ShortNews
+ + + 3 BRANDNEW NewsTickers for your Website! + + + easy configurable in less than 1 Minute + + + GET'EM NOW! + + +

   Home | Join | Submit News | MyShortNews | HighScores | FAQ'S | Forums 0 Users Online   
   
                 01/19/2018 06:37 PM  
  ShortNews Search
search all Channels
RSS feeds
  ShortNews User Poll
Are you excited about the holiday season?
  Latest Events
  4.038 Visits   10 Assessments  Show users who Rated this:
Quality:Very Good
Back to Overview  
09/21/2007 11:15 PM ID: 65099 Permalink   

Ahmadinejad Tells CBS They Don't Represent 300 Million Americans

 

In an interview a CBS reporter attacked President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad calling Iran a sponsor of terrorism. The reporter also claimed that if Ahmadinejad visited ground zero it would be an insult to all Americans.

Later during the interview Ahmadinejad was asked if he still planned on visiting ground zero. His response was "Well, it was included in my program. If we have the time and the conditions are conducive, I will try to do that."

After CBS continually called his visit insulting to Americans the President had had enough. He scolded the reporter saying, "You are representing a media and you're a reporter. The American nation is made up of 300 million people."

 
  Source: rawstory.com  
    WebReporter: Tetsuru Uzuki Show Calling Card      
  Recommendation:  
ASSESS this news: BLOCK this news. Reason:
   
  57 Comments
  
  Sadly..  
 
... For once I agree with something the Iranian president says. :/
 
  by: chimmy420   09/21/2007 11:54 PM     
  Hmmm  
 
I am not sure of the comments to follow, but WTF? I would have to agree that CBS does not speak for me so the Iranian president does have a point there. How did this guy get into the US or is going to get into the US if we are polishing our cannons in anticipation of a war with him? Fine summary, by the way.
 
  by: John E Angel     09/21/2007 11:58 PM     
  Well...  
 
It'd be hard for us to really say / do anything to him with no evidence to back up all our claims. On the other hand, it wouldn't be the first time.
 
  by: erasedgod   09/22/2007 12:06 AM     
  Also  
 
The Iranian President isnt the commander in chief of Iran. The Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is in charge of the military and trumps the President with Veto power.
 
  by: Tetsuru Uzuki     09/22/2007 12:32 AM     
  I don't think...  
 
.. the CBS reporter was being unfair. It was a spot for 60 minutes, wasn't it? They ask you pretty direct and frequently uncomfortable questions on that show. I'll catch it when it airs to hear the tone the reporter presented his questions with, but aside from that the quoted questions were valid.

President Ahmadinejad didn't have anything to do with 9/11, but he is from a country that, as the reporter correctly points out, has terrorist ties. Whether you swallow the Admin's current PNAC case about how evil Iran is or the talk about invading/bombing them is irrelevant. Iran supports certain groups that were considered "terrorist" well before 9/11 or Bush and they continue to do so.

Not that I personally care what Iran does or doesn't support offically or unoffically, but the incongruity of him holding a press conference/speech from ground zero would, as the reporter also points out, probably anger a bunch of people.

I wouldn't be one of them though -- he might not be a citizen here but I feel that the 1st Amendment should apply to anyone on our soil, and that includes Whacky Ahmy.
 
  by: Dedolito     09/22/2007 12:46 AM     
  well  
 
if anyone listend to what i guess is one of the higher ups at columbia university. the reason he gets to make a speech there is well.. while he has the chance. for i dunno before a war or while he is still alive.
 
  by: DRK   09/22/2007 12:54 AM     
  Saudi Arabia has far more ties...  
 
to terrorism than any other country on the middle east.
Saudi Arabia:

- Osama Bin Laden Birthplace
http://en.wikipedia.org/...

- 15 out of 19 9/11 hijackers were Saud's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/...

- In 1996, Bin Laden issued his first fatwa which called for "American soldiers to get out of Saudi Arabia".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/...

- Saudi Military cooperating with Al Qaeda.
http://www.cnn.com/...

- Saud's more likely to respond to Al Qaeda's call.
http://www.cnn.com/...


Questionable Deniability:
- Bush fails to Reveal Saudi 9/11 Info
http://www.cbsnews.com/...

But it doesn't really matter, terrorism will exist as long as there's funding. At this time, whether you like to admit it or not, the current price of terrorism financing comes to $3/gall at the pump.

nozzles up middle east, toast to multimillion dollar terrorism!

