Iran blasts Obama's nuclear criticism

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/11/08/iran.obama/index.html

So much for changing THAT relationship.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/WORLD/meast/11/08/iran.obama/art.iran.afp.gi.jpg

OBAMA: We should negotiate with Iran.
REPUBLICANS SUCH AS KIDROCK: That won't work. He should be agressive, because Iran is our enemy.
OBAMA: I will make sure Iran doesn't have weapons and will invade if necessary.
REPUBLICANS SUCH AS KIDROCK: Obama's gonna start war with Iran, which is now bad.

Any questions?

Originally posted by lord xyz
OBAMA: We should negotiate with Iran.
REPUBLICANS SUCH AS KIDROCK: That won't work. He should be agressive, because Iran is our enemy.
OBAMA: I will make sure Iran doesn't have weapons and will invade if necessary.
REPUBLICANS SUCH AS KIDROCK: Obama's gonna start war with Iran, which is now bad.

Any questions?

LORDXYZ: Who cares if Obama is friends with a racist preacher and a terrorist. Bush IS a racist AND a terrorist!

Originally posted by KidRock
LORDXYZ: Who cares if Obama is friends with a racist preacher and a terrorist. Bush IS a racist AND a terrorist! ...Do I have to point out the obvious that we aren't our friends?

I wonder how Obama is going to convince Ahmadinijad to stop his nuclear program.

After that we can discuss how he will try to disarm Russia.

Yeah, Ahmadinejad is a terrorist, FOX said so.

It's ridiculous how you and others like you see the Ahmadinejad and other Middle Eastern leaders as potential threats...and at the same time, urging the need to raise taxes on defense which is already the biggest in the world and takes up 30% of the US budget.

Spend that money on helping the poor for ****s sake, since you already have money to burn.

I agree, to a certain point with the parliamentary leader.

Iran has shown their ugly colors before. Since Israel is a huge ally of ours, it would be retarded to think that we would just sit back and do nothing.

Just because an Iranian leader has spoken out about this doesn't mean that it is the end all be all of this debate. There WILL be unconditional talks AND some appeasement going on under the Obama administration. Much better than we had under the shit on everything Bush administration. If Iran does get out of hand and does show perfectly veritable evidence of a strike on Israel, I fully expect Obama to take military action. However, it had better not be another Iraq and I want mother ****in' evidence or admission from Iran.


I personally prefer that we not have to meddle in world affairs like that. I'd like it if we could just **** and smoke weed all day, but that's just me.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Yeah, Ahmadinejad is a terrorist, FOX said so.

It's ridiculous how you and others like you see the Ahmadinejad and other Middle Eastern leaders as potential threats...and at the same time, urging the need to raise taxes on defense which is already the biggest in the world and takes up 30% of the US budget.

Spend that money on helping the poor for ****s sake, since you already have money to burn.

More lies, you clearly have no idea what my policy's and thoughts are.

Originally posted by KidRock
More lies, you clearly have no idea what my policy's and thoughts are.

OK, one last time, what are your policies and thoughts?

Prove to us that you aren't the lonely, ignorant right-wing/christian 12 year old hiding in your parents' basement that you appear to be.


(Also, in the 2 weeks that I've visited the GDF you have looked like the only actual racist I've met yet on KMC. Just letting you know.)

Originally posted by KidRock
I wonder how Obama is going to convince Ahmadinijad to stop his nuclear program.

After that we can discuss how he will try to disarm Russia.

Why should Iran not have nuclear capabilities?
Why does Russia need to disarm?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Why should Iran not have nuclear capabilities?
Why does Russia need to disarm?

Ask Obama.

Russia can do whatever it wants, same as Iran...we don't police the world. I am against Iran getting nuclear weapons though due to evidence of them supporting/supplying Iraqies fighting against us.

Unless they do something that threatens us then we should act.

It's not totally outrageous to view this aggressive nuclear agenda between Iran and North Korea as nothing more than a defensive measure after Bush's New Axis of Evil speech in 2003. Every leader who could be considered on-par with Saddam knows of the potential consequences in going directly against the U.S. Donald Snow's security dilemma is an idea that the Bush administration shouldn't have ignored.

