Sunday, December 18, 2011
One Hell of a Year--To Hell With You Kim Jung Il
As shitty as the economy is and regardless of the fact that I am struggling workwise, I am celebrating. It has been one hell of a year! It has been announced today Sunday December 18th, 2011 that Kim Jung Il has died of a heart attack. For those of us keeping score, this year Osama bin Laden, Mummar Qadaffi, and now Kim Jung Il have died. Dictatorships all over the Middle East and North Africa have felt the quake of revolutions and the desire for freedom.
Thursday, December 15, 2011
We Can No Longer Ignore Iran
Coming to Right Conclusions III
We Can No Longer Ignore Iran
By Felicia Whatley
Things are really heating up in Iran and the United States can no longer ignore it. Iran is a time bomb waiting to explode in a tumultuous area; they hit the front pages every other week with a new absurdity. Politics and regimes are changing in the Middle East and North Africa for the better in some ways. Yet, the instability brings the inability to protect their borders, to help their own people from being stricken with severe poverty, and to provide basic public works for their people. Iranians lack the opportunity to live in a democratic nation and enjoy the human rights we all should have, as well as the ability to govern themselves. The human rights violations in Iran are shocking. When they had their so-called democratic elections, followed by the peaceful demonstrations that turned ugly, many were killed for just documenting the truth. And what about the American hikers that were held for so long; it was as if they were treated like POWs in a modern cold war.
As Iran nears the aptitude to have nuclear weapons, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iran can no longer be ignored. United States needs to take action.
Although legally, the U.S.’s position on the Iranian nuclear program is not justifiable, because of the Non Proliferation Treaty; though politically, Iran’s nuclear program is a threat to U.S. interests.
A nuclear Iran would threaten the security of Israel, which is a strategic ally of the U.S., and it would create an imbalance in the regional politics. This would trigger a nuclear arms race in Middle East and endanger the U.S. interests in oil in the Persian Gulf. Though the people of Iran need nuclear power to assist in their basic needs, The U.S. should not trust Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with a toaster, let alone nuclear capability.
The great leader of Iran is always poetic about saying terrible things. “We have advised the Europeans that the Americans are far away, but you are the neighbors the nations in this region. We inform you that the nations are like an ocean that is welling up, and if a storm begins, the dimensions will not stay limited to Palestine, and you may get hurt. It is in your own interest to distance yourself from these criminals [Israel]…this is an ultimatum,” said Ahmadinejad on the Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran Radio on October 20, 2006.
This statement was a direct threat to Europeans and Americans regarding their interests in Israel. Israel, hopefully, will always remain a U.S. ally and Ahmadinejad and his Iranian regime should never be trusted.
“Heated public rhetoric has filled the newspapers and radio broadcasts since the summer of 2003, warning that Iran is nearly ready to produce nuclear weapons and that, if she was ever to actually produce those weapons, she would be an unacceptable risk to her neighbors and to Israel through direct military confrontation. Further, Iran is said to be ready to supply global terrorists with nuclear weapons, thus posing a risk to the United States, to Great Britain, and to the European Unions,” stated an article in Cuttingedge.org.
Historically, Iran has isolated itself from the world's discussions on peace and their leaders antagonize for war. The President of Iran has been thrown out of worldwide peace conferences and shunned worldwide for the indignant things he says and the way he treats his own people. Let’s not forget the history of Iranians’ actions against Americans.
On November 4, 1979, the revolutionary group Muslim Student Followers of the Imam’s Line reacted to the fact that the recently deposed Shah had been allowed into the United States for cancer treatment. The MSFIL occupied the American embassy in Tehran and took U.S. diplomats hostage. Fifty U.S. diplomats were held hostage for 444 days. America responded by freezing Iranian assets, which is still a sensitive topic for the Iranian government.
After the 1979 seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran, the United States froze about $12 billion in Iranian assets, which included bank deposits, gold and other properties. According to U.S. officials, most of those were released in 1981 as part of the deal for the return of U.S. hostages taken in the embassy kidnappings. But the effects are still there; some assets—Iranian officials say $10 billion, U.S. officials’ account less—remain frozen pending resolution of legal claims in the aftermath of the revolution.
