4 Play:

Iran unlike Palestine is neither an Arab nation or a Sunni nation

Most (Sunni) Arabs see Iranians as Persians, as not being true Arabs. Just to buttress your point.

if you were to have an enemy that declares you are unfit to live, and he is about going to get what he will use to kill you, wont you do anything and everything within your power to prevent him from getting the weapon, even if it means maiming (but not killing) the enemy with the same weapon he may have to use on you - that is the simple analogy of the case between Israel and Iran

PeeDaVinci:

if you were to have an enemy that declares you are unfit to live, and he is about going to get what he will use to kill you, wont you do anything and everything within your power to prevent him from getting the weapon, even if it means maiming (but not killing) the enemy[b] with the same weapon he may have to use on you [/b]- that is the simple analogy of the case between Israel and Iran

Put differently, it is ok for some countries to have them and wrong for others to have them.

As long as the powerful nations continue to develop them and use them as status weapons or intimidating others, the less powerful nations will continue to seek to own them as owning nuclear weapons these days seems the fastest way to get the likes of the US off your back.

NPT is not just about not developing nuclear weapons, it is also about getting rid of nuclear arsenals and as at today the US and Iran are both in breach of the NPT (the case of the US is even more concrete as it continues to build them whereas no proof exist yet as to Iran building a nuclear weapon).

Nobody beats this man on nairaland for mendacity

How stupid of me to think that the US like the other permanent members of the Security Council have a special status under the NPT.

For him,the facts are an obstacle to be overcome in expressing his views

If i were an American weapons scientist, i'd be busy figuring out ways to develop more sophisticated weapons to counter REAL threats from rogue nations such as Iran, N. Korea, Lebanon!

If not for the superior weapons of the west, Islam's dogs of war would long since have over-run the whole world!

America has been developing a missile defence program which is designed to take out incoming missiles in orbit

These systems work with land and space based surveillance systems to detect missiles as they are launched.

The biggest problem the program faces is how to cope with dummy missiles.Missiles which are launched alongside real missiles to confuse the detection mechanisms

While such a missile defence program is not perfect,they do offer some measure of protection to the US and its allies.

Ultimately,the best defense program is prevention.It is better to prevent the acquisition of nuclear arms than to hope to knock them out when they are launched.

If you didn't want nuclear weapons, you shouldn't have developed them in the first place.

There is no way you can convince me that Iran does not deserve a nuclear weapon but the US does, that's gross bullshit. What is good for the goose, is good for the gander. Egbe belu, ugo belu, nke siri ibe ya ebena, nku kwa ya!. . .Thank you!

@4Play

Last I checked, Iraq did nothing to the US to deserve being invaded. The US were the aggressors in the current war and you're asking me which wars were US the aggressors?. . .Did Vietnam or Somalia bomb the US? Why did they feel the need to go and fight therE?

@Donzman

Your arguments barely reside within the boundaries of reason that I don't know how to begin to deconstruct them.

However for the sake of boredom let me try.

There is a little piece of International law embodied in what is called the NPT which I gather from your arguments u are unaware of.Under this treaty,the 5 permanent members are allowed to retain their arms,subject to an obligation to negotiate btw themselves its reduction.

Other nations who have signed this treaty undertake to desist from any attempts to acquire nuclear weapons and to subject their nuclear programs to full inspections.Remember that nations have the choice to sign this treaty or not.

Iran exercised the choice to do so and logically it is only right that are being called upon to comply fully with the obligations they have undertaken.

If we agree that nukes are bad,it is irational to say that since this bad thing is in the hands of some let it be in the hands of many more. I do not see the logic of saying the more dangerous weapons there are the better.

Nor do I  share your confidence in the Iranian regime to act responsibly while in possesion of nukes.

As for your little diatribe on the US's purpoted belligerency.In Somalia,in 2007,they bombed at the invitation of the sovereign and internationally recognised Govt of Somalia which is legitimate use of force under international law.