I personally think that if they want Nukes, let's just let them have a few... and warn them that if they fire off a single one we'll wipe them off the face of the planet. Nuclear weaponry is just a sign of power and respect, all the countries that have nuclear weapons don't get ****ed with while the third world countries that don't have them get exploited.

all words & saber rattling.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I'd like it if we could just **** and smoke weed all day, but that's just me. -- Dadude 4 Prez n 2012 --

Originally posted by KidRock
More lies, you clearly have no idea what my policy's and thoughts are. You have stated on this forum before that you are against Obama's plan to cut missle defense from the budget, so it's obvious you believe US defense to be important.

You have also stated you are against Obama negotiating with Ahmedinejad, and have stated him to be a terrorist.

You are also against Obama's socialised health care plan.

So, I guess I do know your policies.

Originally posted by lord xyz
You have stated on this forum before that you are against Obama's plan to cut missle defense from the budget, so it's obvious you believe US defense to be important.


So do you think its not important?

Originally posted by lord xyz

You have also stated you are against Obama negotiating with Ahmedinejad, and have stated him to be a terrorist.


Where?

Originally posted by KidRock
So do you think its not important?



Where? I believe it's way over funded.

Can't find it, I remember it being in one of the political threads by Strangelove.

Originally posted by KidRock
Russia can do whatever it wants, same as Iran...we don't police the world. I am against Iran getting nuclear weapons though due to evidence of them supporting/supplying Iraqies fighting against us.

If every kid at Virginia Tech had been armed with a gun then no one would have died that day.

Originally posted by lord xyz
I believe it's way over funded.

Can't find it, I remember it being in one of the political threads by Strangelove.

I dont think you can ever spend too much when it comes to peoples safety..thats just me though.

And keep looking, I would like to see where I called Ahmadinijad a terrorist.

When that spending comes at the cost of efficiency in other areas it is too much. A family does not spend money on a fancy alarm system when they can't afford to feed their children. The US should not be spending as much as the rest of the world on defense when our education system is so deeply flawed.

http://www.globalissues.org/i/military/country-distribution-2006.png
We are about half of world spending- the entire rest of the world spends about the same amount as we do on military funding.

Originally posted by Devil King
If every kid at Virginia Tech had been armed with a gun then no one would have died that day.

Actually odds are the cross fire would have lead to more deaths.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Actually odds are the cross fire would have lead to more deaths.

Well if all guns were banned the shooting never would have happened. Criminals obey the law.

Originally posted by Devil King
If every kid at Virginia Tech had been armed with a gun then no one would have died that day. If the US had a half decent culture, no one would've died that day.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
all words & saber rattling.

That's what they said about the Kaiser.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
When that spending comes at the cost of efficiency in other areas it is too much. A family does not spend money on a fancy alarm system when they can't afford to feed their children. The US should not be spending as much as the rest of the world on defense when our education system is so deeply flawed.

http://www.globalissues.org/i/military/country-distribution-2006.png
We are about half of world spending- the entire rest of the world spends about the same amount as we do on military funding. And they wonder why people stereotype Americans as being so ridiculously arrogant and stupid.

Originally posted by lord xyz
And they wonder why people stereotype Americans as being so ridiculously arrogant and stupid.

Don't people stereotype you as that as well?

Oh, and FYI your logic fails...

Britain once had the largest military expenditure...did people think the Brits were arrogant and studpid? Arrogant maybe, stupid not often.

Rome also had the largest military expenditure...did people think the Romans were arrogant and stupid? Arrogant maybe, stupid not often.

Arrogant is something we call people who believe their way of doing things is better than our way. (However, when these people are usually the most powerful nation on Earth...who has the evidence on their side for who's methods are better?)

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Don't people stereotype you as that as well?

Oh, and FYI your logic fails...

Britain once had the largest military expenditure...did people think the Brits were arrogant and studpid? Arrogant maybe, stupid not often.

Rome also had the largest military expenditure...did people think the Romans were arrogant and stupid? Arrogant maybe, stupid not often.

Arrogant is something we call people who believe their way of doing things is better than our way. (However, when these people are usually the most powerful nation on Earth...who has the evidence on their side for who's methods are better?) Nah, I'm stereotyped as angry, weird since I've never once been angry on here.

I wouldn't call it evidence, more they have the biggest sword.

Originally posted by lord xyz
If the US had a half decent culture, no one would've died that day.

A manic depressive Korean immigrant shoots up a school because he is rejected by a girl and it is the US cultures fault?

Riiiight.

What about the school shooting in Finland? Do they not have a half decent culture as well?

Originally posted by KidRock
A manic depressive Korean immigrant shoots up a school because he is rejected by a girl and it is the US cultures fault?

Riiiight.

