Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Big Oil Demands Another Mountain Of Dead Babies

Posted 7 years ago on Oct. 17, 2012, 3:16 p.m. EST by trashyharry (3084) from Waterville, NY
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

60 Minutes-5/12/96-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -Leslie Stahl:We have heard that a half million children have died.I mean,that's more children than died in Hiroshima.And,you know,is the price worth it?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Madelaine Albright:I think this is a very hard choice,but the price-we think the price is worth it.

94 Comments

94 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (22990) 7 years ago

Here is the youtube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbIX1CP9qr4

And, "It's worth noting that on 60 Minutes, Albright made no attempt to deny the figure given by Stahl--a rough rendering of the preliminary estimate in a 1995 U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) report that 567,000 Iraqi children under the age of five had died as a result of the sanctions."

Sad stuff.

[-] 8 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

"Iran Sanctions Now Causing Food Insecurity, Mass Suffering : Yet again, the US and its allies spread mass human misery though a policy that is as morally indefensible as it is counter-productive", by Glenn Greenwald :

"One other question: if 'terrorism' means the use of violence aimed at civilians in order to induce political change from their government, what is it called when intense economic suffering is imposed on a civilian population in order to induce political change from their government ? Can those two tactics be morally distinguished ?!" Very sad 'bw' - tending towards outrageous & thanx for posting the YouTube link btw.

fiat justitia ...

[-] 5 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago

I think you raise a very good point in your second paragraph.

If they are going to bitch and argue over the definition of people attacking our embassy AFTER we just got done bombing the hell out of them, then perhaps we should take a look at our own actions.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

Re. Iran : Some hard facts may bring some 'Light' to matters, rather than all the unpleasant 'Heat' being generated by the constant fear and loathing and abject WAR-mongering :

a) Iran has The World's 3rd Largest known 'Total' & 2nd Largest 'Liquid' Oil Reserves : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Iran ,

b) Iran has The Worlds 2nd Largest known Gas Reserves : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_gas_reserves_in_Iran ,

c) Further consider and cogitate upon the fact that in Feb. 2008, Iran opened a Hydro-Carbon Bourse at The Kish Mercantile Exchange (see http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11613.htm and also http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28646.htm ) - trading in a basket of currencies, including Euros, Roubles, Yuan and Iranian Rial BUT NOT in U$ Dollar$ and thereby challenging both Reserve Currency, Dollar "HegeMoney" as well as the Monopoly of the existing Oil and Petroleum Bourses.

d) The Iranian Central Bank is State Controlled & Entirely Government Owned, ie - NOT Privately Owned ( http://blogs.wsj.com/corruption-currents/2011/12/15/senate-passes-sanctions-on-irans-central-bank/?mod=google_news_blog & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Bank_of_the_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran ).

e) The same NeoCon, Neo-Colonial, Paleo-Imperial WARMONGERS who beat the drums for The Unconscionable, Illegal & Immoral WAR on Iraq (where The Only "WMD" = Words of Mass Deception !!) are now beating the Drums of War and this time Iran is in the Imperial crosshairs. Pls. Research PNAC (eg http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1665.htm & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNAC etc.)

  • Thus, do 'a-d' above actually constitute the Real 'Casus Belli' here ?!

fiat lux et fiat pax ...

[-] 5 points by beautifulworld (22990) 7 years ago

Great article. Thanks. From it: "In essence, the same mentality that drives Democratic support for drones sustains Democratic support for sanctions: they tacitly embrace the unexamined assumption that the US is inevitably going to engage in aggression and kill Muslims, and then pat themselves on the back for cheering for the way that kills the fewest (I support drones because they're better than full-scale invasions; I support sanctions because they're better than air strikes). They are seemingly incapable of conceiving of a third alternative: that the US could or should refrain from killing innocent people in predominantly Muslim countries."

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

Thanx for highlighting that excellent quote from the Greenwald article and I also append :

Alas, The War Drums keep beating but http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QglEbgON9o :-)

e tenebris, lux ...

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22990) 7 years ago

I love that Oliver Stone video and thanks for the article. All we can do is keep shining a light on all of this and hope and pray that love overcomes fear.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

ommm mane padme hummm {~i~}

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22990) 7 years ago

Very nice, ~} :) {~

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

"Al Jazeera to Air Opposition Presidential Debate Amidst US Black-out", by Mark Wachtler :

Next Tuesday, Oct.23rd !!

fiat lux ...