Then there was the tragedy in Lebanon. Victims from the Beirut bombing said their lawyers began looking for Iranian assets to seize after winning the $2.7 billion judgment in 2007. A federal judge in Washington D.C. ruled that Iran's intelligence Service, the Ministry of Information and Security, directly oversaw and assisted the bombing of the Marine Corps barracks in coordination with Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group. Before the September 11 attack, this terrorist attack was the largest ever inflicted on U.S. citizens, in which 241 servicemen died.
Then a more recent event, “Iran Frees U.S. Hikers Held As Spies” covered by the United Kingdom’s The Guardian, wrote by Saeed Kamali Dehghan said that after two years in captivity Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal were held as supposed spies after they and Sarah Shourd hiked over the Iraqi Kurdish unmarked border in 2009. Shourd was released in 2010, but it took until September of 2011, $1 million in bail, and negotiations from Iraq and Oman for these hardy American hikers to make it home.
“Their release comes a week after Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told two U.S. media that the men had been granted a ‘unilateral pardon’, but the following day, the Iranian judiciary cast doubt on the release. Analysts interpreted the delay in the men’s release as the latest episode in a power struggle between the president and conservatives close to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Observers say the two Americans became victims of a feud between Ahmadinejad and his opponents. Some speculated that Iran kept the two in jail to use them as a means to put pressure on western powers, especially the U.S. and its allies,” printed The Guardian.
It is unclear why Ahmadinejad finally released them, but he has a reputation of accepting large bribes. To get Sarah Shourd out in 2009, the large sum was also half a million dollars in a similar deal. But what is clear is the power struggle of the Western nations and Iran throughout history. There is also the internal power struggle of the Ayatollah and Ahmadinejad that shows a weakness from within.
An article in USA Today quoted Barack Obama in 2008, "A nuclear Iran would pose a grave threat and the world must prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapons,”
The senator said it would be a ‘game-changing situation not just in the Mideast, but around the world,” because it would seriously undermine international agreements against the spread of nuclear weapons.”
He said, “This is our single most important threat, not only to Israel but to the United States." Obama also reiterated his calls for talks with Iranian leaders, without preconditions, but said nothing was ‘off the table’ in how he might respond as president if Iran developed nuclear weapons.
But Obama really has backed down on taking a clear stance against Iran getting nuclear power. He said every nation should have to right to have clean, nuclear power. Only recently has Obama declared that there needs to be tougher economic sanctions against Iran. But that isn't enough. Though they may have the legal right, Iran is not just any old nation. Ahmadinejad has proven to not be credible, reliable, or responsible. He clearly doesn’t act in the best intentions for his people, let alone the rest of the world.
When I served in Baghdad with the 65th Public Affairs Massachusetts Army National Guard in 2007, and the mortar rounds and Katyusha rockets flew into our Embassy compound, we KNEW they came from Iran. The Iranians not only supported manpower, but also weaponry to fight "the infidels". I cursed them. The border control was a mess. We had government contracted Peruvians, who spoke very little English in charge of the checkpoints and the border security in much of the country. They got paid very little to do a very dangerous job, but it was inadequate.
“A majority of the mortars recovered in 2007 in Iraq were stamped ‘made in Iran’. I felt frustrated, because there was nothing we could do about it. As for Iran getting nuclear power, that is one issue, but I think no country should have nuclear weapons. Look at the Cuban missile crisis. I would say that there is no way that we trust Iran with this. Look what they have done with every other type of weapon they have ever had,” said University of Massachusetts English Senior Katie Govoni. She is a U.S. Army veteran who served in Iraq from 2007 to 2009 after being extended because “we had no way home”.
The people of Iran have had enough. They want a new leader and feel they did elect one. The election was rigged and the awful dictator reigned on. This madness has to stop! On June 12, 2009, Iran had its tenth election. Ahmadinejad ran against three others. Iran's official news agency announced that within hours that two-thirds of the votes had been counted and that Ahmadinejad had won the election with 62 percent of the vote, and that Mir- Hossein Mousavi (who was the popular candidate) had received 34%.