What about the school shooting in Finland? Do they not have a half decent culture as well? Obviously I was refering to Virginia Tech only.

Pedantry is like a plague around here.

Originally posted by KidRock
I wonder how Obama is going to convince Ahmadinijad to stop his nuclear program.

After that we can discuss how he will try to disarm Russia.

Or maybe this time around, Medvedev and Putin will disarm America.

I saw "lol Bitchiness" as the last poster and I knew Russia was going to be mentioned.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
I saw "lol Bitchiness" as the last poster and I knew Russia was going to be mentioned.



Nah, you were just so proud of yoursef to have recognised the names of leaders of a country other than your own that you just couldn't pass up an oppertunity to let everyone know that you know who the President of Russia is.

Thats 2 counteries down - another 190 to go.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Obviously I was refering to Virginia Tech only.

Pedantry is like a plague around here.

So can you explain it to me how it was the culture of the US that caused the korean to shoot up the school?


Also find that post yet where I called Ahmadinijad a terrorist?

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Nah, you were just so proud of yoursef to have recognised the names of leaders of a country other than your own that you just couldn't pass up an oppertunity to let everyone know that you know who the President of Russia is.


No actually... no that wasn't it was at all.

If thinking that will help fuel your own arrogant diluusions of grandeur, though, far be it from me to say otherwise.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
No actually... no that wasn't it was at all.

If thinking that will help fuel your own arrogant diluusions of grandeur, though, far be it from me to say otherwise.

I love this bizarre fixation of Americans' that Russia is still an enemy- the Russian people are not antagonist about Americans but most American citizens seem to think Russians are still gun-slinging commies...(if they ever were)

I think however this time, under Putin especially, Russia will win any conflict with the United States.

Originally posted by KidRock
So can you explain it to me how it was the culture of the US that caused the korean to shoot up the school?


Also find that post yet where I called Ahmadinijad a terrorist? He was in a place where everyone's secretive, opressive and hateful. That'd drive anyone insane. We've been trained for individual differences to stand out and taught about good and evil people as if they're real.

No, not found it, and given up on finding it.

To be fair... nuclear weapons are entirely unnecessary whoever the country is that happens to be producing them. But maybe that's a crazy idea.... obviously countries need a way of comparing who's penis is bigger.

The fact that America apparently feels the need to disarm everyone else while adding more to their own military budget makes them the most worrying country in my opinion. Especially as they are the only ones to actually have dropped a nuclear bomb.

On a slightly different note... I was talking to a girl on my course who is from Iran and she said that she knows her own people and bombing is the only way. So I guess that's an interesting view from another angle.

Plus... Obama isn't even the President yet, perhaps he deserves a little more slack before people start writing him off.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
I love this bizarre fixation of Americans' that Russia is still an enemy- the Russian people are not antagonist about Americans but most American citizens seem to think Russians are still gun-slinging commies...(if they ever were)


Why quote me and say this?

Originally posted by lord xyz
He was in a place where everyone's secretive, opressive and hateful. That'd drive anyone insane. We've been trained for individual differences to stand out and taught about good and evil people as if they're real.

So...why arent there school shootings every day there if it would drive anyone insane? Or better yet at Harvard or Yale..certainly they must be more secretive and hateful maybe? Are you saying US culture is oppressive, hateful and secretive?


And you couldnt find it cause it doesn't exist. You're delusional and because my views differ from yours you make up fairy tales in your head.

Originally posted by KidRock
So...why arent there school shootings every day there if it would drive anyone insane? Or better yet at Harvard or Yale..certainly they must be more secretive and hateful maybe? Are you saying US culture is oppressive, hateful and secretive?


And you couldnt find it cause it doesn't exist. You're delusional and because my views differ from yours you make up fairy tales in your head. Well, there's the restraint, lack of confidence, wanting to not look like a dick.

The US culture is. You guys keep 5 guns in your house for that off-chance someone might break in.

Yeah, I'm delusional.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Well, there's the restraint, lack of confidence, wanting to not look like a dick.

Yes, because obviously this is a personality trait(s) that only exists in the US.



Not even the majority of "us guys" have a gun in our house.

Originally posted by Mindship
-- Dadude 4 Prez n 2012 --



Well, if you put it that way...tax credits for those who purchase comic books.


edit-

I read the rest of the thread. Damn, a whole lot of shit crawled up everyone's ass. Seriously, I think everyone could use some sex and a bowl of weed right now.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Actually odds are the cross fire would have lead to more deaths.

