America is the rogue nation

Spytheweb

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 27, 2005
1,171
14
0
June 28, 2008
America Is the Rogue Nation
by Charley Reese

One gets the impression that there are some people in Washington who believe that Israel or the U.S. can bomb Iran's nuclear reactors, fly home, and it will be mission complete.

It makes you wonder if perhaps there is a virus going around that is gradually making people stupid. If we or Israel attack Iran, we will have a new war on our hands. The Iranians are not going to shrug off an attack and say, "You naughty boys, you."

Consider how much trouble Iraq has given us. Some 4,000 dead and 29,000 wounded, a half a trillion dollars in cost and still climbing, and five years later, we cannot say that the country is pacified.

Iraq is a small country compared with Iran. Iran has about 70 million people. Its western mountains border the Persian Gulf. In other words, its missiles and guns look down on the U.S. ships below it. And it has lots of missiles, from short-range to intermediate-range (around 2,200 kilometers).

More to the point, it has been equipped by Russia with the fastest anti-ship missile on the planet. The SS-N-22 Sunburn can travel at Mach 3 at high altitude and at Mach 2.2 at low altitude. That is faster than anything in our arsenal.

Iran's conventional forces include an army of 540,000 men and 300,000 reserves, including 120,000 Iranian Guards especially trained in unconventional warfare. It has more than 1,600 main battle tanks and 21,000 other armored combat vehicles. It has 3,200 artillery pieces, three submarines, 59 surface warships and 10 amphibious ships.

It's been receiving help in arming itself from China, North Korea and Russia. Unlike Iraq, Iran's forces have not been worn down with bombing, wars and sanctions. It also has a new anti-aircraft defense system from Russia that I've heard is pretty snazzy.

So, if you think we or Israel can attack Iran and not expect retaliation, I'd have to say with regret that you are a moron. If you think we could easily handle Iran in an all-out war, I'd have to promote you to idiot.

Attacking Iran would be folly, but we seem to be living in the Age of Folly. Morons and idiots took us into an unjustified war against Iraq before we had finished the job in Afghanistan. Now we have troops tied down in both countries.

For some years now, I've worried that we seem to be more and more like Colonial England ? arrogant, racist, overestimating our own capacity and underestimating that of our enemies. As the fate of the British Empire demonstrates, that is a fatal flaw.

The British never dreamed that the "little yellow people" could come ashore by land and take Singapore from the rear or that they would sink the pride of the British fleet, but they did both.

I suppose no one in Washington can imagine the Iranians sinking one of our carriers in the Persian Gulf. How'd you like to be the president who has to tell the American people that we've lost a carrier for the first time since World War II?

Exactly how the Iranians will respond to an attack, I don't know, but they will respond. In keeping with our present policy, our attack on Iran would be illegal, since under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran has the right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes.

Who would have thought that we would become the rogue nation committing acts of aggression around the globe?
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,580
228
63
"the bunker"
i`m not advocating that we attack iran...i`d rather that israel take out their nuclear reactors...

obviously,6 years of the europeans talking and negotiating with iran has yielded exactly zilch...

but,don`t start this b.s. about how powerful iran is is comparison to the u.s. and the west...we haeard the same shit about the iraqi army and how fearless and strong they were... ....

and they folded klike a cheap tent..... the insurgengcy has been the problem...not the military..

this same small country basically fought the iranians to a standstill..

the israeli`s will be the ones that do the deed...not us...

yes,we`ll be complicit behind the scenes...just like china and n.korea are with the iranians...

will they have the balls to hit back at israel?...

i think we`ll probably find out...the "powerful" syrians didn`t do much after israel whacked their n.korean assisted nuclear program...

who...in their right mind in this forum...doesn`t see that you are an america hater and a jihadi sympathizer?....

you`d have to be deaf, dumb and blind..
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,580
228
63
"the bunker"
but...on second thought,point taken....

we have little resolve left in the country,and with many working to undermine us from within and without our gov`t,lichtenstein could make it very difficult for us...

job well done,spy and friends...
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
but...on second thought,point taken....

we have little resolve left in the country,and with many working to undermine us from within and without our gov`t,lichtenstein could make it very difficult for us...

job well done,spy and friends...

GW, the only people who undermined our country were the American Hating Neocons who brought us into a war that is strangling us under it's debt.
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
i`m not advocating that we attack iran...i`d rather that israel take out their nuclear reactors...

obviously,6 years of the europeans talking and negotiating with iran has yielded exactly zilch...

but,don`t start this b.s. about how powerful iran is is comparison to the u.s. and the west...we haeard the same shit about the iraqi army and how fearless and strong they were... ....

and they folded klike a cheap tent..... the insurgengcy has been the problem...not the military..

this same small country basically fought the iranians to a standstill..

the israeli`s will be the ones that do the deed...not us...

yes,we`ll be complicit behind the scenes...just like china and n.korea are with the iranians...

will they have the balls to hit back at israel?...

i think we`ll probably find out...the "powerful" syrians didn`t do much after israel whacked their n.korean assisted nuclear program...

who...in their right mind in this forum...doesn`t see that you are an america hater and a jihadi sympathizer?....

you`d have to be deaf, dumb and blind..