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (22990) 7 years ago

Wow! That's all I can say. Sad for us. It is corporate America bullying us saying "You will vote for one of these two and that's that."

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

Wtf kinda demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy is that ?!

ipsa scientia potestas est ...

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (22990) 7 years ago

It is the one I am forced to live in, :( .

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

I may have to consider starting to organise some kind of asylum if Mitt for B(r)ains gets in !!

Not that Obummer's much better .. but in that differential .. there be monsters !!!

verum ex absurdo ...

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (22990) 7 years ago

LOL! :)

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

:-( et :-) mais c'est la vie, n'est ce pas ?

pax ...

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22990) 7 years ago

Oui.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

How do you propose to minimize the killing of innocent people in predominantly Muslim countries? 1. The U.S. does not have the wherewithal to determine in detail who is innocent or otherwise. It has the firepower but it often simply becomes manipulated by the locals into their very own instrument of terror. 2. The U.S. cannot disengage from the world because the global war has been brought to our homes even though we or our ancestors have ALREADY put the world's two greatest oceans as buffers to "Old" world's troubles. 3. The propaganda and ideology inculcated into populations around the world by their own governments for their own political advantages cannot be undone. We may have to wait for the generation of polluted minds to pass away or take them out actively. There is no escape in an imploding global world.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (22990) 7 years ago

Love, not fear, my friend. End this nonsense. Live and let live. Stop killing, period. We do not have to conduct ourselves like this.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

I am absolutely amazed at your beautiful soul. I wish that everyone were like you so that we can free ourselves of this nonsense. Yes, it is indeed nonsense but having lived for a long time I have become more of a realist because "live and let live" is NOT the motto of the counter-parties. Wherever there is a power vacuum, there is the contention and jockeying for power and influence. The U.S. definitely has national interests at stake in the outcomes if sometimes nothing else than to keep the world a bit stabler, saner, and fairer. We need to be a paragon of virtues and success, a beacon of hope, and the "City on a hill" for the rest of the world. We need to show that we can be the example for the forlorn and brokenhearted that those who come to join us shall be rejuvenated with a rebirth of hope and be blessed with the bounties from justice, freedom, and peace.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22990) 7 years ago

Thanks, grapes, I'm humbled. I only wish we would be all of those things and not the bellicose, fear-mongering nation we have become. I do think we have it in us. And, peace to you.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

Good. Believing in ourselves overcomes the first and most important step towards making the promises real.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 7 years ago

"Polluted minds" is correct. Here & in the Muslim world.

In the west we MUST end the fear mongering brainwashing that convinces people we should bomb everyone & give up our freedoms.

1st priority, end the fear mongering brainwashing.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

Whatever got into our minds earlier tends to stick around stubbornly. I was taught "Arabic" numerals so I thought that the Arabs not the Hindus invented zero. There are indications that the Arabs got their numerals from the Hindus. Whether zero was actually included in the import is still murky to me but I certainly fell into the trap of attributing the Arabs with the origin of the numerals. Arabs still preserved many classical texts in spite of the burning of the library of Alexandria by Christians and later Muslims alike. Religious and political fervor caused much destruction. Closing our minds to new evidences is a sure way to live with pollution in them.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

Great post.

It's Iraq all over again.

Sanctions killed about a million people in Iraq over their span in the 90's and 2000's. Then they invaded over WMD's that didn't exist. Now they're sanctioning Iran... and later on they plan to Invade or NATO over WMD potential.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

We are being led to war due to an irrational and paranoid perception intentionally being used to propagandise and in order to justify a view that somehow Iran will attack Israel - which every sane person in Iran and elsewhere in The World, knows would be nothing short of completely suicidal for Iran and Iranians !! - No country in the world would dare to attack Israel which is a Nuclear Armed State, so in all honesty - such talk of Israel being threatened is sophistry of a very high order and is almost desperate in its inventiveness.