In Vietnam,they went in on  the invitation of the Govt of the Republic of Vietnam,again a legitimate use of force

In Iraq,they were on less firm legal grounds I will admit when they invaded but I will say that Iraq's breach of various Cap 7 Resolutions coupled with the various post war UN Resolutions which have  legitimised the prescence of Coalition forces puts the US on safe legal footing

In Vietnam,they went in on the invitation of the Govt of the Republic of Vietnam,again a legitimate use of force

Check your history, the communist Government of Vietnam didn't invite the US to fight against Communist Vietnam. It's the same thing they're doing with Islam right now, that's what they did with communism back then. Causing aggression all over the place and filling idiots like you with the idea that they're right. Ask yourself why these guys have to be in the forefront of every war and at the same time their enemies change all the time?. . .Saddam was their friend in the 80's and suddenly he's an enemy, yeah that's a real freedom fighting country.

Tell me this, if the US felt communism was bad, why do they keep doing business with communist China? Bunch of hypocrites with no concrete ideology deceiving people all over the place.

It's almost COMEDIC looking at you trying to pull out all sorts of ridiculous things to justify US's invasion of Iraq. Section 700 of my ass!!!

@Donzman


There is a little piece of International law embodied in what is called the NPT which I gather from your arguments u are unaware of.Under this treaty,the 5 permanent members are allowed to retain their arms,subject to an obligation to negotiate its reduction between themselves.

If we agree that nukes are bad,it is irational to say that since this bad thing is in the hands of some let it be in the hands of many more. I do not see the logic of saying the more dangerous weapons there are the better.

Again here you are in an ocean but you have soap lather in your eyes. The NPT was developed by none other than the US and their cronies to make sure they keep their nuclear weapons while preventing others from getting it. You know, just like the IMF, they do nothing but protect the interest of the exploitative west.

If we agree that nukes are bad, it is only rational to say that it's either nobody has them OR everybody has them so no one country that intimidate the other with it. This is the only fair arrangement I see.

Donzman:

Check your history, the communist Government of Vietnam didn't invite the US to fight against Communist Vietnam.

Vietnam  in the 50s after its war with France separated into 2 like Korea,the North was under a communist Govt while the South was under a non-communist Govt.The Govt in the South asked for US help to defend it in its battle against the North.

A internationally recognised Govt is entitled under international law to invite a foreign Govt to come to its assistance in a military conflict

The rest of your posts is marked by your customary incoherence.Jumping from issue to issue with the sure-footedness of an inebriated man

None of the legal points are challenged by you on their merits so I  do not need to procced further

I didn't expect anymore from you, there's no way you can justify having a nuclear weapon and saying another person shouldn't have it. Especially when you're known to go around intimidating people if they as much as have a slight difference in ideology or refuse to let you exploit their resources.

I mean look at how they're painting Robert Mugabe like some sort of wicked, saber-toothed villian when in fact the guy is doing what is right for his nation. Very soon they'll attack Zimbabwe and nicompoos like you will run out here trying to justify it. America will mess your wife and you'll find a way to say your wife deserved a good mess because you're impotent

Donzman:

I mean look at how they're painting Robert Mugabe like some sort of wicked, saber-toothed villian when in fact the guy is doing what is right for his nation. Very soon they'll attack Zimbabwe and nicompoos like you will run out here trying to justify it. America will mess your wife and you'll find a way to say your wife deserved a good mess because you're impotent

The above highlighted phrase was enough to convince me you indeed have no clue what you are arguing about. Robert Mugabe at 82yrs of age continues to deny his country freedom to choose democracy since he shot his way into power in 1980, Zimbabwe is today facing starvation no thanks to Mugabe's headless policy of taking farmland from white farmers who unfortunately are the mainstay of Zimbabwe's battered economy.
Need i remind you that Zimbabwe presently has an inflation rate of over 1000% with millions facing starvation.

With hundreds of political opponents either exiled or spending time in jail, indeed Mugabe is doing "what is right" for his nation!

Is Nigeria faring any better with our democracy? Rubbish!!. . .When the West decide to destroy Zimbabwe's economy because Mugabe decided to give justice to his people, what do you expect?. . .Whites had no right to that land in the first place, getting rid of them is the RIGHT thing to do. You took it by force and slavery, you shall return it.

