East stability? 723431[/snapback] Yeah, that's what I said. Because there's only two possible ways to address the situation: let Iran become a nuclear power, or let Israel bomb the sh-- out of them.
Typical TBD Guy Posted July 15, 2006 Posted July 15, 2006 Yeah, that's what I said. Because there's only two possible ways to address the situation: let Iran become a nuclear power, or let Israel bomb the sh-- out of them. 723440[/snapback] Well, there are two outcomes: 1. Iran becomes a nuclear power. 2. Iran doesn't become a nuclear power. The former should be considered absolutely unacceptable. For the latter, I only see one viable solution: 1. Israel/US/our allies bomb Iran's nuke centers now or ASAP. Others might suggest: 2. Diplomacy - has proven to be useless with the Iranian regime...they want nukes, not nuclear power...any diplomatic talks with them are done with their fingers crossed behind their backs. 3. Internal revolt - definitely not gonna happen anytime soon enough, especially since Iranian citizens aren't allowed free press, guns, etc... That's my take. I don't think our options are more complex than this, but I could be wrong. What's your take? And please try to respond without your usual sarcastic, condescending remarks or lame-ass, homophobic Fit jokes.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 16, 2006 Posted July 16, 2006 I don't think our options are more complex than this, but I could be wrong. What's your take?723450[/snapback] My take is: you're wrong, and I don't feel particularly compelled to waste my time explaining to you something you probably wouldn't understand anyway.
Typical TBD Guy Posted July 16, 2006 Posted July 16, 2006 My take is: you're wrong, and I don't feel particularly compelled to waste my time explaining to you something you probably wouldn't understand anyway. 723486[/snapback] @ your precious time. You're on this board 24-7, posting in every thread imaginable. And now TBD's resident pseudo-intellectual has finally found a topic for which he has no time . So...does anyone else know any decent options for halting or disarming Iran's weapons program? Otherwise, I'd definitely be up for some strategic Israeli missile strikes a la Iraq 1981!
IBTG81 Posted July 16, 2006 Posted July 16, 2006 You're on this board 24-7, posting in every thread imaginable. And now TBD's resident pseudo-intellectual has finally found a topic for which he has no time . 723489[/snapback]
cromagnum Posted July 16, 2006 Posted July 16, 2006 So...does anyone else know any decent options for halting or disarming Iran's weapons program? Otherwise, I'd definitely be up for some strategic Israeli missile strikes a la Iraq 1981! 723489[/snapback] Here' some possibilities if that happens. This link is about the strait of hormuz. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2...1730.shtml?s=lh Then there is iraq, and possible interference by iran to ramp up the insurgency. Then hamas which is in america and other countries around the world. Just another day in pardise
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 16, 2006 Posted July 16, 2006 @ your precious time. You're on this board 24-7, posting in every thread imaginable. And now TBD's resident pseudo-intellectual has finally found a topic for which he has no time . So...does anyone else know any decent options for halting or disarming Iran's weapons program? Otherwise, I'd definitely be up for some strategic Israeli missile strikes a la Iraq 1981! 723489[/snapback] Discussing it isn't a waste of my time. Discussing it with you is a waste of my time. Your sorry ass has already reduced the problem to a binary set (Iran has nukes/Iran doesn't have nukes), and reduced the solution to a binary set (bomb/don't bomb). You've already set the world speed record for establishing total ignorance of a topic...so why the hell should I bother discussing intricacies like the effect of bombing Iran on Amman, when your only likely answer is "Who cares! Either Iran gets nukes or they don't!" I'll reserve serious discussion for people who can handle it. You're just a waste of bandwidth.
X. Benedict Posted July 16, 2006 Posted July 16, 2006 Now that, I can agree with. I would say that most wars, bloodshed, and misery occured over the course of human history due to religion... 722555[/snapback] You would say that and you would be wrong. That is just silly.
UConn James Posted July 16, 2006 Author Posted July 16, 2006 You've already set the world speed record for establishing total ignorance of a topic... 723580[/snapback] He outdid BF in the Retatta thread? Due diligence, tho, BF was the creator of both the topic and the culinary disaster. He at least gave the impression he'd know something about it.
UConn James Posted July 16, 2006 Author Posted July 16, 2006 You would say that and you would be wrong. That is just silly. 723596[/snapback] I would amend it to: "Most wars, bloodshed, and misery occured over the course of human history due to politics, economics and good-old resource-grabbing in the name of religion so the leaders could simultaneously a) collectively rally their people in a medium where the craziness grows exponentially the further it gets down the line and... 2) claim the supremacy of their own ideas as being divinely intended."
Typical TBD Guy Posted July 16, 2006 Posted July 16, 2006 Discussing it isn't a waste of my time. Discussing it with you is a waste of my time. Your sorry ass has already reduced the problem to a binary set (Iran has nukes/Iran doesn't have nukes), and reduced the solution to a binary set (bomb/don't bomb). You've already set the world speed record for establishing total ignorance of a topic...so why the hell should I bother discussing intricacies like the effect of bombing Iran on Amman, when your only likely answer is "Who cares! Either Iran gets nukes or they don't!" I'll reserve serious discussion for people who can handle it. You're just a waste of bandwidth. 723580[/snapback] Ah goody, the usual arrogant response from the manic depressive, yuppy burnout monkey with the inferiority complex... Yes, I reduced a complex problem and a complex solution to a couple of "binary sets" ( , what a !@#$ing tool you are). Partly in the interest of my weekend time, partly because the issue of Iran CAN be simplified in such terms. You really think Iran's weapons program will somehow cease without the use of external force? In theory, of course that's possible. In practicality? Very doubtful. Or perhaps you think the consequences of bombing Iran now will be worse than the consequences of allowing them to have nukes later? That's plausible - and would be an interesting debate with you if you weren't such a prick - but provided that the US and our allies come to Israel's defense in the event of an Iranian airstrike, I think I'd much rather see us/them take the chance now. Iran, with nukes, will undermine the Middle Eastern fledgling democracies, influence the global oil economy, and be able to siphon WMD's to whatever rogue terrorist organizations they choose.
X. Benedict Posted July 16, 2006 Posted July 16, 2006 I would amend it to: "Most wars, bloodshed, and misery occured over the course of human history due to politics, economics and good-old resource-grabbing in the name of religion so the leaders could simultaneously a) collectively rally their people in a medium where the craziness grows exponentially the further it gets down the line and... 2) claim the supremacy of their own ideas as being divinely intended." 723598[/snapback] better, but I would contend that in most conflicts the claims of religion are merely ancilliary to any real tribal or state motives. True, occaisionally God is invoked to legitimize these enterprises. In most of human history race, ethnicity and nationalism make much more persuasive propoganda than any religious claims with a few exceptions.
Recommended Posts