If you don't think there will be severe ramifications for America if Israel attacks them, you have to be the worlds biggest idiot.

On the Iraq thing, lemme get this straight:

1. They were such a HUGE threat and that was the justification for occupying.

2. NOW you mock how little of a threat they were.

3. Yet we're still screwing around over there going on 5 1/2 years and no end in sight.

And yeah, who could have EVER predicted that there would be 'insurgents.' After all, big Dick assured us that we would be treated as liberators.

To paraphrase Wayne: Neo-con logic at it's finest. I'll even put a litle winky guy in there, in tribute to Wayne. ;)
 

Agent 0659

:mj07:
Forum Member
Dec 21, 2003
17,712
243
0
51
Gym rat
If you don't think there will be severe ramifications for America if Israel attacks them, you have to be the worlds biggest idiot.

On the Iraq thing, lemme get this straight:

1. They were such a HUGE threat and that was the justification for occupying.

2. NOW you mock how little of a threat they were.

3. Yet we're still screwing around over there going on 5 1/2 years and no end in sight.

And yeah, who could have EVER predicted that there would be 'insurgents.' After all, big Dick assured us that we would be treated as liberators.

To paraphrase Wayne: Neo-con logic at it's finest. I'll even put a litle winky guy in there, in tribute to Wayne. ;)

Nice one!!!
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,580
228
63
"the bunker"
If you don't think there will be severe ramifications for America if Israel attacks them, you have to be the worlds biggest idiot.

On the Iraq thing, lemme get this straight:

1. They were such a HUGE threat and that was the justification for occupying.

2. NOW you mock how little of a threat they were.

3. Yet we're still screwing around over there going on 5 1/2 years and no end in sight.

And yeah, who could have EVER predicted that there would be 'insurgents.' After all, big Dick assured us that we would be treated as liberators.

To paraphrase Wayne: Neo-con logic at it's finest. I'll even put a litle winky guy in there, in tribute to Wayne. ;)

there are usually severe ramifications for every hard decision that the free world takes against despotism....

thank god there are still men left that have the resolve and fortitude to bear the criticism from those that do nothing more than whine...

when the generation that is now in there 30`s and 40`s(those born of 60`s generation parents)take over and start making decisions(i.e.bock),it will mean the beginning of the end of the u.s.a. as the leader of the free world.....

/sorry if i pissed anybody off right before hitting the rack:shrug:
 
Last edited:

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
when the generation that is now in there 30`s and 40`s(those born of 60`s generation parents)take over and start making decisions(i.e.bock),it will mean the beginning of the end of the u.s.a. as the leader of the free world.....

/sorry if i pissed anybody off right before hitting the rack:shrug:
The first coronation of GW Bush will mark the beginning of that.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,580
228
63
"the bunker"
'Despotism'

Are you even kidding?

Please share when we got involved with 'despotism' that things even went halfway right.

Thanks, bro.

the end of slavery...fighting the nazi`s in ww2 and freeing the joos before they were totally wiped out....

removing saddam from kuwait....

the cold war.....

kicking keith olbermann off of espn...

just to name a few...
 

Spytheweb

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 27, 2005
1,171
14
0
i`m not advocating that we attack iran...i`d rather that israel take out their nuclear reactors...

obviously,6 years of the europeans talking and negotiating with iran has yielded exactly zilch...

but,don`t start this b.s. about how powerful iran is is comparison to the u.s. and the west...we haeard the same shit about the iraqi army and how fearless and strong they were... ....

and they folded klike a cheap tent..... the insurgengcy has been the problem...not the military..

this same small country basically fought the iranians to a standstill..

the israeli`s will be the ones that do the deed...not us...

yes,we`ll be complicit behind the scenes...just like china and n.korea are with the iranians...

will they have the balls to hit back at israel?...

i think we`ll probably find out...the "powerful" syrians didn`t do much after israel whacked their n.korean assisted nuclear program...

who...in their right mind in this forum...doesn`t see that you are an america hater and a jihadi sympathizer?....

you`d have to be deaf, dumb and blind..


Iran has an "inalienable right" to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes such as the production of electric energy, and the enrichment of uranium for its nuclear reactors. Could it be that Iran's plan for an oil exchange trading in Euros is the real issue? Or is it Israel?

Article IV of the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which entered into force on March 5, 1970, states:

1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.

2. All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also cooperate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.

Thus, not only does Iran have an "inalienable right" to use nuclear energy for electricity, the NPT obligates the nuclear powers to "further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes." Iran has gone beyond its obligations under the NPT to assure others of it's peaceful intentions.
 

