T Nation

Attacking Iran


#1

#2

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#3

I never worry about guys like these.

What troubles me is that they find an audience.

Whatever goes on in his listeners heads would still be there if he was gone.


#4

Well I've watched the video. Great eye opener.

Everything Galloway and Farakhan said in that video doesn't surprise me.


#5

I watched seven minutes. The film starts out by telling us that Israel, (a country is recognized by the UN as such)is an illegal country because all of it's neighbors hate the Jews and want them gone. Then it tries to paint Ahmedinejihad as reasonable. After that we get treated to George Galloway.

If method_man had half a brain he would have come up with a much more accurate title for this thread.


#6

Yeah, that video had nothing to do with painting Farrakhan/Iran as a 'devil', unless I'm ultra dense and missed that part.


#7

Personally, I'd like Ahmedinejad to meet the same fate as Gaddafi. A lynching followed by a sort of 'Weekend at Bernies' style parade with the remains.


#8

You couldn't have possibly watched the video, because Farrakhan was barely in it, and b) the devil in disguise is Israel, because they are trying to get the United States to do their dirty work for them in Iran like they did in Iraq.


#9

I can think of lots of Zionist, war-criminals and pigs fit for slaughter:
http://www.redress.cc/global/hokok20090126


#10

It is accurate. The US is mulling actions against Iran because they threaten the United States of Greater Israel and because Israel has powerful PACs in place to influence our politics.
Meanwhile, someone like Assad mass murders civilians and the United States doesn't do shit about about it.


#11

The Iranians having nuclear weapons will be a huge problem for the entire world. If the US intervenes militarily to stop them, it will be in the best interests of everyone, including the Iranian people.

The ideological perspective of Obama is he's an anti-colonialist, Iran having nukes suits his world view. The rest of his administration doesn't have the balls to attack the Iranians and they have let the Iranians know it. That is why his diplomacy has failed. As I said it would.

We don't do shit about Assad because the will to do something isn't there anymore than it is to do something about his ally Iran.


#12

Aren't we lucky? Of course George Galloway is an excellent source. He was found to have been taking Iraqi oil for food bribes whilst a member of the British parliament. Now he works for the Iranians running the London wing of their media outfit 'PressTV.' Amusing to see him denouncing the Arab League as western dictators then opposing the West when they take those same dictators out. Or supporting Arab League UN resolutions against Israel whilst denouncing the Arab leaders as Western puppets.


#13

Actually, I think the American people have had enough wars in that region of the world. I mean the one about the "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq, was not only a crock of shit, but a colossal waste of taxpayers money, American lives lost and messed up, AND there might be a bigger mess over there than we know what to do with.

We seem to be pick and choose where we meddle in the world for one. And for two, most of these police state actions by the United States contribute to the national debt. Neither Iran or Syria is a direct threat to the United States. Even if they created a primitive bomb like their fellow Muslims Pakistan or non-Muslim India, they would not still be a threat to us. With one strike of an ICBM they would be obliterated. As for the Iranian leader he has spoken against Assad:
http://www.menafn.com/qn_news_story_s.asp?storyid=1093451980


#14

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.