Mugabe is a solid determined leader and I admire him.

With hundreds of political opponents either exiled or spending time in jail

You mean politicians who are used as tools of commotion in Zimbabwe?. . .They should be on exile for sure.

Donzman:

Is Nigeria faring any better with our democracy? Rubbish!!. . .When the West decide to destroy Zimbabwe's economy because Mugabe decided to give justice to his people, what do you expect?. . .Whites had no right to that land in the first place, getting rid of them is the RIGHT thing to do. You took it by force and slavery, you shall return it.

Mugabe is a solid determined leader and I admire him.

You mean politicians who are used as tools of commotion in Zimbabwe?. . .They should be on exile for sure.

o ye malcontent, will ye not learn? Fresh from spouting inaccuracies about Vietnam and Somalia (which were speedily disproved!) now you bandy about things you know little of. Which west destroyed Zimbabwe's economy? Go there and find out what good the people are doing with the farms seized from the whites.
Someone tells you about millions starving in Zimbabwe and a seriously terrible economy and you compare it to Nigeria. When last did you enter your country?

Donzman:

If you didn't want nuclear weapons, you shouldn't have developed them in the first place.

There is no way you can convince me that Iran does not deserve a nuclear weapon but the US does, that's gross bullshit. What is good for the goose, is good for the gander. Egbe belu, ugo belu, nke siri ibe ya ebena, nku kwa ya!. . .Thank you!

let me expand your 'logic' a bit.
There's no way you can convince me that the mad men in my area shouldnt carry guns! There's no ay you can convince me that people deserve to be jailed and locked up no matter the crime. after all, fellow human beings are walking around freely.
There's no way you can convince me that the constitution sould peg the age limit for the presidency at 40 years. after all, are primary school pupils not human beings too? we should allow 14 year olds to contest!

You amuse me. really, you do. keep it up!

@Donzman,

You ain't seen anything yet as regards how low and ridiculous these people can go to make points that are virtually useless.

Now we have a new definition of NPT which spells out that the 5 countries are left to negotiate reduction amongst themselves.

I hope the world will be spared the works of these spin doctors.

@texxapete

u can continue running your mouth on facts and assumptions u dont even understand
you r sure lucky i have been busy and would continue to be busy for the next 3 weeks

i wish by the time i am free this thread would be alive then i would show u some facts to make u reconsider your stand point

enjoy

Don't do it^^^^^^^^^. Kaecy5 if you love yourself yuo will not challenge texazzpete.

kaecy5:

@texxapete

u can continue running your mouth on facts and assumptions u don't even understand
you r sure lucky i have been busy and would continue to be busy for the next 3 weeks

i wish by the time i am free this thread would be alive then i would show u some facts to make u reconsider your stand point

enjoy

When will you Apes get it? i'm not averse to learning anything new, or hearing something new. If you've got something new, bring it to the table. Why would i count my self 'lucky'?
And you're not the only 'busy' one, man.
All i do is try and throw people's logic back at them and see how they like it. and i try my best to argue with facts, not feelings and emotions, Half of the people who beef the US do so because they've read so many Robert Ludlum novels, they feel the US is capable of anything .

The other day, someone came up to say that The Thanksgiving day in the US is a celebration of the day that the 'White americans gathered all the indians fro a dinner and killed them'. This, even when a simple research would show this to be false. but the person stubbornly refused to admit his error.

To all the guys who want weapons for all; Would you feel happy (and safe!) if Nigeria announced it wanted to develop biological weapons?

texazzpete:

To all the guys who want weapons for all; Would you feel happy (and safe!) if Nigeria announced it wanted to develop biological weapons?

Why twisting the logic?

No body wants everyone to own nuclear weapons, we want all nuclear weapons destroyed.

But if one country feels it reserves the right to own it and continue to develop more with impunity then any country may as well seek to own its own nuclear arsenal.

Yes, I would want Nigeria to own one too since some countries already intimidate, maim or kill others that do not have them.

Donzman:

When the West decide to destroy Zimbabwe's economy because Mugabe decided to give justice to his people, what do you expect?. . .Whites had no right to that land in the first place, getting rid of them is the RIGHT thing to do. You took it by force and slavery, you shall return it.