The Iran War is the brainchild of the Neocons of the Bush-Cheney administration. In top secret meetings of the national security council, Dick Cheney argued for war against Iran as early as 2002 and 2003. Cheney’s daughter, Elizabeth Cheney served in the State Department as the conduit for $85 million per year in funds to “pro-democracy” organizations inside Iran – groups like the Mujaheddin e-Khalq, a Pseudo-Marxist ; Quasi-Islamist paramilitary cult of celibate terrorists, commandos, assassins and agents who practice assassination, bomb manufacture, espionage, torture and terrorism in Iran.

It is clear to any and all that there is a deep desire for WAR against Iran from the Military-Industrial-Security-Complex in both Israel & The USA and "W.M.D" = Words of Mass Deception and repeating them does NOT make them true. Peace loving people all across the world can see what is going on here and what is at stake. Thanx for your comment, that YouTube link above ;-) & for all you do.

fiat lux et fiat pax ...

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

Iran is the prize in the center. Paranoid and delusional.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnFlsjhpGfw

General Wesley Clark told the nation the plans years ago.

This is why Iran is all the talk of the town. This is why we have military operations happening right now in the Straight of Hormuz. This is why HR 4310 authorizes war.

Also your first video didn't load when I clicked on it.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

Good points and link. It's end game as per Gen. Clark's uncommonly candid words. My link may work now as it is working for me and its title is "Iraq Exit Strategy according to Oliver Stone in W.".

pax ...

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

Hahaha that's too funny that we shared the same link. It was not working for me at the time. It is working now and I'm seeing it's the same as I had shared.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

Yep. I got the link from you back in the day, well a few weeks ago ! Have you seen :

Also, please see other video links on this thread.

pax et lux ...

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

I will. You've been posting great links since I can remember.

I watched part of that video earlier today.

My favorite quote was from a women's rights movement leader who said something along the lines of "Yes there is oppression here... but US intervention will only make it worse. Just like in Iraq. Interventions fuel hatred and allow oppressors to take power and use the fear to build up followers."

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

Your clear, succinct and to the point final paragraph would for sure utterly escape most US politicians and media - all of whom are of course wedded and welded to The Corporations and The US-MIC.

For further insight into The WAR Machine :

SOLIDARITY 'Trev' !!

fiat pax ...

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

Yeah I remember the Army always posted up at my high school. I went to their desks for the free pens and never with the intention of joining.

The government just started invading Iraq because of lies and propaganda back when I was in high school. I sure as shit didn't want to go to a war that was based on bullshit.

Also the whole "do as I say" deal with the military... fuck that. I'm my own person.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

I have Friday night foggy head & exotic cigarette memory issues here, so can't remember which grey box if I have just linked this to, so excuse possible repetition but please reflect upon :

Also, consider, that the only possible moral war, is one of self-defence.

fiat pax ...

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

As you have said, Iran is unlikely to attack Israel IF it were sane. Is it sane, though? It is not that farfetched a stretch to go from meddling in its neighborhood with suicidal jihadists to a suicidal state [wartime Japan and Germany were precedents]. Iran's behaviors so far have already demonstrated irrationalities, probably prodded by an inferiority complex and arrogant nationalism. We can all believe in the "containment" strategy but we had better be ready, militarily, morally, or otherwise to deal with the consequences of a breach of containment.

It is an open "secret" that Israel has nuclear weapons from Dimona in the Negev. It also tested nuclear weapon with the cooperation of apartheid South Africa in the ocean. There were also corroborating leaks but we all know that there are people who cannot be convinced no matter what -- not in the least, the Iranians and the Israelis about this "Mortal Combat."

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

That it "is an open 'secret' that Israel has nuclear weapons from Dimona in the Negev." is precisely why no country on earth would dare attack it & it's a desperately invented 'fear' that says "Iran ... Is it sane, though?"

That Israel "also tested nuclear weapon with the cooperation of apartheid South Africa in the ocean." is less well known but of course again true. Consider, 'fear' begets more fear and leads to 'anger' which gives rise to more anger and which leads to 'hate' which generates further hate, which all leads to 'suffering' which can be avoided by 'heart centred' thinking.

Please see my reply to hchc at the top of the thread and reflect on my other links here ... if you dare :-)

fiat lux, fiat pax, fiat justitia ...