The world was in uproar. The European Union, the United Kingdom, and many other Western nations responded with speculation and concern over allegations of the contested votes. Meanwhile Russia, China, India, and Brazil congratulated Ahmadinejad on his victory.
A former Israeli Army soldier of three-and-a half years, who would like to remain anonymous, had a lot to say about the situation in Iran. “As crazy as Ahmadinejad is, he is only a puppet for the Ayatollah. He tries to validate to the UN his beliefs, such as the idea that Jews in his country are safe. It is untrue. After the elections, over 117 people were massacred; women were beaten and killed by Iranian riot police with grenade launchers. Even the older veterans were affected.”
Mousavi said, "I'm warning that I won't surrender to this charade," and urged his supporters to fight the decision, without committing acts of violence. Over 500,000 Iranian protesters took to the streets. Many of them were beaten and murdered. It is unknown exactly how many, because cameras were taken away from the journalists and Sharia law was in effect.
Like many awful speeches from Ahmadinejad, this past September, US delegates walked out on his speech at the United Nations in New York where he said that 9/11 was a “mystery.” As covered by the UK’s Daily Mail on September 23, 2011, they have noted some of his previous rants such as: “In Iran we don’t have homosexuals…we do not have this phenomenon.” “The September 11 incident was a big fabrication as a pretext for the campaign against terrorism and a prelude for staging the invasion against Afghanistan.” He described Israel as a “fake regime” that “must be wiped off the map.” He has said, “Terror leader Osama bin Laden was hiding in Washington, D.C. because he was a previous partner of Mr. Bush.” He called “Zionists the most detested people in all humanity and called the Holocaust a myth.” He claimed, “Western countries were using special equipment to dump rain on their countries, leaving none for Iran.” This is like the third year in a row that delegates from all over the world have walked out on Ahmadinejad. This crazy mad man is an idiot!
Iran needs NATO intervention. The instability in the region and its state failure status is likely to start a necessary civil war, like what Libya just went through. I am ready to suit up and help where needed. It is just so important for the suffering Shiite Muslims, for the Jews and Arabs in Israel, and the Christians and Catholics all over the world. For the leader of Iran, he is full of religious hate. So, yes, I really think this would be a Holy War.
The West does have a problem. Iran is flagrantly defying the International Atomic Energy Agency and still pursuing nuclear capabilities, and thereby also defying the United Nations. So did Pakistan and India, and for Realists who believe that a democracy will not fight with another, they have obviously been proven wrong.
Although, I would not call Iran a democracy, it is the black robe’s interpretation of a democracy. God help you if you are an Iranian and disagree with the regime. A policy of confrontation only confirms the view of Iranian extremists that the Christian West is set on a path to intervention, and that everyone, is part of that struggle. We cannot allow this to happen. I wonder if Ahmadinejad really has a master plan to destroy Israel. That kind of mentality cannot be coddled.
I think the minute Iran gets nuclear energy; they will sell the configuration technology to Syria, amongst others and further destabilize the region. And what can Iraq do to defend themselves from that? Because of the Iran/Iraq war, the Iraqis still do not trust Iran’s intentions. For now, the insurgency in Iraq is mostly funded by Iranians to the south and Syrians to the north. I fear to think what would happen if they had that kind of power.
"If there is a revolution or civil war, there will be a massive slaughter. We [U.S.] are never going to hit Iran as long as Obama is in power. The people of Iran are not going to get help with our president having kissed the Ayatollah's hand. I don't think the people of Iran are really supportive of the overly religious fascist state ideals they are ruled by. I don't know how much America can help, because they aided in putting the Ayatollah in power in the late '80s. Perhaps the only hope they have is from Israel to hit their nuclear reactors, but they don't have the capacity to put boots on the ground like America does, despite Israel having one of the world's best air forces," said a anonymous former Israeli Special Forces soldier and sniper.