I really don't know where people like you get this attitude. When will people learn to accept responsibility for their own failures rather than blame others. The facts are there to see. Mugabe destroyed the economy of that country by giving farm lands to people who know nothing about farming just to win popular support. Now a country that used to have enough food to export cannot feed itself without importing food. And you're blaming the West?

Donzman:

Mugabe is a solid determined leader and I admire him.

The craziest, most saddistic, and wicked leaders throughout history have been determined leaders as well.

@Afam
Can you put any evidence forward to show that these nuclear countries are actively developing and expanding their nuclear arsenal?

texazzpete:

@Afam
Can you put any evidence forward to show that these nuclear countries are actively developing and expanding their nuclear arsenal?

No, I believe only IAEA can put forward such evidence based on inspection.

It is either the US is destroying its nuclear arsenal (which I believe is non starter), doing nothing (most unlikely) or is adding to its arsenal (most likely as it keeps developing more sophisticated weapons across board).

On Iran, based on IAEA inspection, Iran cannot be said to be developing nuclear weapons yet because the US believes that it is developing them then the world must be fed such baseless lies and non existent scenarios.

Even the same IAEA made it clear that there was not any evidence that Iraq had WMD yet the all knowing US waged an illegal war based on the WMD lie and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi's are dead.

Again, if any country believes it is stable enough to own nuclear weapons then any other country reserves the right to develop its own too.

Enough of the hypocrisy, double standards, lies and misinformation being spread in the world.

People before you go on with some of these arguments I will advice you hear from the horses mouth. Browse the name "Carne Ross" and see how this Ex-British diplomat got fed up with deception.

, Ross, a confident, crop-haired 38-year-old, spent 15 years in the Foreign Office. He loved the life but ultimately hated having to bend the truth on behalf of his country. The gradual process of disillusionment began in Germany in the mid-1990s when refugees from the war in Yugoslavia flooded into the country. "We of course supported the British policy that the war in Yugoslavia was a civil war and that an arms embargo was a fair way of treating all the parties," he says. "This was deeply mistaken and inhuman. In effect it enabled one group to genocidally pursue another. The war was born of a grasp for power by Milosevic and his henchmen on the back of an invented Serb nationalism.",

see full page on http://politics.guardian.co.uk/interviews/story/0,,1510368,00.html

It was an agonised experience because I knew that the evidence they were presenting for WMD was totally implausible. I'd read the intelligence on WMD for four and a half years, and there's no way that it could sustain the case that the government was presenting. All of my colleagues knew that, too. We all believed the Iraqis had something, but that is very different from saying they had that much. The intelligence indicated that they'd failed to account for what they had in the past. They hadn't given us a complete account of the disposal of their past stocks, so we thought there was something, but there was no way that the claim of an imminent threat was sustainable. The 45-minute stuff was ridiculous."

"I told [the inquiry] what I knew in terms of the evidence on WMD and what the inspectors told me during the four and a half years that I dealt with it," he says. "I also wrote down my views on the available alternatives to war, which were fairly forthright. I felt that war should be the last alternative, and emphatically it was not in this case. There was a very good alternative to war that was never properly pursued, which was to close down Saddam's sources of illegal revenue. That testimony crystallised what I felt about the Iraq issue, and once I'd written it I felt there was no going back. I had to quit. I couldn't honestly work for this government with a smile on my face."

@McKren

No need to post any of those, any sensible individual knows the US and her allies (which change like the weather) are filled with deceiving men like 4Play who lack ability for deep intellectual thought.

o ye malcontent, will ye not learn? Fresh from spouting inaccuracies about Vietnam and Somalia (which were speedily disproved!)

Huh?. . .Where did I miss these disapprovals?. . .Somalia/Iraq/Vietnam did nothing to the US to deserve being invaded, keep fooling yourself.

let me expand your 'logic' a bit.
There's no way you can convince me that the mad men in my area shouldnt carry guns! There's no ay you can convince me that people deserve to be jailed and locked up no matter the crime. after all, fellow human beings are walking around freely.
There's no way you can convince me that the constitution sould peg the age limit for the presidency at 40 years. after all, are primary school pupils not human beings too? we should allow 14 year olds to contest!