Exactly. Sadly, though, this is the opinion expressed by several of the Republican presidential candidates during the media coverage of the shooting.

Originally posted by KidRock
Well if all guns were banned the shooting never would have happened. Criminals obey the law.

This one did follow the law. The law failed those people who died. He didn't disclose his mental health background and no one checked. This is because the more important factor in all this was the money that changed hands, not the lives it put in danger.

Originally posted by lord xyz
If the US had a half decent culture, no one would've died that day.

It does, but only half of it is decent.

Originally posted by KidRock
A manic depressive Korean immigrant shoots up a school because he is rejected by a girl and it is the US cultures fault?

Riiiight.

What about the school shooting in Finland? Do they not have a half decent culture as well?

A depressed Korean immigrant that suffered from several disorders and had lived here since he was 2 or 3, if I recall.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Well, there's the restraint, lack of confidence, wanting to not look like a dick.

The US culture is. You guys keep 5 guns in your house for that off-chance someone might break in.

Yeah, I'm delusional.

You're still not telling me how any of this made a man go on a shooting spree and kill 30 people though. The culture of the US had nothing to do with the shooting, the mental disorders and lack of restraint he had did.

The US is no more an oppressive culture then a country like Japan is with their unique customs and pressure put on the kids.

You're creating things in your mind that you think I said, when I really didn't..that is delusional.

edit:

Who here supports Iran building nuclear weapons? Is anyone against it?

I support it, personally.

I have found proof that the Russians are at heart- American lovers.

0lNFRLrP014

Originally posted by lord xyz
OBAMA: We should negotiate with Iran.
REPUBLICANS SUCH AS KIDROCK: That won't work. He should be agressive, because Iran is our enemy.
OBAMA: I will make sure Iran doesn't have weapons and will invade if necessary.
REPUBLICANS SUCH AS KIDROCK: Obama's gonna start war with Iran, which is now bad.

Any questions?

Oddly, that's pretty much it.

That video is atrocious. It's like a post-communist amalgamation of the B-52's and redneck rock. Sadly, it's the most professional looking musical number I've seen out of Russia. Granted, the only music videos I usually see out of Russia is when the microphone electrocutes the lead singer, half the stage collapses and the bear dressed as a hooker goes berserk and kills someone in the audience that's gathered around the organ grinder.

Now, did you mean "bear" as in the proper, or a large hairy gay-man with a leather fetish?

Originally posted by Robtard
Now, did you mean "bear" as in the proper, or a large hairy gay-man with a leather fetish?

No, Bear proper; as in the big hairy wild animal that they've trained to ride a unicycle and wear a pointy hat and dress for the amusement of a crowd. But I understand the confusion since I also mentioned an organ grinder.

Oh, very good then.

I always find it amusing that after some wild animal that's been trained to wear stupid clothes and do stupid tricks, snaps one day and mauls someone, then it's always "I don't understand, it was very gentle and never showed any aggression, how could this have happened." Stupid people, I say.

Originally posted by KidRock

Who here supports Iran building nuclear weapons? Is anyone against it?

Nuclear weapons? Meh.

Nuclear power? Hell yeah.

lol, alright, this seems like the appropriate thread to do this in:

Impromptu poll:

What are you more worried about as the most likely potential escalation of the conflict raging in the Middle East? And just for curiosity sake, which option would do the most to destabilize the region?

a) America attacking Iran
b) Iran attacking America
c) Iran attacking Israel
d) Israel attacking Iran

EDIT:
Originally posted by KidRock
Who here supports Iran building nuclear weapons? Is anyone against it?

I don't support it for the reason I don't support any nation having nuclear weapons.

Realistically, I don't see it as a good thing, as it will destabalize the tenuous relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran, but I don't see it as a threat to myself or really to America. If anything, it is a defensive manuver against the Israelis.

I very much see the situation as nearly identical to Pakistan having nuclear weapons. Not a good thing, but not as bad as it is being propogated to us in the West. Its like, heaven forbid someone actually wants to defend themselves (lol, so appropriate after watching a video on Waco)

America attacking Iran or Iran attacking Israel.

sorry bards, I had to change it, I forgot to say "most likely"

I stand by my answer.

Originally posted by inimalist
lol, alright, this seems like the appropriate thread to do this in:

Impromptu poll:

What are you more worried about as the most likely potential escalation of the conflict raging in the Middle East? And just for curiosity sake, which option would do the most to destabilize the region?

a) America attacking Iran
b) Iran attacking America
c) Iran attacking Israel
d) Israel attacking Iran

Iran attacking Israel. America attacking Iran would probably cause almost as much damage.