There is so much history--recent and from the 70's onward that shows why this political player has got to go and why what happens in Iran affects the rest of the world, not just the instability in the region. Reiterating, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says that there is no such thing as gays in Iran, that the Holocaust never happened, and that we should just wipe Israel off the planet. This megalomaniac needed to go --yesterday. The youth have spoken and the nation needs intervention.
“Iran is much different than Iraq or Afghanistan. It is a big, semi-modern state of 80 million people, compared with 20 million each for Iraq and Afghanistan. Bombers can easily attack Kabul and Baghdad. Doing likewise to Tehran, a city the size of London, should be unthinkable. Iran's politics may be unstable but its national pride is fierce. To challenge it would be disastrous, a final sign that western democrats can no longer contain the globalized moral arrogance shown by their leaders,” said British journalist Simon Jenkins.
President Obama has made the comment that they should be allowed to have nuclear power. Gasp. Why? I know that nuclear power is good, relatively safe power that can help with much needed infrastructure, but I am afraid we cannot trust the man at the helm. As for the Supreme Ruler the Ayatollah and the rest of the black robes--they can take a long walk off a short pier.
"No, I would not trust Iran with nuclear power," said International Relations Graduate Professor Ursula Tafe.
At the UN Race Conference last year, diplomats from 33 countries got out of their seats and walked right out of the door during an Ahmadinejad racist speech. It was humorous, but sad because he really believes the untruths that he says.
“This shows the truth. Ahmadinejad takes to the podium at the Geneva conference on racism and as soon as he starts attacking Israel and the Jews, half the place walks out. (And neither the Americans nor the Israelis were even there),” said MJ Rosenberg in an article “Beautiful Moment: Delegates Jeer and Walk Out as Iranian President Spews Hate.” Rosenberg said, “I wish this type of reaction was inflicted on every racist demagogue in the world. But this is nice in and of itself."
He logically continues, “But if a democratic change can happen anywhere, it can happen in Iran, since it happened before with hope from the Shah. The Iranians have seen it in their lifetimes. If we are looking at it from the best interest of Americans, we would work to undermine the Ahmadinejad’s government, help see to it that a leader emerges who is friendly to the West, and treats their own citizens as human beings. Then we can invest in Iraq’s economy and again have access to their oil. But diplomacy with Iran is a pipe dream,” said Rosenberg.
I know this is a controversial subject and there is so much evidence out there. Though many have proved that diplomacy with Iran isn’t working, are Americans ready to step up and make a commitment to intervene? What we are left with is no other equitable, available plan of action. We have no other choice-- but to invade Iran.
We Can No Longer Ignore Iran
By Felicia Whatley
Things are really heating up in Iran and the United States can no longer ignore it. Iran is a time bomb waiting to explode in a tumultuous area; they hit the front pages every other week with a new absurdity. Politics and regimes are changing in the Middle East and North Africa for the better in some ways. Yet, the instability brings the inability to protect their borders, to help their own people from being stricken with severe poverty, and to provide basic public works for their people. Iranians lack the opportunity to live in a democratic nation and enjoy the human rights we all should have, as well as the ability to govern themselves. The human rights violations in Iran are shocking. When they had their so-called democratic elections, followed by the peaceful demonstrations that turned ugly, many were killed for just documenting the truth. And what about the American hikers that were held for so long; it was as if they were treated like POWs in a modern cold war.
As Iran nears the aptitude to have nuclear weapons, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iran can no longer be ignored. United States needs to take action.
Although legally, the U.S.’s position on the Iranian nuclear program is not justifiable, because of the Non Proliferation Treaty; though politically, Iran’s nuclear program is a threat to U.S. interests.
A nuclear Iran would threaten the security of Israel, which is a strategic ally of the U.S., and it would create an imbalance in the regional politics. This would trigger a nuclear arms race in Middle East and endanger the U.S. interests in oil in the Persian Gulf. Though the people of Iran need nuclear power to assist in their basic needs, The U.S. should not trust Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with a toaster, let alone nuclear capability.