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

What unnerved me is the seeming parallel between Iran's behaviors and national psychology and those of prewar Japan and Germany. They all meddled in their neighborhoods as bullies. They all suffered from inferiority complexes relative to the more powerful and better established states (the ones with their own colonial empires). They all touted their own brand of arrogant nationalism or racism -- Iranian, Aryans, "Yellow Aryans". It is disturbing. Are we not that far away from a South Asian Sudetenland incident?

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

That you are "unnerved" by "the seeming parallel between Iran's behaviours and national psychology and those of prewar Japan and Germany" is purely a function of paranoia and propaganda, imo.

What is it that you claim to know of this and would you like to evidence and share your sources ? What evidence can you show for Iran's "inferiority complex" or "brand of arrogant nationalism" ? The word 'Iran' is indeed derived from 'Aryan' but what of it ?

Your mention the erstwhile Czech "Sudetenland" is really also calculated to press buttons to draw parallels to Nazi Germany, isn't it ?

I could write paragraphs to disabuse you of these notions and deconstruct your irrational and misplaced anxieties but the reality is your mind is quite made up on this matter as I remember you from last year singing from the same hymn book. Thus, these links will have to suffice, though of course you will not avail yourself or engage with them. Nevertheless and in hope, I append :

I wonder if you have the courage and strength of mind to engage with any of that.

fiat lux et fiat pax ...

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

What have we achieved towards resolving this nuclear proliferation issue of Iran since last year? Not much! Things have only gotten more heated up covertly and not so covertly. This sort of game was played by Saddam Hussein and we all know how that had ended up. Do we really want another repeat of that?

I did not mean "Sudetenland" to draw Iran as a parallel to Nazi Germany. I meant it as an example of a weaker neighbor having been cowed by a stronger neighbor at the acquiescence of the major powers. Nazi Germany was NOT the only country which indulged in this game. Russia did too. So did Saddam Hussein who attacked Iran, annexed Kuwait, and was on the verge of invading Saudi Arabia. The U.S. with the blessings of the U.N. and our faithful allies liberated Kuwait and thwarted the invasion of Saudi Arabia. Let me remind you that the Kuwaitis and the Saudis did not "love" the ways of the American "infidels" -- just ask al-Qaeda members who were "educated." They tolerated the U.S. presence, not because they like Americans, but because of the very dangerous neighborhood they find themselves in. The U.S. incurred the wrath of the "holy warriors" because of this nexus as it was a marriage of convenience due to oil and sovereignty. Iran has the potential to destabilize the region with its nuclear ambition which by the way IS the will of its people but it is misguided.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 7 years ago

Of course trying to starve a civilian population in order to "incentivize" them to follow one's "policy advice" is terrorism. This is what "we" are doing in Iran.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

"Iran is Not the Problem" (Doc.) : http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5708329875314599685 ,

Well worth the time taken to view.

multum in parvo ...

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

This would actually be called an act of diplomacy. Likewise, I think it is important that we define terrorism.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

Consider that 'economic sanctions' are not "diplomacy" - they are actually in international law - an act of war and also please further consider :

fiat lux ...

[-] 0 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

There in no such thing as international law, only national diplomacy; this is a sovereign nation.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

Your statement sounds like a license for a free for all ; 'might is right' and does this "sovereign nation" status apply to other countries too ? Did you engage with the documentary per chance ? How about :

fiat pax ...

[-] 0 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

It only applies to nations to the extent that they can defend their borders. All peoples everywhere consider themselves "sovereign"; if they did not we could not distinguish them as "peoples."

International law only exists relative to sovereignty as those beliefs commonly shared of nations; it became an issue in this country as early as our Dec. But it can only exist as a world of community censure in the sense of allies; it has no relevance beyond the shared polemic because it lacks the ability to militarily force-law.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

Re. "the ability to militarily force-law", like Pax Americana you mean ?!!! Imperial hubris, much ?!! Thus behold Empire's legalistic machinations ; HR 4310 makes regime change in Iran foreign policy :

"'Section 1221' makes military action against Iran a US policy."

cave 'bellum se ipsum alet' ...

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33801) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

Thx shadz - a good moment caught on video - someone in government actually saying that we need to address social ills here at home in the USA. Imagine how shocked the other members of government in that room were at that announcement.

( hey whats up D? - you want to announce to the public over cspan that we are not paying attention to problems here at home? - shit - this is bad - I wonder if anyone in the public is watching right now - damn - damn - damn - Dennis what the hell? - you want the public to take notice of our fucking the world over?)

