Argentinean President, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner reveals...

[ChumpDumper]

It's not a fight against us that is as concerning, but the fact that they harbor a deeper resentment towards another member of that nuclear club. Israel. That resentment is fueled by a deeper religious fanaticism. Their political instability and this fanaticism is an unstable mix. But no amount of flagging this for you seems to elicit acknowledgement that it's not a good mix.

You don't think they have any grievances against the US?

Jesus, you really don't know anything unless I tell you to google it.

Anyway, thanks for proving my point.

Since you like red-herrings:

It's like allowing the nuts from Woodsboro Baptist church to have a say in the matter when the president has to make a call on military action.

In no world would that be a sensible thing to do.

You need to google what a red herring is now.

Depends on the context and the results of the investigation.

They say it's an accident. What can you investigate? What did the Iranians get to investigate?

Because Hussein outclassed their military.
Because they were already taking big losses.

Thank you for proving my point again.

It's different against Israel.
Because their fraternal hatred for each others' doctrines is ONLY dwarfed by their shared hatred for Israel.

Not really, they fight each other much more than Israel.

Here's another red-herring for you:

Brothers fight all the time correct? What happens if a mutual friend attacks your brother though? Do they not jump in and defend their kin? Despite whatever differences the brothers may have had in the past - that all goes out the window.

Hatred against Israel is the one unifying thing that all muslims have in common. It runs deep in their veins. It's fool-hardy to suggest that their hatred doesn't factor into their military decisions. Because they're completely rational.

Seriously, look up red herring.

And not all Muslims hate Israel. You flaunt your ignorance with every post.

[Th'Pusher]

Fair enough. I'll just address the comment below then



Nobody in the international community wants more nuclear capable nations. The question is what is the best strategy to avoid proliferation. The decades-long US-led tactic of isolating Iran and fighting proxy wars has led to Iran becoming a nuclear threshold state. Continuing this trajectory will complete the process of Iran possessing nuclear warheads. The alternative is to try and regulate rather than eliminate Iranian nuclear capability. This is what the current JCPOA seeks to do with steep reductions in centrifuges and enriched Uranium, curbing Plutonium production and a reasonable (while not ideal) inspections framework.

There are legitimate reasons to find faults in this deal - it is not perfect. But making perfect the enemy of good is a shortsighted tactic. The agreement pushes Iran's military nuclear ambitions back and offers a way for Iran to develop closer economic ties with the West. Aside from military engagement, this is arguably the most realistic way of containing Iran. Netanyahu's way - a bloody war that will turn out worse than the Iraq misadventure - is breathtaking in its foolhardiness.

And the proof of the pragmatism of the deal is the response from the international community. The whole of Europe (including parties in power and credible opposition parties in various countries) supports this deal. The UN Security Council voted for it unanimously. The moderate Gulf nations (Qatar, UAE, Kuwait, Oman etc) cautiously support it. The only opposition is from Saudi Arabia (due to ideological Shia-Sunni doctrine and for oil trade reasons), Israel (the Likud party's ticket to remaining in power is to keep Israelis scared and voting for them repeatedly) and the Republican Party (because the other side did it, they have to oppose it).

Well said. I noticed Phenomanul ignored this post completely.

I would too if I were him/her.

[hater]

Can't disagree with anything warlord said tbqh

Israel obviously wants war. Either they are hiding/scared of something or they are pandering to their voters. Same with Saudi. But Saudi is easier to figure out. They are a nation with ZERO friends. No one likes them. But they have money so they can buy some friends. They are irrelevant thou because they have no ideals besides continuing their bloodlines.

The rest of the world could be reasoned with.

[hater]

Btw Cristina Fernandez just said Putin is now the global leader in fighting terrorism.

Wonder what phenomauled thinks about that

[pgardn]

Btw Cristina Fernandez just said Putin is now the global leader in fighting terrorism.

Wonder what phenomauled thinks about that

While the Russians bomb to make way for Hezbollah

[pgardn]

Fair enough. I'll just address the comment below then



Nobody in the international community wants more nuclear capable nations. The question is what is the best strategy to avoid proliferation. The decades-long US-led tactic of isolating Iran and fighting proxy wars has led to Iran becoming a nuclear threshold state. Continuing this trajectory will complete the process of Iran possessing nuclear warheads. The alternative is to try and regulate rather than eliminate Iranian nuclear capability. This is what the current JCPOA seeks to do with steep reductions in centrifuges and enriched Uranium, curbing Plutonium production and a reasonable (while not ideal) inspections framework.

There are legitimate reasons to find faults in this deal - it is not perfect. But making perfect the enemy of good is a shortsighted tactic. The agreement pushes Iran's military nuclear ambitions back and offers a way for Iran to develop closer economic ties with the West. Aside from military engagement, this is arguably the most realistic way of containing Iran. Netanyahu's way - a bloody war that will turn out worse than the Iraq misadventure - is breathtaking in its foolhardiness.

And the proof of the pragmatism of the deal is the response from the international community. The whole of Europe (including parties in power and credible opposition parties in various countries) supports this deal. The UN Security Council voted for it unanimously. The moderate Gulf nations (Qatar, UAE, Kuwait, Oman etc) cautiously support it. The only opposition is from Saudi Arabia (due to ideological Shia-Sunni doctrine and for oil trade reasons), Israel (the Likud party's ticket to remaining in power is to keep Israelis scared and voting for them repeatedly) and the Republican Party (because the other side did it, they have to oppose it).