The great leader of Iran is always poetic about saying terrible things. “We have advised the Europeans that the Americans are far away, but you are the neighbors the nations in this region. We inform you that the nations are like an ocean that is welling up, and if a storm begins, the dimensions will not stay limited to Palestine, and you may get hurt. It is in your own interest to distance yourself from these criminals [Israel]…this is an ultimatum,” said Ahmadinejad on the Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran Radio on October 20, 2006.
This statement was a direct threat to Europeans and Americans regarding their interests in Israel. Israel, hopefully, will always remain a U.S. ally and Ahmadinejad and his Iranian regime should never be trusted.
“Heated public rhetoric has filled the newspapers and radio broadcasts since the summer of 2003, warning that Iran is nearly ready to produce nuclear weapons and that, if she was ever to actually produce those weapons, she would be an unacceptable risk to her neighbors and to Israel through direct military confrontation. Further, Iran is said to be ready to supply global terrorists with nuclear weapons, thus posing a risk to the United States, to Great Britain, and to the European Unions,” stated an article in Cuttingedge.org.
Historically, Iran has isolated itself from the world's discussions on peace and their leaders antagonize for war. The President of Iran has been thrown out of worldwide peace conferences and shunned worldwide for the indignant things he says and the way he treats his own people. Let’s not forget the history of Iranians’ actions against Americans.
On November 4, 1979, the revolutionary group Muslim Student Followers of the Imam’s Line reacted to the fact that the recently deposed Shah had been allowed into the United States for cancer treatment. The MSFIL occupied the American embassy in Tehran and took U.S. diplomats hostage. Fifty U.S. diplomats were held hostage for 444 days. America responded by freezing Iranian assets, which is still a sensitive topic for the Iranian government.
After the 1979 seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran, the United States froze about $12 billion in Iranian assets, which included bank deposits, gold and other properties. According to U.S. officials, most of those were released in 1981 as part of the deal for the return of U.S. hostages taken in the embassy kidnappings. But the effects are still there; some assets—Iranian officials say $10 billion, U.S. officials’ account less—remain frozen pending resolution of legal claims in the aftermath of the revolution.
Then there was the tragedy in Lebanon. Victims from the Beirut bombing said their lawyers began looking for Iranian assets to seize after winning the $2.7 billion judgment in 2007. A federal judge in Washington D.C. ruled that Iran's intelligence Service, the Ministry of Information and Security, directly oversaw and assisted the bombing of the Marine Corps barracks in coordination with Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group. Before the September 11 attack, this terrorist attack was the largest ever inflicted on U.S. citizens, in which 241 servicemen died.
Then a more recent event, “Iran Frees U.S. Hikers Held As Spies” covered by the United Kingdom’s The Guardian, wrote by Saeed Kamali Dehghan said that after two years in captivity Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal were held as supposed spies after they and Sarah Shourd hiked over the Iraqi Kurdish unmarked border in 2009. Shourd was released in 2010, but it took until September of 2011, $1 million in bail, and negotiations from Iraq and Oman for these hardy American hikers to make it home.
“Their release comes a week after Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told two U.S. media that the men had been granted a ‘unilateral pardon’, but the following day, the Iranian judiciary cast doubt on the release. Analysts interpreted the delay in the men’s release as the latest episode in a power struggle between the president and conservatives close to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Observers say the two Americans became victims of a feud between Ahmadinejad and his opponents. Some speculated that Iran kept the two in jail to use them as a means to put pressure on western powers, especially the U.S. and its allies,” printed The Guardian.
It is unclear why Ahmadinejad finally released them, but he has a reputation of accepting large bribes. To get Sarah Shourd out in 2009, the large sum was also half a million dollars in a similar deal. But what is clear is the power struggle of the Western nations and Iran throughout history. There is also the internal power struggle of the Ayatollah and Ahmadinejad that shows a weakness from within.
An article in USA Today quoted Barack Obama in 2008, "A nuclear Iran would pose a grave threat and the world must prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapons,”
The senator said it would be a ‘game-changing situation not just in the Mideast, but around the world,” because it would seriously undermine international agreements against the spread of nuclear weapons.”
He said, “This is our single most important threat, not only to Israel but to the United States." Obama also reiterated his calls for talks with Iranian leaders, without preconditions, but said nothing was ‘off the table’ in how he might respond as president if Iran developed nuclear weapons.
