AsburySkinsFan Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 Wrong again. You know, your logic and the presentation of your argument is so convincing that I am changing my opinion on the matter.:doh: Now, do you care to substantiate your claim or are we just supposed to take your word for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsGuy Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 In this article, Isreal is completely denying the story in the London Times: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,242261,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 You know, your logic and the presentation of your argument is so convincing that I am changing my opinion on the matter.:doh: Now, do you care to substantiate your claim or are we just supposed to take your word for it? Honestly? I'd rather you just take my word for it. It's a good rule of thumb. Just agree with me. It'll make you seem much more intelligent. You must admit that there's a great deal of irony in your post given that you yourself made a series of claims without any support. All you've really done is cast light on the weaknesses in your own contributions to this thread. All part of my master plan of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 In this article, Isreal is completely denying the story in the London Times:http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,242261,00.html Seems awful silly to deny, because I automatically assume that nations develop contingency plans for many scenarios and those plans should necessarily contain plans for certain limited nuclear strikes, just as they could contain conventional strikes, and Black Op strikes etc. I still fail to understand what all the fuss is about. It's like when a year or so ago news organizations were all going bonkers because the US had plans for a nuclear attack on North Korea...well duh! My guess is that there is a whole drawer full of various attack scenarios that can be used given varying circumstances. I actually would be disappointed if a nuclear nation didn't have plans on how they might use those weapons, it would then leave that nation to a fairly arbitrary use of them and one that forced them to think on the fly with little or no preparation. Not the best way to utilize the most powerful weapon in the world IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 Honestly? I'd rather you just take my word for it. It's a good rule of thumb. Just agree with me. It'll make you seem much more intelligent. Smarter in your eyes perhaps, but then that might not be a good thing. You must admit that there's a great deal of irony in your post given that you yourself made a series of claims without any support. All you've really done is cast light on the weaknesses in your own contributions to this thread. All part of my master plan of course. Yes, but at least my statements had some substance that could be argued one way or another, and not just. "Wrong" without any reasons given as to why the position was wrong or in need of correction, and unless you are a very studied authority on Middle East/Israeli/Western Diplomacy then you're probably gonna have to offer something in response other than just dismissing an argument without reasons given.So, are you a studied authority in Middle East/Israeli/Western Diplomacy? If so what are your credentials? If not then pony up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 Smarter in your eyes perhaps, but then that might not be a good thing. Yes, but at least my statements had some substance that could be argued one way or another, and not just. "Wrong" without any reasons given as to why the position was wrong or in need of correction, and unless you are a very studied authority on Middle East/Israeli/Western Diplomacy then you're probably gonna have to offer something in response other than just dismissing an argument without reasons given. So, are you a studied authority in Middle East/Israeli/Western Diplomacy? If so what are your credentials? If not then pony up! Bill Parcells is the cause of all discontent in the Middle East. Prove me wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryman of the North Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 (the US has plans on how to invade Canada btw. So watch out all you Canadians!) Your government also has`plans to keep people in cities in the event of a major nntural disaster or war. anyway I would support Israel because those nukes would never be aimed at me while Irans would eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 Seems awful silly to deny, because I automatically assume that nations develop contingency plans for many scenarios and those plans should necessarily contain plans for certain limited nuclear strikes, just as they could contain conventional strikes, and Black Op strikes etc. I still fail to understand what all the fuss is about. It's like when a year or so ago news organizations were all going bonkers because the US had plans for a nuclear attack on North Korea...well duh! My guess is that there is a whole drawer full of various attack scenarios that can be used given varying circumstances. I actually would be disappointed if a nuclear nation didn't have plans on how they might use those weapons, it would then leave that nation to a fairly arbitrary use of them and one that forced them to think on the fly with little or no preparation. Not the best way to utilize the most powerful weapon in the world IMO. I agree with that. America's successful invasion of Afghanistan was largely a plan developed decades ago. The strategy of sending only a few troops along with CIA agents with breif cases full of