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

Yep and 'Truth' is treason in the Empire of Lies, right ?!

Thanx DK & appreciatin' your appreciatin' of another DK !!

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32761.htm !!!

pax, amor et lux ...

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33801) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

{:-]) - well he is in a good and proper place to voice dismay regret disenchantment disbelief and displeasure at the failure which is our current government - How could I not appreciate?

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

Dennis Kucinich is a 'heart centred' man who is head and shoulders above the rest of US Politicians from a 99% perspective and this is precisely why he has had his Congressional seat boundaries 'gerrymandered' to oust him from Capitol Hill !! For further evidence of the man's integrity :

respice, adspice, prospice ...

[-] 0 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

Sure, much like a Pax Americana... only those in a position of power have the ability to force-law; international law is but vent of a meaningless opine.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

Re. "international law is but vent of a meaningless opine." - well, we wouldn't want to add to that now, would we ?! LOL !! Admit it 'yobbo' - you're for 'might is right' ; 'free for all' & 'law of the jungle' !!!

fiat lux ...

[-] 0 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

Of course it is - what's sadder is that it extracts wealth to create sinecures and world banks at the expense of the proles; just another banker's scam.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

War and Empire are also "just another banker's scam" & "extracts" is THE critical term !!! Consider that Peace, Justice and Economic Equity are possible !! Most of us here on this Good Spaceship Earth, our beautiful, shared and only hommme wish for that !

Consider : "The triumph of imperialism leads to the annihilation of civilization." (Rosa Luxemburg, from 'The Junius Pamphlet').

veritas vos liberabit ...

[-] 0 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

Thoughts expressed as words do not change the organism which is humanity.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

You believe in 'evolution', right ? Because Not to do so would be like Not believing in 'electricity' !

Thus, consider that "humanity" has an 'Evolving Nature'. Furthermore, also please reflect that 'words' are an approximation of our 'thoughts' which are in and of themselves, an analogy of our 'feelings' and so we progress and evolve as we open ourselves as individuals and societies - to 'heart centred' thought, word and action. I hope.

pax, amor et lux ...

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

I believe in it in ways few have considered.

Humanity does not have an evolving "nature," only evolving methods. We can choose to naturally select as choice, but it does not change our nature.

What words are, actually, is symbology; the approximation you refer to is but a limit of articulation; we must strive to be more "articulate" as the precise expression of emotionally driven thought because it will lend a greater understanding, both of ourselves and others. It also enhances our ability to negotiate these choices. And I would add to this that vocabulary greatly enhances this ability; we should also strive to enhance the current pool, which I often find wanting - to do this we must turn to others of more analytical mind and language.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

And the people clap for them killers.

They give it up for them gangsters.

Then they vote for them killers.

Pay their taxes to them gangsters.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 7 years ago

The inference being that our current sanctions against Iran will cause the deaths of thousands more?

A fair analogy would be like a strong man choking a weaker mans child in order to force him to comply with the strong man's wishes. Quite a cowardly act

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 7 years ago

Disgusting.

Protest the sanctions! Protest thewar mongering pressure to invade. Protest against big oil subsidies, Protest for green tech.

What's your MPG?

[-] 0 points by Grimreaper2 (-318) 7 years ago

Do you drive a car?

[+] -5 points by TheRazor (-329) 7 years ago

How about the Iranian people disavowing their religious leaderships quest to wipe out a sovereign nation.

If the choice is 567000 dead Iranian babies or the annihilation of Israel, I side with the people who have once already been targeted for annihilation.

[-] 6 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

W0W !!!! Infanticide justified by extreme and paranoid nationalism !!! Backed by a deep, dark hubris !! Based on the hoary, propagandist meme of "annihilation of Israel" !

Perhaps you ought to consider what the many tens of thousands of Persian Jews still living in Iran think about theses matters. Thus for real insights re.'Iran and Jews' see :

e tenebris, lux ...

[+] -6 points by TheRazor (-329) 7 years ago

Its a cruel world. Deal with it.

When the leader of a country vows to wipe another country from the earth, take that claim very seriously.

Muslims have fired 400 rockets into southern Israel this year. So by your typical utterly anti Semitic position, dead Jewish babies arent to be valued.