But Obama really has backed down on taking a clear stance against Iran getting nuclear power. He said every nation should have to right to have clean, nuclear power. Only recently has Obama declared that there needs to be tougher economic sanctions against Iran. But that isn't enough. Though they may have the legal right, Iran is not just any old nation. Ahmadinejad has proven to not be credible, reliable, or responsible. He clearly doesn’t act in the best intentions for his people, let alone the rest of the world.
When I served in Baghdad with the 65th Public Affairs Massachusetts Army National Guard in 2007, and the mortar rounds and Katyusha rockets flew into our Embassy compound, we KNEW they came from Iran. The Iranians not only supported manpower, but also weaponry to fight "the infidels". I cursed them. The border control was a mess. We had government contracted Peruvians, who spoke very little English in charge of the checkpoints and the border security in much of the country. They got paid very little to do a very dangerous job, but it was inadequate.
“A majority of the mortars recovered in 2007 in Iraq were stamped ‘made in Iran’. I felt frustrated, because there was nothing we could do about it. As for Iran getting nuclear power, that is one issue, but I think no country should have nuclear weapons. Look at the Cuban missile crisis. I would say that there is no way that we trust Iran with this. Look what they have done with every other type of weapon they have ever had,” said University of Massachusetts English Senior Katie Govoni. She is a U.S. Army veteran who served in Iraq from 2007 to 2009 after being extended because “we had no way home”.
The people of Iran have had enough. They want a new leader and feel they did elect one. The election was rigged and the awful dictator reigned on. This madness has to stop! On June 12, 2009, Iran had its tenth election. Ahmadinejad ran against three others. Iran's official news agency announced that within hours that two-thirds of the votes had been counted and that Ahmadinejad had won the election with 62 percent of the vote, and that Mir- Hossein Mousavi (who was the popular candidate) had received 34%.
The world was in uproar. The European Union, the United Kingdom, and many other Western nations responded with speculation and concern over allegations of the contested votes. Meanwhile Russia, China, India, and Brazil congratulated Ahmadinejad on his victory.
A former Israeli Army soldier of three-and-a half years, who would like to remain anonymous, had a lot to say about the situation in Iran. “As crazy as Ahmadinejad is, he is only a puppet for the Ayatollah. He tries to validate to the UN his beliefs, such as the idea that Jews in his country are safe. It is untrue. After the elections, over 117 people were massacred; women were beaten and killed by Iranian riot police with grenade launchers. Even the older veterans were affected.”
Mousavi said, "I'm warning that I won't surrender to this charade," and urged his supporters to fight the decision, without committing acts of violence. Over 500,000 Iranian protesters took to the streets. Many of them were beaten and murdered. It is unknown exactly how many, because cameras were taken away from the journalists and Sharia law was in effect.
Like many awful speeches from Ahmadinejad, this past September, US delegates walked out on his speech at the United Nations in New York where he said that 9/11 was a “mystery.” As covered by the UK’s Daily Mail on September 23, 2011, they have noted some of his previous rants such as: “In Iran we don’t have homosexuals…we do not have this phenomenon.” “The September 11 incident was a big fabrication as a pretext for the campaign against terrorism and a prelude for staging the invasion against Afghanistan.” He described Israel as a “fake regime” that “must be wiped off the map.” He has said, “Terror leader Osama bin Laden was hiding in Washington, D.C. because he was a previous partner of Mr. Bush.” He called “Zionists the most detested people in all humanity and called the Holocaust a myth.” He claimed, “Western countries were using special equipment to dump rain on their countries, leaving none for Iran.” This is like the third year in a row that delegates from all over the world have walked out on Ahmadinejad. This crazy mad man is an idiot!
Iran needs NATO intervention. The instability in the region and its state failure status is likely to start a necessary civil war, like what Libya just went through. I am ready to suit up and help where needed. It is just so important for the suffering Shiite Muslims, for the Jews and Arabs in Israel, and the Christians and Catholics all over the world. For the leader of Iran, he is full of religious hate. So, yes, I really think this would be a Holy War.