Your IQ possibly cannot be this low!. . .The logic doesn't transfer, not even close. You first have to establish that Iran and every other nation looking to acquire WMD with the exception of your beloved US are looking to use it on others. Even though your beloved US is the one who goes from continent to continent creating strife and wars. If it isn't communists, it's Islam. . .I can't wait for the next people who will be next.

You will also have to prove that all other nations are immature and have IQ of 14 year olds with the exception of your beloved US. The logic doesn't transfer, we know how many assasinations the US has sanctioned, they're just as criminal as every other nation you're trying to deride.

Again, take your dumbass out of here.

I really don't know where people like you get this attitude. When will people learn to accept responsibility for their own failures rather than blame others. The facts are there to see. Mugabe destroyed the economy of that country by giving farm lands to people who know nothing about farming just to win popular support. Now a country that used to have enough food to export cannot feed itself without importing food. And you're blaming the West?

Yeah people who have been farming for thousands of years suddenly do not know anything about farming. You mention export but forget to remind yourself that countries need to open up their markets for your exports. If the West decides to sanction Zimbabwe and restrain their ability to trade just for doing what is RIGHT and what every other African nation should do, how is that Zimbabwe's fault?

You seem not to be able to understand the impact trade sanctions can have on an economy, not your fault, they feed you with propaganda and you swallow.

The craziest, most saddistic, and wicked leaders throughout history have been determined leaders as well.

Yeah and the best, most charismatic and philanthropic leaders throughout history have been determined as well.

@Donzman

You obviously love Rob Mugabe more than the people of Zimbabwe do.Zimbabwe has turned from a leading agricultural nation to a destination of food aid from the Western.

Zimbabwe has in effect traded ownership of farmland(most of the land was distrubuted to Mugabe's cronies) for dependence on Western food aid .How wise.

You suggested earlier that since we can't get the US to disarm,it is okay for everyone to get nukes.Yes,let everyone get it.That makes plenty of sense.

The fact of the matter is that there is an international treaty that governs the issue of proliferation.Iran is in breach of that.

One buffoon mocked earlier my claim that the 5 permanent members are obliged to negotiate between themselves how they can decommision their nukes.Here is the relevant part of the treaty

Article VI

Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effecrnational control.

It is pointless asking the 5 permanent members to continue negotiations on nuclear disarmament when nations like N.Korea and Iran are busy building nukes while Isreal,Pakistan and India who never signed the treaty have no plans to disarm.

The question is whether in the light of the difficulty in getting those who are already nuclear armed to disarm we should ignore further prolifertion.I think further proliferation is unwelcome.The more nukes there are the higher the possibility of nuclear warfare

Donzman:

@McKren

No need to post any of those, any sensible individual knows the US and her allies (which change like the weather) are filled with deceiving men like 4Play who lack ability for deep intellectual thought.

Huh?. . .Where did I miss these disapprovals?. . .Somalia/Iraq/Vietnam did nothing to the US to deserve being invaded, keep fooling yourself.

Your IQ possibly cannot be this low!. . .The logic doesn't transfer, not even close. You first have to establish that Iran and every other nation looking to acquire WMD with the exception of your beloved US are looking to use it on others. Even though your beloved US is the one who goes from continent to continent creating strife and wars. If it isn't communists, it's Islam. . .I can't wait for the next people who will be next.

You will also have to prove that all other nations are immature and have IQ of 14 year olds with the exception of your beloved US. The logic doesn't transfer, we know how many assasinations the US has sanctioned, they're just as criminal as every other nation you're trying to deride.

Again, take your dumbass out of here.

I enjoy arguing with people like Afam, even though we find ourselves at odds 99% of the time, i look forward to his posts cos he speaks with logic and sound reasoning. You on the other hand argue with 99% passion and 1% logic!

