Are Iran the bad guys? Or America??? Watch

This discussion is closed.
Agent Smith
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#121
Report 10 years ago
#121
(Original post by TSR King)
when was the last time iran went an invaded another country for no reason?

exactly, US are the most immature nation out there.
/facepalm
0
Melancholy
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#122
Report 10 years ago
#122
(Original post by TSR King)
when was the last time iran went an invaded another country for no reason?

exactly, US are the most immature nation out there.
My word, you certainly do have a sophisticated measure of 'maturity'. :rolleyes: I suggest you look into the Iran-Iraq war after Iraq's attack on Iran, as well as at least try to understand that sometimes invasions can be made for better reasons than others. My question to you is similar: when was the last time that the US invaded another country for no reason?

EDIT: Technically, most countries have, in their history from their first creation, invaded land.
0
indefenseoftruth
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#123
Report 10 years ago
#123
Both nations are terrorists.
The UK likewise is a terrorist nation.

Fight back!
0
BonnyBon
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#124
Report 10 years ago
#124
I don't care who is the bad guy, but I just trust the USA more than Iran.
0
Melancholy
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#125
Report 10 years ago
#125
(Original post by indefenseoftruth)
Both nations are terrorists.
The UK likewise is a terrorist nation.

Fight back!
Ironic username.
0
donmcl777
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#126
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#126
(Original post by BonnyBon)
I don't care who is the bad guy, but I just trust the USA more than Iran.

LOL:laughing:
0
Melancholy
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#127
Report 10 years ago
#127
(Original post by Seven-Three)
If I believed it (which I don't because I'm not stupid) that'd make it 'our' opinion.

This is the most basic of think abilities, being able to imagine things objectively, without personnal bias and above all with as good rational as possible.

Where is the rational for this 'maturity' rubbish you're going on about?
You honestly don't believe that women should have the right to wear what they want?

Your bull about thinking 'rationally' and without 'bias' is nonsense, along with your talk of objectivity. I guess you believe in objective morality, then? I could only imagine that you could be a theist in that respect; I mean, I can't imagine objective morality in a Godless world. Yet, I'm sure you once said that you weren't religious, and frankly you don't seem very Godly - what with your racism and all...

Yes, I have subjective opinions, but they are based on some logic. I don't see the two as necessarily mutually exclusive. I'm not saying that something can be 'proven' to be moral, but rather that it makes sense to me that it should be moral based on my reasoning. Consider, for example, my subjective opinion that there is no God. It's a logical position, however subjective and unproven it may be.

So this begs the question, why do I believe women should have equal rights to men? Why would that be more mature? Well, I believe the burden is on those arguing that they shouldn't have equal rights, without resorting to primitive, outdated and wholly immature stereotypes of women being the 'lesser sex'. Like my belief in 'no God', my belief that women should be treated equally to men is because I have no reason not to. The fact that just a few changes in my genetics could have made me a female or a person with slightly different skin colour, makes me believe that humans, disabled, or otherwise, deserve the same status in terms of their subjection under the law in terms of their basic human rights.

That's just one moral reason for treating females equally to males. It's far from exhaustive!
0
donmcl777
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#128
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#128
Im not being funny melancholy but how the hell can you call a nation mature . fair enough if it was about a young boy like yourself who acted responsibly. but i think when it comes to whole nations, its a little more complex.
0
Melancholy
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#129
Report 10 years ago
#129
(Original post by Seven-Three)
This is a thread about race. You think all the jews on this forum have a such a die hard support for Isreal and everything and anything it does because it is some 'great democracy'? Ha ha ha. Sometimes I think you just like believe what you want Melancholy.
I'm not Jewish, I only have a Jewish Grandfather. I support Israel, not very strongly, but I support them. It's you making into a race issue. Israel is the greater democracy, tbf; granted, you could always argue that this is because Israel controls most the water (for example); but then again that's only the case because Palestine failed to fulfil their duties with regards to water distribution. Then again, I'm not engaging in the Israel-Palestine debate.