Thank you, Nazi.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

So now the "dead babies" are Jewish are they, as opposed to the "567000 dead Iranian babies" & you also accuse me of having a "typical utterly anti Semitic position" and of being a "Nazi" ?!!! Do you want to reconsider your words ?!! Finally, the canard of the "wipe another country from the earth" meme, has been repeated so often that it is now pretty much the text book case of 'how to ply faux propaganda by manipulation and constant repetition', but it will actually cut no ice here !

ad iudicium ...

[-] 3 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

Muslims from Palestine have fired rockets into Israel in retaliation for bombing raids, political prisoner abuse, bombing of bridges to stop food and aid arriving in Palestine.

Nothing at all to do with Iran, a nation that has attacked nobody, but a nation that had to defend itself against US-supplied Iraq for eight years of attack.

Your information is about as biased as yourself.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 7 years ago

"Muslims from Palestine have fired rockets into Israel in retaliation for bombing raids, political prisoner abuse, bombing of bridges to stop food and aid arriving in Palestine."

This fight has been going on for the last century. It can't be judged by the last decade.

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by TheRazor (-329) 7 years ago

Just googling "Israel bombed bridges to cut off food to Palestine" produces not one link, not even a trumped up link.

So why should I trust your claims? Please link any of the above or call yourself an ANTI SEMITIC LIAR, a kin to Hitler.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

In your protected media, that's not surprising. Have a look at the following graph.

http://www.ifamericaknew.org/images/killedbyyear-lg.jpg

[-] 1 points by TheRazor (-329) 7 years ago

YOU dropped charges

1) Bombing raids. Can you provide a link to an unprovoked Israeli bombing raid?

2) Political prisoner abuse, Do you have a link?

3) Bridge bombing; Dont bother, that was a pure lie.

All your link des is tally deaths without regard to why and how. Give us the whys and hows, PLEASE.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by NVPHIL (664) 7 years ago

So you would agree tp sanctions against Israel since they are trying to wipe Palistine off the face of the earth.

[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 7 years ago

If Israel wanted to destroy the Palestinians, it would have happened.

How exactly is Israel trying to destroy Palestine?

[-] 1 points by NVPHIL (664) 7 years ago

Occupying Palestinian territory for a start, bombing palestinian territory. Don't get me wrong I don't believe in sanctions against Israel but if you agree to sanctions against Iran for talk then it's only fair to agree to sanctions against Israel for actions.

[-] -1 points by TheRazor (-329) 7 years ago

Its land captured thru war, war started by Arabs. Should they just give it back? Why?

And please link these incidents of unprovoked Israeli bombing of Palestinians.

[-] 2 points by NVPHIL (664) 7 years ago

So if Iran captured land thru conventional war it's ok. You can say they were provoked but here you go.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2012/mar/11/israel-air-strike-footage-video

[-] 1 points by TheRazor (-329) 7 years ago

Uh, THATS your argument!!?? Hamas launches rockets and Israel retaliates! RETALIATES to a provoked attack?

You arent serious, are you. If you punch me in the nose, prepare to be beaten with a bat.

[-] 1 points by NVPHIL (664) 7 years ago

As good as the arguement for the iran sanctions.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 7 years ago

This fight has been going on for the last century. It can't be judged by the last year or the last decade.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22990) 7 years ago

Did that razor cut your heart out? Your comments are utterly heartless and ignorant.

[-] 1 points by TheRazor (-329) 7 years ago

Then its OK for Iran to say " cut out the tumor that is Israel? Yes or no?

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (22990) 7 years ago

None of it is okay, but ask yourself, what came first? How can you attack one, and give the other a pass?

[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 7 years ago

I did adk myself. Israelwas at peace until the Arabs wzged war, 1967, then 1972.

What aggression did Israel commit first. please be clear, with links.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 7 years ago

Its Al Tantura and 52 died, out of 2000 population.

Nice try tho.

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

My opinion is that this country is just trying to right the wrong of granting uranium enriching tech to the Chinese, who gave it to Pakistan, who will give it to Iran. We either call an end to this madness or ultimately the Dem party under Clinton will be held responsible for hundreds of millions of lives. Personally, I would just as soon give them the bomb but I'd like to develop our military tech a little further before we do that - in other words this is but an attempt to postpone. And who did what to who first is irrelevant when one third the world goes up in a cloud of radioactive dust to blind our worldview.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22990) 7 years ago

And who are the only people on earth to ever drop a nuclear bomb? How can one sovereign nation tell another how to defend itself, tell it what weapons it can have? Such hubris will be the downfall of the U.S.