Must you insist on showing off your ignorance and sub-par IQ in public? Anyway, in the vain hope that you might learn something from this, i will tackle your issues one by one.
1) The US was in Somalia as part of a UN mission. read it up, dumbass! It is pertinent to note that the troops hat rescued trapped US troops after the Battle of mogadishu (black Hawk Down) contained Malaysians and Pakistani troops (both muslim countries). So when did the US invade Somalia?

2) The US was in Vietnam on the invitation of the south vietnamese to combat North Vietnam sponsored rebels. later they got embroiled in a full-fledged war between the north and south. So how come the invasion? Someone already pointed this out to you, but you being an intellectually challenged idiot still bring this up. Why? WHY?

3) Let's take a look at the stability of Iran and North Korea.
North Korea: Testing a nuclear missile in violaion of prohibitions from doing same, firing a missile over Japan (in the 90s) can't be interpreted as stability. Do you have faith in a country that aggressively pursues millitary weapons at the expense of food and education, leavin gmillions to starve?

Iran:
Here are soem statements made by the iranian president:
"The real cure for the conflict is elimination of the Zionist regime."
"The way to peace in the Middle East is the destruction of Israel."
"Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation."
"The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm."
"they should know that they are nearing the last days of their lives"
"as the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map"


In 2005, much of the media reported his call for Israel (actually the "Zionist regime" since Iran refuses to use the word "Israel" to be "wiped off the face of the map" in a keynote address to the Iranian-government sponsored "World without Zionism" conference.

According to the Washington Times:

In January (2006), the German magazine Bild reported that Iran purchased 18 BM-25 land-mobile missiles from North Korea. The BM-25 is a variation of the SS-N-6, a Soviet-made submarine-launched ballistic missile, with a range of up to 1,800 miles. The BM-25, according to Mr. Rubin, "is a nuclear missile, There is no other warhead for this other than a nuclear warhead."

In August of 2004, former U.S. Representative to the United Nations John Bolton testified that:

Cover stories put forward by Iran for the development of a nuclear fuel cycle and for individual facilities are simply not credible. For example, Iran is making an enormous investment in facilities to mine, process, and enrich uranium, and says it needs to make its own reactor fuel because it cannot count on foreign supplies. But for at least the next decade Iran will have at most a single nuclear power reactor. In addition, Iran does not have enough indigenous uranium resources to fuel even one power-generating reactor over its lifetime -- though it has quite enough uranium to make several nuclear bombs. We are being asked to believe that Iran is building uranium enrichment capacity to make fuel for reactors that do not exist from uranium Iran does not have.

read more http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/Iran_A_Threat_to_Israel_and_the_World.asp


So how can one like yourself claim such a threat does not exist? How can you claim genocide isn't in that idiot's plans?

Donzman:

You will also have to prove that all other nations are immature and have IQ of 14 year olds with the exception of your beloved US. The logic doesn't transfer, we know how many assasinations the US has sanctioned, they're just as criminal as every other nation you're trying to deride.

Again, take your dumbass out of here.

You poor deluded fool! Are you so scared of putting your (admittedly feeble) brains to work that you must take everything literally? Must i spell everything out for you since you are too dumb to think things through for yourself? I was tring to highlight the gulf in stability between the countries in question and more stable Western countries.

There is no helping you. Go forth and dispose of youself in whatever method you think best.

* I just saw

You poor deluded fool!

and I knew it was you, texazzpete

They will soon destroy the whole of Iran with bombs.

1) The US was in Somalia as part of a UN mission. read it up, dumbass! It is pertinent to note that the troops hat rescued trapped US troops after the Battle of mogadishu (black Hawk Down) contained Malaysians and Pakistani troops (both muslim countries). So when did the US invade Somalia?

What an idiot, who are we deceiving here?. . .Who controls the UN? UN mission = American sanctioned mission. Nobody is a kid here! What happened to the UN mission after the Black Hawk Down?

You can as well tell me the Iraq was a coalition and not an invasion.

Concerning Vietnam, FACT is that majority of Vietnamese didn't want your favourite country there and it showed in the resistance. If you enter a country without the MAJORITY wanting you, it's an invasion, plain and simple. We all know the US isn't in love with Southern Vietnam, they got into the fray hoping to stem the tide of communism. Don't be naive or atleast don't pretend like people being naive is the status quo.