War on Iraq = operation cut our the middle east.

 
  by: ukcn001xyz   09/22/2007 01:40 AM     
  oops  
 
*War on Iraq = operation cut out the middle east.

or more shortly
Operation: no more middle (east)man.
 
  by: ukcn001xyz   09/22/2007 01:43 AM     
  Agreed  
 
CBS doesn't speak for America as a whole as no one media outlet. We have no proof that Iran had anything to do with 9/11 whatever else their terrorist ties might be. If the man wants to visit Ground Zero then let him. If he wants to visit the museum of tow trucks so be that also (yes there really is one.)

Whoever interviewed him I hope realises that we too have sponsored terrorists in the past, hell trained many a "rebel fighter." We do not have clean hands either.
 
  by: TaraB     09/22/2007 02:45 AM     
  Not about nukes nor terrorism  
 
UN Votes to Urge a Nuke-Free Mideast, Israel and West Condemn Action

http://www.reuters.com/...

This is far more important than the useless moveon vote.
 
  by: Kaleid   09/22/2007 03:23 AM     
  On-Topic and Off-Topic  
 
On topic, I also have to agree with Ahmadinejad that the reporter does not speak for America. Now, I'm not saying that I side with Ahmadinejad either, but I believe that reporters have become so opinionated to that it's not even news anymore...it's some talking head sitting there speaking his mind.

Off topic, and @Dedolito, like ukcn001xyz, Saudi Arabia has more ties to terrorism than Iran, Iraq and probably Afghanistan combined. Furthermore, Pakistan is currently harboring most of the Taleban and is most likely where Osama bin Laden is, yet we're sending $80 million a month to their military dictator.
 
  by: elderban99     09/22/2007 04:06 AM     
  american media  
 
all the american media I see is either straight out propoganda or 'entertainment news'. I know when we were getting lots of coverage from america it was laughable the way the reporters conduct interviews, it is obvious they are trying to effecgt the subconsious memory by repition of key words and phrases, posed as facts even if the interviewee is disputing it and presenting facts countering their statement the reporter just keeps making the same statement even though it has been completely answered
 
  by: veya_victaous     09/22/2007 04:28 AM     
  the truth is  
 
that the country with the most ties to the groups we claim attacked the world trade center (al-qaeda and the taliban) is the united states. we damn near created them and are currently doing more to strengthen them than any other country. not only that, but if you want to bar someone from visiting ground zero because of ties to terrorists, how about george bush? he has ties to the actual bin laden family! this isn't journalism, it's a hit piece. if cbs or any corporate media source had the balls to say the same to our own officials, then perhaps they'd be justified in posing the same questions to ahmadinejad.
 
  by: ManilaRyce     09/22/2007 05:26 AM     
  Paid Respects to the Terrorists?  
 
I've not yet heard this spin on things, but I'm thinking maybe deep down inside he wants to visit ground zero so that he can pay his respects to the terrorists who died in the name of Allah. I dunno, and only he really does, but that to me makes a lot more sense than his claim to pay his respects for the Americans who died there given his open loathing of most things American to begin with. What do you think? This is my very first post here too BTW...
 
  by: tulsalen   09/22/2007 06:32 AM     
  Tulsalen  
 
Welcome aboard.

"...but that to me makes a lot more sense than his claim to pay his respects for the Americans who died there given his open loathing of most things American to begin with."

Have you got a specific incident you're talking about?
 
  by: erasedgod   09/22/2007 08:11 AM     
  @tulsalen  
 
yes, welcome. as i've posted before, iran was enemies with the taliban and al-qaeda long before we decided we were. ahmandinejad has no more reason to pay respects to the terrorists than you or i do. it is also a misconception to think that he hates all things american. what he hates is american imperialism, and has expressed on several occassions that he thinks the american people are good people. you might find it interesting to know that on sept 11th, 60,000 iranians held a minute of silence in tehran's football stadium, and that the iran aided the US in driving out the taliban in afghanistan and establishing a new government.
 
  by: ManilaRyce     09/22/2007 08:19 AM     
  actually  
 
it sounds like ahmadinejad thinks more of the american people than cbs does. not only does he tell pelley that americans don't believe everything in the media, but that he ought to do a better job as a journalist. ouch. what does that say about our media when a supposed terrorist has more respect for us than our own media?

"Well, I'm amazed. How can you speak for the whole of the American nation?" Ahmadinejad says. "You are representing a media and you're a reporter. The American nation is made up of 300 million people. There are different points of view over there."
 
  by: ManilaRyce     09/22/2007 11:52 AM     
  I Agree that the press does not speak for me  
 
So I'll offer my own thoughts to this terrorist "president".