Lol? Are you for real? Before nuclear weapons there was nothing but war, it was a constant reality for every country. The only reason we have so little now, the only reason there are such good international relations is because the consequence of war is ultimately a bad thing for everyone. That is the good thing about nuclear weapson.
You have no historical perspective. Compare the latter 19th century to post-1945. I don't think that nuclear weapons have made much difference. In fact, it's very easy to forget how worrying the Cuban Missile crisis was, or the Hungarian Uprising of 1956, or the various other incidences.
'mature philosophies' :rolleyes: Your disengenuous babble doesn't half become boring after a while Melancholy.
*disingenuous. You've spelt that wrong more than once, so I thought I'd point it out.

Where's the rebuttal?

If anything Iran is the more mature, there ideas have been around for thousands of years.
LOL.

Stoning has been around for thousands of years. Is it a mature way to deal with land disputes? You cheeky little joker.
0
Melancholy
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#130
Report 10 years ago
#130
(Original post by donmcl777)
Im not being funny melancholy but how the hell can you call a nation mature . fair enough if it was about a young boy like yourself who acted responsibly. but i think when it comes to whole nations, its a little more complex.
When somebody mentions Iran, it's a safe assumption that they're talking about Iran in the global context. It doesn't follow that I believe that Iranians are all immature, as I did specify in my post if you cared to read it . It means that their government is immature. Not releasing sailors straight away is very immature, for example. Their idea of justice, in my opinion, is not developed. So yes, I'd say that 'Iran' is immature; I'm not "being funny" about that.
0
Symbea
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#131
Report 10 years ago
#131
Whichever ones have skulls as a badge.
0
indefenseoftruth
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#132
Report 10 years ago
#132
(Original post by Melancholy)
Ironic username.
Should I mention a few countries where America or England have funded or directly aided terrorism, or used in their favour to promote domestic policies reducing the individual freedoms of individuals?

Nicaragua
Syria
Cuba
Guatemala
Chile
Colombia
Iraq
Pakistan
Georgia
Afghanistan
Turkey
South Korea
Vietnam
Half of the African countries?
0
indefenseoftruth
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#133
Report 10 years ago
#133
9/11 could not possibly have been an insider job, but the Bush administration greatly welcomed the blessing of domestic terror, in order to boost their policy of fear. This allowed them to, for instance, pass tax cuts for the rich and fund a war without any real reason, hereby greatly enriching the warfare and pharmaceutical industry in the US, thus further enriching the 98th percentile of the population.
0
Melancholy
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#134
Report 10 years ago
#134
(Original post by indefenseoftruth)
Should I mention a few countries where America or England have funded or directly aided terrorism, or used in their favour to promote domestic policies reducing the individual freedoms of individuals?

Nicaragua
Syria
Cuba
Guatemala
Chile
Colombia
Iraq
Pakistan
Georgia
Afghanistan
Turkey
South Korea
Vietnam
Half of the African countries?
You've missed Spain and various other countries of that list. What you call 'terrorism' may be interpreted as 'freedom fighting'. To me, that's an unhelpful distinction because terrorising involving harm to innocent people is not justified; but where a struggle is already occuring, there's nothing wrong with funding support for the side you want to win in the greater interest of the people. If we are to make liberty the champion, I don't think those interventions are unjustifiable. Supporting a side in an already existing civil war, for example, is not really terrorism when the other side is doing exactly the same, and when your goal is for the greater good, be it better living standards, liberty or democracy.


9/11 could not possibly have been an insider job, but the Bush administration greatly welcomed the blessing of domestic terror, in order to boost their policy of fear. This allowed them to, for instance, pass tax cuts for the rich and fund a war without any real reason, hereby greatly enriching the warfare and pharmaceutical industry in the US, thus further enriching the 98th percentile of the population.
Conspiracy :teeth:
0
indefenseoftruth
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#135
Report 10 years ago
#135
(Original post by Melancholy)
You've missed Spain and various other countries of that list. What you call 'terrorism' may be interpreted as 'freedom fighting'. To me, that's an unhelpful distinction because terrorising invovling harm to innocent people is not justified, but where a struggle is already occuring, there's nothing wrong with funding support for the side you want to win in the greater interest of the people. If we are to make liberty the champion, I don't think those interventions are unjustifiable. Supporting a side in an already existing civil war, for example, is not really terrorism when the other side is doing exactly the same.
When they do it, it's terrorism, when we do it, it's counter-terrorism.
We're right, they're wrong.