money was developed by the CIA back when the Soviet Union getting their butts kicked there. The headline "America has plans to invade Afghanistan" would have been pretty shocking back in the early 1980's too, even though it turned out to be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Spiff Posted January 7, 2007 Author Share Posted January 7, 2007 It's no different here. We've got Fort Bragg, Pope AFB, Camp Legeune, Sunny Point (Military weapons ocean terminal), numerous nuclear plants...No place to hide when you start lightin' those things off. True, never really looked at it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 Your government also has`plans to keep people in cities in the event of a major nntural disaster or war. Yeah it's called the Beltway. They keep us in even without war or a natural disaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 Yeah it's called the Beltway. They keep us in even without war or a natural disaster. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 Bill Parcells is the cause of all discontent in the Middle East. Prove me wrong. Why would I want to do that....this I actually agree with. BTW, on a more serious note, just because I don't have the facts to prove you wrong does not alone make you right. Althought, in message boards this does seem to be the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 Yeah it's called the Beltway. They keep us in even without war or a natural disaster. LOL!!! I've driven on that thing...there is no way anyone inside the beltway makes it out alive! :laugh: It's a conspiracy man! From the same people who organized the Romo sits to pee Armoral-Ball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thirtyfive2seven Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 Kinda makes me want to move to NC. I don't really feel like being next door to the nerve center of our country, AKA prime target #1... Hey there just wondering why everyone is talkin about building a bunker. Does Iran have capabilities to lob one of those suckers over here? Do you think this may cause a nuclear war? I dunno man, I'm kinda for Israel attacking a terrorist country tryin to develop nukes and they state all the time that they want to "Kill all Jews" Why not attack it, blow it into the stone age (already there basically). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 Does Bush speak for all Americans? Then why is it assumed that Ahmadinejad speaks for all Iranians? His party just lost a ton of power in the recent Iranian elections. People are realizing that he's no good. And no Iran isn't already basically in the stone age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Why would I want to do that....this I actually agree with. Touche. BTW, on a more serious note, just because I don't have the facts to prove you wrong does not alone make you right. Althought, in message boards this does seem to be the case. Yes, but if we simply ASSUME that I'm always right, things will go much more smoothly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Touche.Yes, but if we simply ASSUME that I'm always right, things will go much more smoothly. LOL, too funny! LOL:laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oisn1 Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Hey there just wondering why everyone is talkin about building a bunker. Does Iran have capabilities to lob one of those suckers over here? Do you think this may cause a nuclear war? I dunno man, I'm kinda for Israel attacking a terrorist country tryin to develop nukes and they state all the time that they want to "Kill all Jews" Why not attack it, blow it into the stone age (already there basically). Technically, he has never stated he wants to kill all Jews. He wants a regime change but not to commit genocide against the Jews. You can read up on his infamous "Destroy Israel" speech, and read the prelude to his speech (last I checked, the MEMRI site has, though it's been a while since I've checked). Pretty much he calls for the death of a regime, not the people. He actually separates between Jews and the government. Now whether he is sincere or not in that notion, you can never be sure. And just for the record, Iran is probably the only country that actually can support its people, even with 30 years of American economic sanctions bearing down on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Technically, he has never stated he wants to kill all Jews. He wants a regime change but not to commit genocide against the Jews.You can read up on his infamous "Destroy Israel" speech, and read the prelude to his speech (last I checked, the MEMRI site has, though it's been a while since I've checked). Pretty much he calls for the death of a regime, not the people. He actually separates between Jews and the government. Now whether he is sincere or not in that notion, you can never be sure. And just for the record, Iran is probably the only country that actually can support its people, even with 30 years of American economic sanctions bearing down on them. This is a classic rhetorical move because it is impossible to remove a regime without removing people. And somehow "push Israel into the sea" doesn't have the ring of regime change, instead it sounds more like reclaiming the lands taken after WWII, and creating a new diaspora of Jews. Not only that but the difference in the Iranian President's rhetoric before the international community and before his own people couldn't be more drastic. He speaks out of both sides of his mouth; 1) appeasing the internation community, 2) appeasing his own hard-liners. Now, of the two which do you really think he's speaking his true mind