You poor deluded fool! Are you so scared of putting your (admittedly feeble) brains to work that you must take everything literally? Must i spell everything out for you since you are too dumb to think things through for yourself? I was tring to highlight the gulf in stability between the countries in question and more stable Western countries.

Your brains are clouded with propaganda. You might want to remind yourself that the US is the fuel that keeps burning in the Middle East. Take off the fuel and you'll be surprised what can happen. Just like the US kept supporting the Duvaliers in Haiti, only to turn around and act like they're freedom fighters in the Middle East.

If you're freedom fighters, why support dictatorship in Haiti but not in Iraq?, It's dumbasses like you that help US maintain their hypocrisy. What do I expect? You're the man with the peanut brain.

As for the rest of your talk on Nuclear Weapons. . .STANCE IS CLEAR. Why did they think of the NPT after they've acquired their own nuclear weapons?. . . Could it possibly be because they want to have it, prevent others from having it and in the process intimidate them?. . .Me thinks what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Donzman:

What an idiot, who are we deceiving here?. . .Who controls the UN? UN mission = American sanctioned mission. Nobody is a kid here! What happened to the UN mission after the Black Hawk Down?

You can as well tell me the Iraq was a coalition and not an invasion.

The US was in somalia as part of a multi-national UN peacekeeping force. This was an operation sanctioned by the UN. Why play the UN = US conspiracy theorist card? This strikes me as strange, considering the fact that most of you pronounce the Iraq war illegal because o flack of UN approval.
Here's a quick one; If the UN doesn't want to be so dependent on the US, why then demand and expect the biggest financial contributions, millitary hardware and troops? During the battle to beat sense into Milosevic, 80% of millitary hardware used came from the US. So the world wants American sweat and dollars but complain at American interest? Idiocy.

Donzman:


Concerning Vietnam, FACT is that majority of Vietnamese didn't want your favourite country there and it showed in the resistance. If you enter a country without the MAJORITY wanting you, it's an invasion, plain and simple. We all know the US isn't in love with Southern Vietnam, they got into the fray hoping to stem the tide of communism. Don't be naive or atleast don't pretend like people being naive is the status quo.

Why do i always get the stupid ones? Where did you get the idea that resistance started after an American 'invasion'? The American army came into South Vietnam on the invitation of the South Vietnamese government to train their troops to fight the VietCong rebels. Gradually the US took over actual combat roles, especially after the entry of North Vietnamese troops. Where do you get your 'facts' from?
Does it matter if the US loved South Vietnam or not? Even if the US was in there just to 'stem communism', do you thin k the S.Vietnamese Govt weren't happy for the help? Such simplistic reasoning is fast becoming your forte.

Donzman:

Your brains are clouded with propaganda. You might want to remind yourself that the US is the fuel that keeps burning in the Middle East. Take off the fuel and you'll be surprised what can happen.

Strange. I always thought that Israel's existence was the most burning issue in the Middle East. After all, 2 Arab-Israeli wars have been fought without the Intervention of the US. When the Mufti of Jerusalem was exhorting arabs/muslims to murder all jews in the 1930s, was the US involved? When multiple Arab nations tried to roll over the newly formed Israeli nation was the US involved?
Your problem is you have no awareness of history. Instead of spirited attempts at unbiased research and learning, you luxuriate in your ignorance.

Donzman:

Just like the US kept supporting the Duvaliers in Haiti, only to turn around and act like they're freedom fighters in the Middle East.

If you're freedom fighters, why support dictatorship in Haiti but not in Iraq

The US was firmly against the Duvalier Govts in Haiti until 1962 when they had to grudgingly accept the government as a bulwark against communism. It is to be noted that the US refused baby Doc Duvalier asylum after he was overthrown in 1986. Also, after Aristide (a democratically elected president) was overthrown, the US millitary stormed the Island and forcibly restored democratic governance to Haiti. Surely, even you with your limited historical knowledge remember this?

I understand your anger at being forcibly educated, so i take no offense at the vitriolic remarks you make about my brains, which are vastly superior to yours!