MrChristo

The Zapper
Forum Member
Nov 11, 2001
4,414
5
0
Sexlexia...
the end of slavery... .

Now, not being American, and often thought of as a 'hater' and 'sympathiser' by the weasel's of this world ;) ...

...but I'm pretty sure roughly half of your own country actually didn't want the end of slavery :shrug: ...
...and that, in fact, racism (within the US) was, and continues to be a massive issue.

Also interesting to see your choice of words...

it will mean the beginning of the end of the u.s.a. as the leader of the free world...

...in response to a British Empire analogy. ;)
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,580
228
63
"the bunker"
Now, not being American, and often thought of as a 'hater' and 'sympathiser' by the weasel's of this world ;) ...

...but I'm pretty sure roughly half of your own country actually didn't want the end of slavery :shrug: ...
...and that, in fact, racism (within the US) was, and continues to be a massive issue.

Also interesting to see your choice of words...

it will mean the beginning of the end of the u.s.a. as the leader of the free world...

...in response to a British Empire analogy. ;)

i never thought you were a "hater" ot a "sympathizer",mr c....i think maybe you have an unnatural hated of yourself,possibly because you were born into a predominantly white,affluent western society that enjoys a quality of life that the rest of the world is envious of...


you`re probably a product of 60`s generation parents and a western school system that for some odd reason became deranged by white guilt and self loathing somewhere along the line...

you became a tad soft in the head because your forefathers,who were hard working,industrious folks (yes,maybe they weren`t perfect),were smart enough to lay the foundation for all the fruits we enjoy and take for granted today....

you`re idea of a crisis is not being in a good cell.... or having the kid at the local starbucks not put the top on your cafe latte` tight enough..

you`re just spoiled...and i mean that in a good way...;)

now,stw?...he`s a hater and a sympathizer...
 
Last edited:

MrChristo

The Zapper
Forum Member
Nov 11, 2001
4,414
5
0
Sexlexia...
aaahhh....Touche. :cool:

Still, pretty sure most countries still weren't lynching blacks in the late 60's...

...and an interesting story about an Australian singer, Jimmy Barnes.
One of the best selling artists over here in history...in fact I believe he has the most no. 1 albums...but anyway...
...decided to tour the US in the late 80's, only to be told by the promoter that it would be best if he replaced his black bass player with someone middle America would be more inclined to see on stage ;)

But anyway, as a recent inductee into the age bracket that will see the west into an ever increasing spiral dive, it's time to blow out my insence sticks and tuck myself into my ruck-sack. (without having a shower obviously...or washing my moo-moo.)

EDIT: Hey, thanks for the clarification, g-dub. Not a bad job of internet psychology either my good man!!
...although my parents were a little before the free-love and hippy days (both born in the 40's in fact!), as an only child you may well have nailed the rest of it! :142smilie

No self-loathing or white guilt tho...just prefer not to judge on face value...and know for a fact that there is never just one side to a story. ;)

So, while Stw may indeed hate what America is doing, doesn't necessarily mean he hates you or your neighbour...

...you know, you'll defend to the death his right to say it, and all that? ;)

Having said that, you do come across as a trust-worthy kinda guy, so I'm onboard...
...death to the infidel! :0corn
 
Last edited:

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,580
228
63
"the bunker"
aaahhh....Touche. :cool:

Still, pretty sure most countries still weren't lynching blacks in the late 60's...

...and an interesting story about an Australian singer, Jimmy Barnes.
One of the best selling artists over here in history...in fact I believe he has the most no. 1 albums...but anyway...
...decided to tour the US in the late 80's, only to be told by the promoter that it would be best if he replaced his black bass player with someone middle America would be more inclined to see on stage ;)

But anyway, as a recent inductee into the age bracket that will see the west into an ever increasing spiral dive, it's time to blow out my insence sticks and tuck myself into my ruck-sack. (without having a shower obviously...or washing my moo-moo.)

in the late 80`s?....post motown?.....oh puh-lease...:rolleyes:

""But anyway, as a recent inductee into the age bracket that will see the west into an ever increasing spiral dive""

cause and effect...
 

MrChristo

The Zapper
Forum Member
Nov 11, 2001
4,414
5
0
Sexlexia...
Late 80's, early 80's...what's 10 years when we're talkin' less than 30 anyway. :cool:

(That is a true story btw.)

Man, us 'youngens' are gunna have to do some serious spiralling to out-do what we've seen over the last 10-20! :scared
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,580
228
63
"the bunker"
Late 80's, early 80's...what's 10 years when we're talkin' less than 30 anyway. :cool:

(That is a true story btw.)

Man, us 'youngens' are gunna have to do some serious spiralling to out-do what we've seen over the last 10-20! :scared

on behalf of those that came before,i humbly apologize for not living up to your standards...

:look: :142squint





:lol:
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top