[-] 0 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

Well, we can... we can say, "Here, here's a bomb - go defend yourself." We have enough nuclear arms to arm the entire world many times over; it's about sharing the wealth, social justice, nuclear equality, etc. Yes we can.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

Iran has already acquired all of the uranium enriching technologies to build nuclear bombs. It is not a question of "if" but a matter of "how soon" the world will be faced with another Islamic nuclear arsenal so all "infidels" beware. This one will be situated right above the placenta and umbilical cord supplying the largest fraction of the world's oil. There is also a deadly nuclear-armed trigger-happy enemy of this state which will possess the nuclear arsenal. Prevention of nuclear proliferation in such a sensitive region is in the interest of all.

[-] -2 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

Listen, you want to befriend the Muslim as Obama favors? Well then, call me pragmatic but it would seem to me the only way to do this and gain is to sell them bombs; Russia knows this - why is it we do not?

In the meantime, I think we should move much more heavily in the direction of safety nets and kinetic weapons; how many megatons can we deliver with a ten thousand pound projectile dropped from space by Allah himself? And it's far less costly.

And... if we were intelligent beings, we would light up their oil wells, slap our overly concerned grandmas, and leave.

Can Sharia win through utter destruction? And how long do you suppose "Muslim" will exist in our world if it does not?

[-] 2 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

The U.S. does NOT stoop to Russia's low moral level of inflaming the Middle Eastern conflagration with arms sale. If there is a disparity in weaponry, let the neighbors there fill them in. They know the region better and have more interests at stake. The U.S. has already got quite a bit of flak from the weapons that it has already sold. People pick up shrapnel from a bomb and if it is marked as "Made in U.S." they naturally blame the U.S. although it is often their own brethren who had fired. Let us wise up and butt out!

Do not talk about megatons. We have far too many of those already -- if we could only put some of them to good usage rather than letting them decay away. Total annihilation is well within our grasp but that will not be advantageous to any party involved.

Utter destruction will silence anything and anyone, Islamic world included. Remember though that we are NOT fighting the "live and let live" Islamic followers at all. We ARE fighting the jihadists till kingdom come and the inflammatory rhetorics that motivate them to attack us.

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

Are you saying that in attacking the jihadist we are trying to beat them into submission, beat them into "peaceful"? Is that not war, isn't that what war seeks to accomplish?

I have to be honest with you - I don't believe this is the way Obamaists are thinking - they are thinking that there is much to gain by adopting Islam as our ally because oil has made many of them very wealthy. You don't see Obama drilling, do you, or trying to grow us independent?

Much of the progressive world is saying these are a peace loving people; I'm saying, cool; let's sell them bombs and find out. If you're not willing to put your own ass on the chopping block, then in my opinion you're not dedicated - I'm here to call your bluff; let's do this.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

Jihad on the U.S. shall have its favor returned in kind per the justice of Allah.

Drilling does not and will not set the U.S. free from the turmoils of the Middle East. The U.S. threw away decades of opportunity since the Jimmy Carter days. We only have ourselves to blame for the missed opportunity.

I do not condemn people as non-peace loving even if they take up arms to fight oppression as a LAST resort. Bombs have their proper addresses of deliverance to be shipped when all have failed but never a moment sooner. We are not at war with Islam, Muslims, or Arabs. We are at war with those who tread on us even after we have rattled and hissed.

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

"I am a peace loving individual who enjoys lopping off people's heads." Sure, I'll buy that.

"My religion has not empowered me; I am just a peace loving individual who enjoys lopping off the heads of Infidels." Uh huh.

That's a pretty convoluted rationale. But even if it is to implode, who cares. They want bombs, let's sell them bombs; we get some green, make a few freaky friends, all is good.

We're not prejudicial, if we were prejudicial we would sell them only to the Christian Arabs.

RIGHT?

Let's do it.

[-] 2 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

It will not be easy or likely but it might just be possible that people would come to their senses so our selling bombs into the war(s) might be causing more casualties. First of all, let us do no harm.