Iranians are not stupid. They're not just going to barge into a war.

Ahmadinejad may be a backward psychotic Khamini-act-a-like, but he's not siucidal.

So priority worry goes to America attacking Iran.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Iranians are not stupid. They're not just going to barge into a war.

Ahmadinejad may be a backward psychotic Khamini-act-a-like, but he's not siucidal.

So priority worry goes to America attacking Iran. B-but, ABC said der r enemies.

Its simple if Iran's president or whatever the position is over there didnt come out with mad ass statements against the west and labelling america the great satan and all that crap they could probably have gotten away with arming themshelves with nukes....But lets get realistic here folks anyone who has nukes has them as deterrents its what all that bickering is about in europe of a missile shield is about....The possibility of losing deterrent status by america rendering strike capability void which is impossible anyway just send more nukes lol.

Iran are nervous I would be two america has invaded there neighbour, saudi arabia dislikes Iran(this could be a understatement_ and Israel could go to war with them at any time. They just want to defend themshelves as guy said there beforehand. I seriously doubt they want to actually nuke anyone no country or leader does because they are all aware of the consequences...MAD- mutually assured destruction.

Personally I would be more worried about North Korea, the power vacuum that will occur there when good old kim dies....Thats one volatile state, who are still at a defacto state of war with south korea. I dont think there was any treaty signed there, the border is basically temporary any kind of hardliner could take up the reins there and be a even bigger threat. Worse what relationship the west has with kim jong most likely wouldnt be present with mr X.

America was against Iran getting weapons before Amedinejad.

Couldn't America make the deal with Iran that if they (as they claim) only want the Uran for a peacefull purpose offer to give them the required Uran, as a sign of good will from Iran they would have to be checked regulary by the group (that I cannot remember the name on) that checks the Nuclear Powerplant etc?

Iran could just get the power from America, but because America ****ed up the middle east, they hate America and want their own power.

Which of course means they're making nuclear weapons.

Lol, yup, it was America that messed up the middle east

history there started in the 1960s, not, you know, thousands of years ago.

Hell, the middle east was a peaceful utopia prior to the Americans arrival.

Originally posted by inimalist
Lol, yup, it was America that messed up the middle east

history there started in the 1960s, not, you know, thousands of years ago.

Hell, the middle east was a peaceful utopia prior to the Americans arrival. More like the 50s or 40s.

And I know it was shit prior, I'm just saying the problems we have today are because of interventionism from the US and UK. The UK even created Iraq.

Originally posted by lord xyz
More like the 50s or 40s.

And I know it was shit prior, I'm just saying the problems we have today are because of interventionism from the US and UK. The UK even created Iraq.

indeed, the UK bears much more blame

if you are interested, Al Jazeera did a series about "Arab Unity" that talks about a lot of this stuff. Its on the Al Jazeera english youtube page. Hit me with a pm and I'll see if I can look it up for you

By no means am I trying to say the Americans have done anything helpful there, and the invasion of Lebanon in the 80s is one of the most critical mistakes of american foreign intervention I know of, just kind of reacted to the insinuation that all of the problems in the middle east (which might not include iran... it is a persian nation, so I think it is classified as "south asian", like afghanistan or pakistan... blah, stupid classifications) are American in origin.

Originally posted by inimalist
indeed, the UK bears much more blame

if you are interested, Al Jazeera did a series about "Arab Unity" that talks about a lot of this stuff. Its on the Al Jazeera english youtube page. Hit me with a pm and I'll see if I can look it up for you

By no means am I trying to say the Americans have done anything helpful there, and the invasion of Lebanon in the 80s is one of the most critical mistakes of american foreign intervention I know of, just kind of reacted to the insinuation that all of the problems in the middle east (which might not include iran... it is a persian nation, so I think it is classified as "south asian", like afghanistan or pakistan... blah, stupid classifications) are American in origin. I never meant to imply it's all America's fault, they do hold a lot of the blame, however.

What's interesting is that most of these cotastrophees are from right wing governments. A bit contreversial, but I'm not insinuating anything, just something worth noticing.

While the U.S. made it messier, I always credited Britain in the 1930's with holding a parallel to the current situation in Iraq. Their military withdrawal from Iraq allowed for revolts against British-promoted Iraqi rule, and chaos ensued. I often look at the event as a message that a pull-out this second would be disastrous.