Donzman:

As for the rest of your talk on Nuclear Weapons. . .STANCE IS CLEAR. Why did they think of the NPT after they've acquired their own nuclear weapons?. . . Could it possibly be because they want to have it, prevent others from having it and in the process intimidate them?. . .Me thinks what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

To all you idiots who spout this line of reasoning: yes, there is an imbalance in the ownership of nuclear weapons, but ever since the Cold war we havent seen any country actively threatening to wipe out any country/race off the face of the world. I presume you also actively encourage Al-Qaeda et al to obtan nuclear weapons? When one of these is used, hundreds of thousands lose their lives. This might mean nothing to you, but it does to all right-thinking people. Since the 1970s, most of the countries with Nuclear weapons have tried to keep these out of the hands of others to safeguard the world.
The Concept of MAD (mutually Assured Destruction) saved the world during the cold war because neither the US or the Soviet Union would attack the other knowing fully well that that ensured their own doom. That remains till this day. Now some of you sadists would love to see such devices in the hands of people who have int he past thought nothing of 'martyring' themselves. Or terrorists with no fixed army.
these people, these Ghouls know themselves, they're the ones who grinned happily when Sept 11th happened, when the london bombings occured. People like Donzman, ghoullish idiots with a dearth of common sense who would dearly love to see a mushroom cloud appear over Manhattan.
As far as Nuclear weapons is concerned, the 'what is good for the goose, ' argument is the most simplistic yet stupid idea we can think up.

Scientists say the world will end when the sun explodes in approx 10 billion years. the world as we know it can end when some trigger happy nut sets off a nuclear holocaust. There's a reason why the US, Russia, China and others have numerous fail-safe checks before an actual nuclear detonation.

As long as nuclear weapons are kept out of the hands of those with no regard for MAD, the world should be alright. Flawed, yes, but alive.

Donzman, inject some more common sense in your thought process, ok?

Strange. I always thought that Israel's existence was the most burning issue in the Middle East. After all, 2 Arab-Israeli wars have been fought without the Intervention of the US. When the Mufti of Jerusalem was exhorting arabs/muslims to murder all jews in the 1930s, was the US involved? When multiple Arab nations tried to roll over the newly formed Israeli nation was the US involved?
Your problem is you have no awareness of history. Instead of spirited attempts at unbiased research and learning, you luxuriate in your ignorance.

Your naivety out under the sun again. Maybe you'll want to check out which country receives the highest share of US Foreign Aid, then get back and tell me the US has nothing to do with Isreal - Arab wars.

Funny enough, you detest Mugabe for driving whites out of their land but you see the establishment of a Jewish state in a formerly conquered territory as ok. Don't you see the inconsistency in your reasoning?

The US was firmly against the Duvalier Govts in Haiti until 1962 when they had to grudgingly accept the government as a bulwark against communism. It is to be noted that the US refused baby Doc Duvalier asylum after he was overthrown in 1986. Also, after Aristide (a democratically elected president) was overthrown, the US millitary stormed the Island and forcibly restored democratic governance to Haiti. Surely, even you with your limited historical knowledge remember this?

I understand your anger at being forcibly educated, so i take no offense at the vitriolic remarks you make about my brains, which are vastly superior to yours!

Haha. . .Ok. After reading tons of books and journal articles on Haiti, you feel your American propaganda is going to somehow shut me blind. Hahaha. . .Dude you're hilarious at best. Right from the time of the Haitian revolution, America has always taken the side of anyone willing to oppress Haitians. They never accepted the Haitian independence until 60 or so years after the fact.

They supported Duvaliers until they were kicked out to France. Freedom fighters my bum! So you mean to tell me the almighty freedom fighting US will change its stance on Freedom?

As for your WMD essays;

If Nuclear weapons are bad and dangerous, NOBODY should own them. What gives one country the right to own them in the name of self defence and another the right not to?. . .So the country which doesn't will keep being forced to be subservient because they can't defend themselves. Every NATION has the right to self defence, you can't obtain a weapon of defence and somehow try to reason with me that you deserve it and they don't. Especially when I see you as an aggressor with enemies changing every decade.