The bolded is highly debatable and IMO wrong.

Agree with most of the rest.
Benji is sick and tired of Hezbollah. If Iran could get rid of Hezbollah AND undo Immadinnerjacket's vow to destroy Israel BN would have not have a leg to stand and AND most likely would not be leading Israel. Thanks for that Iran. Of course the revolutionary guard is perfectly happy with conflict, they get more power and money. This is NOT a one way street.

[Splits]

While the Russians bomb to make way for Hezbollah

What's wrong with Hizb'Allah?

[ChumpDumper]

The bolded is highly debatable and IMO wrong.

So they aren't a nuclear threshold state?

[pgardn]

So they aren't a nuclear threshold state?

No, the US isolating them did not thrust them into becoming one.

[pgardn]

What's wrong with Hizb'Allah?

Are you serious?

[Splits]

vow to destroy Israel

Do you understand that your "destroy Israel" frame is made up Zionist rhetoric which is actually a policy of regime change, much like Israel and the US take/took towards Iraq, Iran, Afghan, Syria, Libya, Gaza, etc, etc, etc?

[Splits]

Are you serious?

They're a political party in a democratic state.

[pgardn]

They're a political party in a democratic state.

Yeah.

So is Sinn Fein.

That did not stop the terrorist arm from intentionally blowing up women and children.

[pgardn]

Do you understand that your "destroy Israel" frame is made up Zionist rhetoric which is actually a policy of regime change, much like Israel and the US take/took towards Iraq, Iran, Afghan, Syria, Libya, Gaza, etc, etc, etc?

Do you understand that Immadinnerjacket saying it is exactly what the far right in Israel thrives on?

[Splits]

Yeah.

So is Sinn Fein.

That did not stop the terrorist arm from intentionally blowing up women and children.

How many women and children did the Zionist terror army kill in Gaza last summer over the course of a couple months? How about a few years before that?

[Splits]

Do you understand that Immadinnerjacket saying it is exactly what the far right in Israel thrives on?

What does that have to do with anything? Iran hasn't invaded any countries in the past few hundred years. The settler movement chants "death to Arabs" all the time. Is that exactly what the Republican Guard thrive on?

[pgardn]

How many women and children did the Zionist terror army kill in Gaza last summer over the course of a couple months? How about a few years before that?

So why supply Gaza with rockets to allow Israel to have that excuse?

Rockets that can hit Tel Aviv?

[pgardn]

What does that have to do with anything? Iran hasn't invaded any countries in the past few hundred years. The settler movement chants "death to Arabs" all the time. Is that exactly what the Republican Guard thrive on?

Invading?

The clear implication was destroying with a nuke.
Get real.

[ChumpDumper]

No, the US isolating them did not thrust them into becoming one.

Oh, if we're just keeping it to the US I would say would say isolation played a part, as did facilitating chemical attacks on thousands of its civilians, directly killing over 200 civilians by shooting down an airliner and helping to overthrow their democratically elected government.

You know -- really petty stuff.

[Splits]

So why supply Gaza with rockets to allow Israel to have that excuse?

Rockets that can hit Tel Aviv?

rockets. You mean fire crackers that land in the desert and don't harm anyone?

Why does Israel place their military bases in the middle of their cities?

[Splits]

Invading?

The clear implication was destroying with a nuke.
Get real.

What "clear implication"? When have Iranians ever proven to be anything other than self-preservationists? Are you implying they are trying to get a nuke to detonate in Tel Aviv? That they're suicidal?

[pgardn]

rockets. You mean fire crackers that land in the desert and don't harm anyone?

Why does Israel place their military bases in the middle of their cities?

Firecrackers?

Thats how YOU see it while safe in your bed.
Dont harm anyone... BS

Just because they are horribly inaccurate does not mean they can't harm anyone.
Did Israel bring in Patriot missiles for the of it?

[Splits]

Firecrackers?

Thats how YOU see it while safe in your bed.
Dont harm anyone... BS

Just because they are horribly inaccurate does not mean they can't harm anyone.
Did Israel bring in Patriot missiles for the of it?

Why do you focus on the firecrackers that land in the desert that killed under 10 civilians last summer instead of the 500-2000lb bombs supplied by your country, that are dropped on an open air prison and killed thousands of people during the same time period? Is 1 Zionist life worth 200 Pal lives?

[pgardn]

What "clear implication"? When have Iranians ever proven to be anything other than self-preservationists? Are you implying they are trying to get a nuke to detonate in Tel Aviv? That they're suicidal?

Read what Immadinnerjacket jacket said.
Thats stupid.

Uhhh... They are sending troops and funding Hezbollah to "help" Assad while getting ready to install a Shiite leader in Syria. Are you completely daft? It's going on in front of your face RIGHT NOW.

[Splits]

Read what Immadinnerjacket jacket said.
Thats stupid.

Uhhh... They are sending troops and funding Hezbollah to "help" Assad while getting ready to install a Shiite leader in Syria. Are you completely daft? It's going on in front of your face RIGHT NOW.

So you're saying the Iranians are trying to acquire a nuke to drop on Tel Aviv? Please state your case, don't be obtuse.