kactus

Wow! You seem to have some experience in this area with vivid imagination. Care to share with us your expertise? (Not kidding)

Bass drums. I'd like to learn playing guitar but just haven't got the time.

Hold it there....According to you there are reasons to implicate that Iran is going to attack Israel first and "wipe it off the map" (although this hasn't been explicitly said nor is there remotely any justification for Iran to do so when the consequences are fully known) and you say "why should we disbelieve their words?" On the other hand, if the government of Iran tells us that they are acquiring nuclear capability for peaceful purposes then they are telling us a lie and we shouldn't believe them! Who is being selective now?

We need to create an enemy. It diverts the sheeple's thinking away from the economic woes and puts the spot light on a contrived enemy of the people. Then the real enemies of the people can carry on robbing our money from us and continue to live in the style they really believe they deserve.

The issue concerns application of nuclear weapon not siding with east or west. In this case west used it against a non nuclear country. Furthermore, japan was already literally at war with US by attacking it's navy. The creation of nuclear weapons and the tragedy of Japan in WW2 is a deterrent on all out war. The human race does not want nuclear weapon but we have them.... Coming back to the topic, speculation on Iran firing on Israel is just nonsense. They are too close and Iran would suffer as well. US as part of a Global Alliance can put an end to this folly.

Thanks for confirming that Persians are fine. I guess you would have said the same thing about libyans, Iraqis, afghanis, etc etc etc before they got attacked. Does supporting israel for you justify an attack on any country in the region just because you don't like their government?

And i suspect you haven't read many of my posts either. No body is singling out Israel. So please stop playing the victim card when the very own title of this thread makes Israel the aggressor. Admit that if it's Human rights issue there are many other places you could start with.

Ah but you see paying attention to finer details is what makes the difference between a propaganda and the truth. Especially when it concerns "wiping another country off the map" to make a case for "war on terror". Ahhhh where is the good old David Frum. Hmmmm....

I am having trouble seeing what your point is when you seem to shift your argument. First you ask which neighbouring country has invaded Iran I told you Iraq. Then you shifted your argument about what was said about the quote which calls for wiping Israel off the map which is still untrue. Perhaps these sources will bring some angle to the story as both of them translate exactly word for word what the quote was: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=4527 http://antiwar.com/orig/norouzi.php?articleid=11025 Honestly I will buy you a virtual beer if you can prove me otherwise. Over to you...

You asked the question of whether Iran's neighbour invaded Iran I gave you an answer with historical proof. That is a fact unlike your heresay about "wiping another country off the earth"! I challenge you to provide the exact quote.

Well Iraq did back in eighties....

Deterrent...not necessarily having it but giving that perception. a lot has been discussed on this thread about this already and have made this clear.

Exactly! Iraq did initiate the invasion with the help of the west that let to a bloody eight year war....Any such attack by Israel will bolster the position of the government as it will unite the youth behind the government.

People are gloating that Israeli jericho II can hit Iran with a few strike and literally send that country back to middle ages and lots and lots of other things...This is not a contest to establish who is stronger militarily. Israel has the possession of over 200 nuclear bombs and the full support of US. Iran on the other hand is hit by very heavy and systematic sanctions, relies on the old technology of the Chinese and russians in their arsenal and still becomes questionable on whether Israel can do it or not despite all the gloating coming that Israel can send Iran back to middle ages bla bla. There is still no answer on why would Iran want to destroy Israel when the Iranian government is fully aware of the consequences. Besides destroying Iranian nuclear targets will inevitably release radiation which will affect the whole region. Think about it.

My response was in relation to the fact that irans military is portrayed best as confined to rusty Russian military weaponry sometimes and at other times when it suits the argument is overplayed by having sophisticated inter continental ballistic missiles... Coming back to your point US deployment of nuclear bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was partly in response to defeat a japan in attacking and destroying US navy. In this case Iran is the country subject to the attack without attacking anyone in the first place conventionally or hypothetically nuclear. I am not disputing what you are saying of the degree of devastation by nuclear attack. You can argue that a large country like Iran with 80mil population has a lot more to lose.

Yep and I thought you said earlier tiny Iran has ICBM.

Attacking a sovereign country like Iran and creating fear that it might attack Israel and the wider world is only half the story from one sided argument. An argument debatable as it could lead to the death of many civilians. This is exactly my point before some people jump on the band wagon and accuse me of having subjective opinion. Let's look at the rationale for having nuclear capability as a deterrent: 1- Both neighbouring countries of Iran are invaded by US and allies 2- For many years even before Ahmadinejad came to power and Iran had a relatively more moderate president called Khatami there have been constant rhetorics of attack echoing the news headlines from US and Israel 3- North Korea has nuclear capability and has become immnue to an attack 4- There's shia/ sunni card to play to isolate Iran further, which has been the case for many years 5- Systematic sanctions are hurting Iranian people not the regime contrary to the popular belief 6- All other countries except US and Israel have shown restraint but are being put under pressure for approval of collective punishment In the face of these realities it might explain why acceleration of becoming nuclear might be important in the face of an attack. Let's also not forget the current hey ho that started in North Africa and now contagous to the Middle East by bombing the shit out of them to bring peaceful "arab spring". Pardon the exprssion but you can not allow to be shafted in the back and then say thank you for doing it.

Thankfully enough we do live in a world where everyone is entitled to an opinion. Sometimes we agree sometimes we disagree which is the first rule of exchanging ideas. But certainly we do not make these attacks personal by bringing family into the equation. If you do not have the capacity to grasp this then stay the hell out. This is your very first reply to me on this thread and you ceratinly haven't shown that degree of maturity in the first place. Furthermore, you do not own this thread to tell me or anyone for that matter how we should think. Pomposity is a bad trait and you seem to have demonstrated it quite eloquently here. Capiche, eiverstanden, understood? I hope so for your own sake...

Israel's tactic at first was to win the heart of the western world for a collective support on their attack on Iran. Then moved the goalpost by framing the justification for an attack under the disguise of "arms race" in the middle east when all this time they are concerned about losing their monopoly nuclear status. Sure as hell they will be punished for instigating an attack on another sovereign nation without being attacked in the first place. And quite rightly so should they wish to go down this route. An eye for an eye would be applicable here. That's what you need to know if you dont know what you must know.

If I remember correctly they did a manouver over the mediterranean water back in early 2008 with refuleing their fighter jets... Let them attack and kill innocent people. Reality is a large proportion of Iranians are actually quite friendly towards the west contrary to the biased views.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15635476 Speaks volume about what they really think of him..... Never liked BiBi. Another megalomaniac....Ahhh!

Nope Never was good at multi-tasking. Learned to play piano at school a long time ago. I used to own a drum and still play it occasionally.

Really? Have the arabs in the shape of (the monarch royal puppets) residing in Saudi Arabia been under the Canadian (NATO) strike mission? Hmmm! That's news to me!

Read DOP's comments prior to my post before being selective on human rights issues. That said your point is valid in so far as human rights issues is concerned in Iran today. It is good to see that atleast you do show compassion for those groups. The point of contention is people use this as a pretext to attack, kill Iranians (including gays, lesbians, etc etc) to justify "liberation" and removal of threat to Israel with their actions. That would have far more grave consequences for the region and Israel if that is the pretext. There are plenty of arab countries including friendly Saudis with far worse human rights issues than Iran. Those concerns don't yet get much humane compassionate coverage do they?!

Play both piano and drum. Played drum since I was a kid and pretty good at it.