"I hope someone puts a cluster bomb up your butt. And the sooner the better."

Just one American's opinion.

 
  by: White Albino   09/22/2007 12:04 PM     
  @White Troll  
 
an intelligent statement as always
 
  by: ManilaRyce     09/22/2007 12:14 PM     
  contras  
 
no wonder they don't mention the US backed contra 'terrorist' in nicaragua. Funded by the cia illegally selling arms to iran.

You also never hear much anymore about israel and iran working together to bomb an iraq nuclear plant before the iran-iraq war.

It's all a d**k waving contest
 
  by: pornohippy   09/22/2007 01:17 PM     
  @PornoHippy  
 
Remember Osirak?
I think that was in Iraq. Israelis bombed a nuclear reactor into junk before it could be completed and activated.

They DO NOT like competition.
 
  by: White Albino   09/22/2007 08:31 PM     
  Correction  
 
I may have my facts wrong in my previous message.
I think the Israelis believed it was to be used as a breeder reactor. They weren't about to allow such a device in their back yard. Twelve fighter-bombers, each carrying two 2,000 pound bombs.
Nice rubble. The Iraqis thought it was a new hotel and immediately moved in.
 
  by: White Albino   09/22/2007 08:39 PM     
  I agree with him  
 
I agree with him. CBS does not speak for me. I also think that if any foreign diplomat asks to visit the site of a tragedy to pay his/her respects, they should be allowed and encouraged to do so. Even if he was just paying respects to the terrorists, which I doubt, it makes -us- look like huge a--holes by saying "no, because we don't like you."

This guy and Israel is a whole different affair. The US should not be involved in supporting any country in warfare except itself. In other words, until the military of Iran (which the US has also a--holicly branded terrorists) begins an offensive against us, we don't get involved. Isolationism worked for us in the past and still does. There is no reason for us to be supporting Israel right now. The only way for there to be peace in the mideast is for the countries to get along. If they can't get along with Israel there, then Israel goes away. It's that simple. Unless we destroy every single other country who does not like Israel that surrounds it, there will always be violence over there and if the US policy stays the same we will keep stupidly being involved in it.

That's why I want Ron Paul to win. Too bad the president has no real authority anymore, though.
 
  by: tsume   09/23/2007 03:50 AM     
  @tsume  
 
Amen to that....

I agree. Democracy needs not be dictated by the barrel of a gun.

If we demonstrate democracy properly and keeping the moral high ground, others in the world will feel, in great numbers, that they want what we have. It is then they will follow us.

All we need do give them a positive steady example to follow. Not constantly shifting alliances, ally one day enemy the next.

Freedom isn't free, but it certainly shouldn't need to be subsidized by American lives. Freedom demonstrated right, is a world changing force by itself.
 
  by: ukcn001xyz   09/23/2007 05:12 AM     
  .....  
 
basically him coming here hes telling and showing the Iranian people that America has no balls and he can do what he wants and can get away with it.

theres a book out that should be read by all members of shortnews but im sure 99% of you wont its called THE IRANIAN TIME BOMB. says alot.

Pretending we can negotiate with people who want to destroy the West only empowers them.

there was a recent poll in iran and it was done by the government there and it had said that something like 75-85% of the ppl did not support the Iranian goverment. the guy who did the polling published the results (not knowing he shouldnt have ) and was never heard from or seen again.

most of the leadership in iran is filled with criminals that have indictments for murder and other serious crimes in other countries.

places like columbia college just love the man and cannot get enough of him and want him to come speak. i think its wrong for him to come to ground zero and do anything just because of his stance on everything and hearing that most of the terrorism and killing of our troops seems to be funded and coming from iran, i find it ironic the guy would want to come to ground zero to pay his "respects".

i think a regime change is needed in iran honestly but it should not be done militarly. the us goverment has sat here for the last 30 years and did nothing to exam the problem. there are a few past presidents that are more at fault then others (ie carter, especially clinton ) others have done their bit, more than accommodating Islamic radicals whom they wishfully insist on terming "moderates."

but on another note
as far left as cbs is it really surprises me about them saying this.
 
  by: cray0la     09/23/2007 07:24 AM     
  @cray0la  
 
I'll be honest with you. I had a good chuckle throughout your entire post. However this line sent me into hysterical laughter:

"as far left as cbs is it really surprises me about them saying this."