to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 This is a classic rhetorical move because it is impossible to remove a regime without removing people. And somehow "push Israel into the sea" doesn't have the ring of regime change, instead it sounds more like reclaiming the lands taken after WWII, and creating a new diaspora of Jews. Not only that but the difference in the Iranian President's rhetoric before the international community and before his own people couldn't be more drastic. He speaks out of both sides of his mouth; 1) appeasing the internation community, 2) appeasing his own hard-liners. Now, of the two which do you really think he's speaking his true mind to? Thank God that the leaders the US and Israel don't ever "speak out of both sides of their mouths". Thank God that all Muslim leaders do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_33 Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Let me make this whole Thread simple...! ---------------------------------------- Put your scenario with mine (Everyone on this thread) and see if you see any simularities? (This leader)....Will sign a 7 year peace treaty with Isreal....3 1/2 years into the treaty Russia will attack (this nation)from the North... When Russia is pushed back to Siberia....The Kings of the East...Orient...Who's from the east of this (country)?China....!So we have Russia from the North and China from the East! Then we have the Kings from the South!Which I know as to be Egypt and Turkey and other Nations at their side...... Then we have the Kings from the west....Europe or should I say the European Union...! North=Russia East=China and other orients(king(s) from the east... South=Egypt and Turkey and other smaller nations West=European Union...(states or countries alligned with the european union like Germany,France and so on...Like 10 to 12 or so?) What Country am I talking about that all these other countries will attack from their respected directions...Isreal..The LORD Almighty...Jesus Christ..Thats who!!!Born in a little town in Bethleham...Sound familier people..?Which resides in Jerusalem!!Which is in the Country of Isreal!! Who's the leader that makes the peace treaty?HiIs name is the Anti-Christ...The man who HATES the Jews and Christians and those who Believe Jesus Christ died for our sins!You think Hitler was bad?Just wait awhile?His objectivity is to try to set up his own kingdom in Jeruselem in the Temple and say he is GOD!This is called the "abomination of descilation"... But Jesus Returns and puts a stop to the evil "SOME" will have to endure during that tribulation period and set up to reign for 1000 years... The Battle you ask?It's the the Battle of Armegadden!Or can be also known as the Battle at Maggedo which resides in the middle east! So yes...! All these therios are great...But one thing is for sure...Russia is invloved...China is too...!Kinda convenient isn't it? That these 2 countries are big trading partners with IRAN and VoW to protect their Ally and Oil revenues...? And Iran did say that they will wipe Isreal off the face of the earth!(well...they think they will anyway...) Ask yourself this 1 question!If I am right(which I am)?Then what forces Is russia, China and Iran fighting for...?Could they possibly just be pure evil and want all followers of Jesus destroyed? And how many times do I need to Hijack a thread to get you non-christians to understand that this IS going to happen... Let me put it in secular terms for ya..!How many times do I need to come in here and save your ass...!This is YOUR responsability to decide this on your own...I can only try to help as best I can... Whats the shame or better yet whats your Shame in trusting and putting your faith in Jesus Christ? Afterall...The odds are about as a good for Jesus in returning with all of these Prophesies coming true than our Redskins winning another Superbowl... Why are some of you afraid...?That's what it is...FEAR!Why?Afraid he won't forgive you? Well...That's all this Christian Nut has to say...I'm just one of those christian nut's you know!Well...One of the smart one's!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 What the hell is taking the Israeli's so long? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Thank God that the leaders the US and Israel don't ever "speak out of both sides of their mouths". Thank God that all Muslim leaders do. He never said anything like what you suggest. In fact, it's pretty offensive, and like the Iranian President's motives, yours are fairly clear. I suggest you re-evaluate your approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 He never said anything like what you suggest. In fact, it's pretty offensive, and like the Iranian President's motives, yours are fairly clear. I suggest you re-evaluate your approach. No kidding like there is no difference between in the way Western nations work out diplomacy and the way that the Iranian President threatens another nation and its people with pushing them into the sea. Defending what the Iranian president has said regarding Israel and equating it to things that our Presidents have said is just ignorant. I can only imagine at the stink some would be raising if Bush had threatened to push Iran into the sea. Some people are so blinded by what they want to be true that they fail to see real difference between national leaders and the things they say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Thank God that the leaders the US and Israel don't ever "speak out of both sides of their mouths". Thank God that all Muslim leaders do. Just for good measure: this post is simply ignorant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.