The West does have a problem. Iran is flagrantly defying the International Atomic Energy Agency and still pursuing nuclear capabilities, and thereby also defying the United Nations. So did Pakistan and India, and for Realists who believe that a democracy will not fight with another, they have obviously been proven wrong.
Although, I would not call Iran a democracy, it is the black robe’s interpretation of a democracy. God help you if you are an Iranian and disagree with the regime. A policy of confrontation only confirms the view of Iranian extremists that the Christian West is set on a path to intervention, and that everyone, is part of that struggle. We cannot allow this to happen. I wonder if Ahmadinejad really has a master plan to destroy Israel. That kind of mentality cannot be coddled.
I think the minute Iran gets nuclear energy; they will sell the configuration technology to Syria, amongst others and further destabilize the region. And what can Iraq do to defend themselves from that? Because of the Iran/Iraq war, the Iraqis still do not trust Iran’s intentions. For now, the insurgency in Iraq is mostly funded by Iranians to the south and Syrians to the north. I fear to think what would happen if they had that kind of power.
"If there is a revolution or civil war, there will be a massive slaughter. We [U.S.] are never going to hit Iran as long as Obama is in power. The people of Iran are not going to get help with our president having kissed the Ayatollah's hand. I don't think the people of Iran are really supportive of the overly religious fascist state ideals they are ruled by. I don't know how much America can help, because they aided in putting the Ayatollah in power in the late '80s. Perhaps the only hope they have is from Israel to hit their nuclear reactors, but they don't have the capacity to put boots on the ground like America does, despite Israel having one of the world's best air forces," said a anonymous former Israeli Special Forces soldier and sniper.
There is so much history--recent and from the 70's onward that shows why this political player has got to go and why what happens in Iran affects the rest of the world, not just the instability in the region. Reiterating, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says that there is no such thing as gays in Iran, that the Holocaust never happened, and that we should just wipe Israel off the planet. This megalomaniac needed to go --yesterday. The youth have spoken and the nation needs intervention.
“Iran is much different than Iraq or Afghanistan. It is a big, semi-modern state of 80 million people, compared with 20 million each for Iraq and Afghanistan. Bombers can easily attack Kabul and Baghdad. Doing likewise to Tehran, a city the size of London, should be unthinkable. Iran's politics may be unstable but its national pride is fierce. To challenge it would be disastrous, a final sign that western democrats can no longer contain the globalized moral arrogance shown by their leaders,” said British journalist Simon Jenkins.
President Obama has made the comment that they should be allowed to have nuclear power. Gasp. Why? I know that nuclear power is good, relatively safe power that can help with much needed infrastructure, but I am afraid we cannot trust the man at the helm. As for the Supreme Ruler the Ayatollah and the rest of the black robes--they can take a long walk off a short pier.
"No, I would not trust Iran with nuclear power," said International Relations Graduate Professor Ursula Tafe.
At the UN Race Conference last year, diplomats from 33 countries got out of their seats and walked right out of the door during an Ahmadinejad racist speech. It was humorous, but sad because he really believes the untruths that he says.
“This shows the truth. Ahmadinejad takes to the podium at the Geneva conference on racism and as soon as he starts attacking Israel and the Jews, half the place walks out. (And neither the Americans nor the Israelis were even there),” said MJ Rosenberg in an article “Beautiful Moment: Delegates Jeer and Walk Out as Iranian President Spews Hate.” Rosenberg said, “I wish this type of reaction was inflicted on every racist demagogue in the world. But this is nice in and of itself."
He logically continues, “But if a democratic change can happen anywhere, it can happen in Iran, since it happened before with hope from the Shah. The Iranians have seen it in their lifetimes. If we are looking at it from the best interest of Americans, we would work to undermine the Ahmadinejad’s government, help see to it that a leader emerges who is friendly to the West, and treats their own citizens as human beings. Then we can invest in Iraq’s economy and again have access to their oil. But diplomacy with Iran is a pipe dream,” said Rosenberg.