:rolleyes:

The most cited person in academia sides with me. Read something Chomsky has written, he might enlighten your perspective a little.
0
indefenseoftruth
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#136
Report 10 years ago
#136
(Original post by Melancholy)
You've missed Spain and various other countries of that list. What you call 'terrorism' may be interpreted as 'freedom fighting'. To me, that's an unhelpful distinction because terrorising involving harm to innocent people is not justified, but where a struggle is already occuring, there's nothing wrong with funding support for the side you want to win in the greater interest of the people. If we are to make liberty the champion, I don't think those interventions are unjustifiable. Supporting a side in an already existing civil war, for example, is not really terrorism when the other side is doing exactly the same, and when your goal is for the greater good, be it better living standards, liberty or democracy.



Conspiracy :teeth:
It's not a conspiracy theory. It's exactly what the Reagan administration did 20 years ago:

1. Make your country go into a recession; this is done by diverting funds away from the public sector and giving the wealthy part of the country a major tax cut.
2. Make sure you have a scarecrow to do this, so that no one notices: Nicaragua and the Contras in the 80s, Al Qaeda and Iraq today.
0
The Saurus
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#137
Report 10 years ago
#137
Death To America
0
Melancholy
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#138
Report 10 years ago
#138
(Original post by prince of persia)
Well they could have negotiated a deal like the West wanted them to. They are stubborn, but that doesn't mean they feel threatened.
It's a non-argument. Not signing a deal is a way of exerting one's authority against the imperial enemy sniffing its borders.

The government is anti-Western, no one is denying that, though you really have no idea what you are talking about with the political parties comment, there currently exists no real 'opposition' movement, perhaps your referring to the Shah's son or the Mujahedeen movement- if you are neither of these are particularly democratic...
I really wish you would stop saying that people have no idea what they're talking about, just because you've visited the country and somehow haven't picked up on things. Ever heard of the Iranian resistance in exile? No doubt, if you lived in Iran, you wouldn't. Info. That's a start. The authoritarian nature of this news shouldn't be too shocking.
0
Melancholy
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#139
Report 10 years ago
#139
(Original post by indefenseoftruth)
When they do it, it's terrorism, when we do it, it's counter-terrorism.
We're right, they're wrong.

:rolleyes:

The most cited person in academia sides with me. Read something Chomsky has written, he might enlighten your perspective a little.
That isn't what I said. Read what I said again. Try to understand it. If you can't, then that's most unfortunate. Citing, vaguely, that Chomsky supports you, does not threaten me in the slightest considering it's nothing but a substance-less statement.
It's not a conspiracy theory. It's exactly what the Reagan administration did 20 years ago:

1. Make your country go into a recession; this is done by diverting funds away from the public sector and giving the wealthy part of the country a major tax cut.
2. Make sure you have a scarecrow to do this, so that no one notices: Nicaragua and the Contras in the 80s, Al Qaeda and Iraq today.
Yep. Pretty much is a conspiracy theory still, ain't it? :rolleyes: You've merely cited another conspiracy theory that Reagan did the same to support your orginal statement, whereas there's little reasonable evidence to believe that Bush would passively allow the loss of life which occurred in 9/11. Maybe Reagan did what he did to avoid a recession? Or is that just too reasonable to believe?
0
indefenseoftruth
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#140
Report 10 years ago
#140
(Original post by The Saurus)
Death To America
Ok, if we play by your logic I can also say:
Death to England
...

I hope I am not accused of conspiring against the Crown. :rolleyes:
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Were you ever put in isolation at school?

Yes (10)
37.04%
No (17)
62.96%

Watched Threads

View All