It seems you are a very good student of Bush and act accordingly. When the logic and reason fails: 1- Play the mushroom cloud and terrorist card 2- If #1 fails play the patriot card According to you Americans should be permitted to commit war crimes because they are patriots.
I can't stop wondering if gworld is just playing devils advocate in all of this. So much of the time I am left thinking "is he that stupid" or "is he nuts?" I have a friend who will play the devil's advocate a lot, just to get people to look at things from a different perspective, even when he usually totally dissagrees with the side he is playing to be, but I have yet to see gworld admit that so I am back to my original thoughts....
I look forward to them Those are your words and your assumption. You seem far more eager to make this assumption (though I have not said these things) than Iran's nuclear weapons. Isn't that odd? Sure it is. You clearly stated you believe it's nuclear weapons. That's on side, but then you say there is no proof. But there is. You choose not to see it or accept it. My assumption based on what I've read is, you need one of two things; one) a mushroom cloud (which seems to be offensive), or two) someone stepping up to the microphone saying "yes, it is true, we are building nukes are feel liberated by disclosing such." What you personally need for proof has no bearing on what the rest of the world (most of it) thinks regarding this. This is not the US, this is the world taking issue. For some, no amount of proof exists. There is plenty of evidence, which is why they are taking it seriously in the first place. Perhaps you have the illusion they will stand up at a press conference and disclose such? I'm glad the EU and IAEA doesn't need such demanding proof! Is there really a need to keep arguing an attack when I've made my position so clear, so many times? It's almost as if you wish that were indeed my position, as it would make it easier. A nuclear explosion will impact the rest of the world, which is why you probably find yourself in the minority arguing in favor of Iran. As I read one of the articles, just over one-third opposed efforts. Leaving nearly two-thirds in favor of current efforts by the IAEA and EU. They already think they are credible. Oh they exist; they are just dismissed with nonchalance. Considering that most options have been exhausted, including world concern on the issue and mounting evidence of materials to make such, I see the two options mentioned above; one) an all out confession, two) a mushroom cloud. Are there any options I'm missing?
But Gtech, I agree we need the most proof we can get. Assuming things won't get us too far at this time. But, if we are aggresively seeking proof either way then we should know before it would be too late. It will always be a gamble until you actually have something in your hands, but we just need to keep pushing hard on the matter until a)we get enough proof b) they quit trying to build a nuke.
Good luck with that one! You'd have better luck going back and defending Jose Padilla. I love the tactic though. Make up something completely fabricated, toss it out, and try and get someone to defend it. Seems like Bush goes through that a lot himself, eh?
I don't disagree. I just don't think the mushroom cloud or sitting around waiting for an admission as the final proof we need is the solution. Second sentence, don't disagree there. Diplomatic solutions are important, and I'm very happy that *others* are leading them. I'm also happy that many other countries are concerned and involved. This builds a strong case to Iran that we (as the world) take this threat seriously. It puts pressure on Iran. It builds consensus among many countries, should harsher meausres than strongly worded letters be necessary down the road. hrbl continues to try an argue from the point I support an invasion. That's just not so...not at this point. I much prefer a diplomatic solution, if it will have a favorable outcome. And I support the current diplomatic efforts.
Yep, and I honestly don't see why Gtech is so eager to dismiss points that can easily be read by others as not a factual proof case for nuclear weapons. Wish I had more time right now, would love to get into this a bit further, but not enough processor resources left to put to much effort into it at this time, got way to much work to get caught up on. I'm asking for decent proof to show me, and others that it is indeed nuclear weapons, of which nobody has yet to prove or even try to prove anything with facts Patriotism views can and will be far different than actual thought out views especially when taking into consideration how others outside of your country might feel, this is not having it both ways and I've already explained that. not to you btw debunked
Nope not in the least, you however appear to keep bringing up points that would support those who do wish to invade.
I am still waiting for you to tell me which one of judges in international criminal court is a pedophile or criminal? It seems when you can not argue your case, you will attack the poster and you always have some one else in the crazy bunch to agree with you. Give us one reason why USA will not sign a treaty that tries to stop war crimes and crime against humanity when other countries such as Canada, Germany, France, UK, Ireland, Sweden, Holland, Belgium, Spain,.....agree with it? Why the only countries that support USA are countries like China, Libya and former Iraq?
What else is there to get into? You said you believed they were nuclear weapons. An enormous amount of evidence to support the IAEA and EU's position has been presented in this thread. The only thing lacking is the mushroom cloud or outright admittal from Iran. What else could be lacking? It's long been presented. You chose not to accept it, even though you think they are nuclear weapons. Not sure how that works, I may have to go back and read up on Kerry some. That it's not enough for you to already have concluded they are nuclear weapons, but they are not, isn't important. That others (IAEA EU and most of the rest of the world) have, is No one's mentioning patriotism but you. Once again, this isn't a US only issue, this is a world issue. Maybe the fifth time is a charm?
While directed at debunked, it might be appropriate to point out there are hundreds of issues, including about ten pages back that I'm still waiting for YOU to address. But I don't act like a bully about it What's next, ten pages of post with large bold print? Is this the narcissism zman was talking about?
Enormous amount of information? Yet just as much information if not more so do disprove those positions. You like taking things out of context don't you? In my patriotic belief USA good Iran bad, I will accept that it is nuclear weapons which you appear to be doing so. However looking into the factual basis of things and not allowing my patriotism for my country to cloud my judgement I still do not see absolute fact, not to the point that it A warrants a current invasion at this time and B will get the rest of the world behind it. The rest of the world now realy, I would love to see some information to back that statement up. Nope but it appears to be your soul basis for any argument, I however can seperate the 2.
What is there to answer? As others pointed out you have offered no proof for your postings. You just keep posting I think, there is a concern and mushroom cloud without offering any evidence.
GTech, it is clear the reason that you are "wrong" no matter what you say. See post here http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=32562
lik·en ([FONT=verdana, sans-serif] P [/FONT]) Pronunciation Key tr.v. lik·ened, lik·en·ing, lik·ens To see, mention, or show as similar; compare.com·pare ([FONT=verdana, sans-serif] P [/FONT]) Pronunciation Key v. com·pared, com·par·ing, com·pares v. tr. To consider or describe as similar, equal, or analogous; liken. To examine in order to note the similarities or differences of. Grammar. To form the positive, comparative, or superlative degree of (an adjective or adverb). Lets start with english before we start working on the hard stuff. Don't try to twist my words or change what I am saying, you only show that you are a manipulator if you do that.
Debunk I am still waiting for one reason why USA will not sign a treaty that tries to stop war crimes and crimes against humanity while every other civilized country has signed it? It seems Bush and Saddam have a lot in common because he didn't want to sign it either.
You can wait all you want - I could care less that you are still waiting, just because you can't comprehend what was written, doesn't mean I need to figure out a new way to help you understand.