I know this is a controversial subject and there is so much evidence out there. Though many have proved that diplomacy with Iran isn’t working, are Americans ready to step up and make a commitment to intervene? What we are left with is no other equitable, available plan of action. We have no other choice-- but to invade Iran.
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Prayers for Virginia Tech
My goodness Virginia Tech, you have been through so much. Today was not a repeat of the 2007 massacre, but instead a notable disaster that continues to remind me what a difficult job policemen have. Today, December 8, 2011 a Virginia Tech policeman pulled over a man. Instead of getting his registration and license, he was shot to death. Then the man got out of car started running, shot another, and then himself. Why?
This spurred much conversation about gun control and self control at Cathay Pacific. Most murders in the U.S. are done with illegal weapons. And we all agreed that guns don't kill people, people kill people. Before guns, it was with swords and knives.
But what about accountability and self control. We can't blame this on stress for final exams, which it looks like Virginia Tech canceled. What about family values? It seems so premeditated to me. Like who just on a whim buys a gun, takes it with them loaded, and then jumps at the first impulse to unload? Can we blame it on a shitty upbringing where kids are not taught to respect the value of human life? I think that really is a part of it.
I don't think stricter gun laws need to be put in place, but with a background check, do they do a psychological assessment? I am a veteran and I do not own a gun and as a child who came from a hunting family, my brother and I were never allowed to have any type of toy gun--no nerf or swirt gun--because guns are not toys. I personally think we should ban some of the gore video games like Grand Theft Auto or the many shoot 'em and kill 'em games. Killing someone is not a game and it is not funny when the blood splirts everywhere.
I think the Virginia Tech did a good job reacting to the situation. The alarms were sounded and the campus when on lockdown. Students were encouraged to stay inside and wait out the situation. Email messages went out immediately to inform students that this was not a drill, but the real deal.
What makes someone snap like that? Should be looking at our friends, neighbors, and classmates more stringently? I know these attacks are rare, but can we find a way to prevent them altogether? I think it would over the top to do background checks on potential students, but we may get to a point when we have to.
If someone is applying to go to school and has priors like armed robbery, maybe that person shouldn't be admitted. A school is not that different than a business. New laws and procedures are put in place, only after a disaster happens. I suppose we will just have to see what the future entails. So sorry Virginia Tech. You have been through enough. You are a good school and people should not be afraid to enroll in your classes.
This spurred much conversation about gun control and self control at Cathay Pacific. Most murders in the U.S. are done with illegal weapons. And we all agreed that guns don't kill people, people kill people. Before guns, it was with swords and knives.
But what about accountability and self control. We can't blame this on stress for final exams, which it looks like Virginia Tech canceled. What about family values? It seems so premeditated to me. Like who just on a whim buys a gun, takes it with them loaded, and then jumps at the first impulse to unload? Can we blame it on a shitty upbringing where kids are not taught to respect the value of human life? I think that really is a part of it.
I don't think stricter gun laws need to be put in place, but with a background check, do they do a psychological assessment? I am a veteran and I do not own a gun and as a child who came from a hunting family, my brother and I were never allowed to have any type of toy gun--no nerf or swirt gun--because guns are not toys. I personally think we should ban some of the gore video games like Grand Theft Auto or the many shoot 'em and kill 'em games. Killing someone is not a game and it is not funny when the blood splirts everywhere.
I think the Virginia Tech did a good job reacting to the situation. The alarms were sounded and the campus when on lockdown. Students were encouraged to stay inside and wait out the situation. Email messages went out immediately to inform students that this was not a drill, but the real deal.
What makes someone snap like that? Should be looking at our friends, neighbors, and classmates more stringently? I know these attacks are rare, but can we find a way to prevent them altogether? I think it would over the top to do background checks on potential students, but we may get to a point when we have to.
If someone is applying to go to school and has priors like armed robbery, maybe that person shouldn't be admitted. A school is not that different than a business. New laws and procedures are put in place, only after a disaster happens. I suppose we will just have to see what the future entails. So sorry Virginia Tech. You have been through enough. You are a good school and people should not be afraid to enroll in your classes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)