I may never recover. I think you just made my day (despite Chuck Liddell losing in a decision).
 
  by: erasedgod   09/23/2007 07:38 AM     
  @erasedgod  
 
well if iran,iraq,our troops getting killed and iran just being able to do whatever they want. basically everything i said in my post is a big joke to you, you need to grow up and get into the real world otherwise you can move to iran and be the 25% or 15% that actaully agrees with the goverenment there.
 
  by: cray0la     09/23/2007 08:07 AM     
  War is on the way... Compliments of Ahmadinejad  
 
On a more serious, and grimmer, note...

Here's something many of you Iranian supporters don't acknowledge or care to know. And it's definitely not something anyone has cared to report on.

Iran has 600 missles pointed at Israel.
Remember that threat to "wipe Israel off the map"? Seems like he's itching to fulfill that promise.

As some of you may remember, Israel performed 2 surgical strikes in Syria. It has been reported that these strikes were against a nuclear facility and/or materials.

Syria has yet to show footage or pictures of where the Israelis attacked. Why not?
Answer: How could they without confirming what US, French, and Israeli intelligence has already unearthed.

Now, Ahmadinejad is coming to the support of Syria.
Funny. Two countries with questionable nuclear ambitions are now circling their wagons and collaborating.

Watch this news clip. If a war with Iran begins... Iran will be the one to declare it.

http://www.youtube.com/...
 
  by: CArnold     09/23/2007 11:22 AM     
  LOL, yeah sure carnold  
 
As we all know Iran wishes to be permanently occupied for it's oil like Iraq. Iran have self destructive wishes and they do not militarily stand a chance and they know it.

And this is not about supporting Iran, it's about wishing to stop a disastrous US and Israeli foreign policy that will kill thousands. It's not about self defence, it's about domination.

Really, you have to be blind not see that it's the western world that once again wants war.

"The truth is that Iran, like Iraq, is a third-world nation without a significant military. Nothing in history hints that she is likely to invade a neighboring country, let alone America or Israel. I am concerned, however, that a contrived Gulf of Tonkin- type incident may occur to gain popular support for an attack on Iran." Ron Paul

 
  by: Kaleid   09/23/2007 11:30 AM     
  @Kaleid  
 
I encourage you to educate yourself on topics prior to posting misinformation. You are clearly clueless of this man's intentions.

Quote below:

"His call for the destruction of Israel may have grabbed headlines abroad, but it is President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's devotion to a mystical religious figure that is arousing greater interest inside Iran.

In a keynote speech on Wednesday to senior clerics, Ahmadinejad spoke of his strong belief in the second coming of Shi'ite Muslims' "hidden" 12th Imam.

According to Shi'ite Muslim teaching, Abul-Qassem Mohammad, the 12th leader whom Shi'ites consider descended from the Prophet Mohammed, disappeared in 941 but will return at the end of time to lead an era of Islamic justice.

"Our revolution's main mission is to pave the way for the reappearance of the 12th Imam, the Mahdi," Ahmadinejad said in the speech to Friday Prayers leaders from across the country.

Ahmadinejad refers to the return of the 12th Imam, also known as the Mahdi, in almost all his major speeches since he took office in August [2005]."


As the quote indicates, the 12th Imam will not appear until the end-of-days. Armageddon. According to prophecy, there will be a huge war involving many countries in the region where millions will die. Only a few loyal followers will be "chosen" to live to see the return of the 12th Imam.

Being educated about the things you speak of is necessary to be taken seriously, Kaleid.
 
  by: CArnold     09/23/2007 11:43 AM     
  Source Quote...  
 
http://www.iranian.ws/...

There are many thousands of such sources. Ahmadinejad has not been shy about this intention, what so ever.
Just Google "Ahmadinejad 12th imam" and you'll be linked to thousands of sources.

He's not concerned about whether he wins the war, or not. Just as suicide bombers are not concerned about surviving the blast. It's what he believes will follow that motivates him -- just as the suicide bombers believe a heaven and 70 virgins await them.
 
  by: CArnold     09/23/2007 11:47 AM     
  Oh please  
 
I'm not the one brainwashed into thinking Iran is anything close to a threat.

Those end of days religious idiots are in Israel and USA as well, but that doesn't mean they actively work towards it or have the power to do so.

It's just more to scare you.
 
  by: Kaleid   09/23/2007 11:49 AM     
  Like I said  
 
previously Ahmadinejad is not even that powerful. And if they supposedly really want an end of days (or is this another Memri "translation"?) they need to have nukes. And no one has presented ANY evidence of such a program, Iran's program is far far more open than Israels for instance.

Nothing to see here. Move along.
 
  by: Kaleid   09/23/2007 11:52 AM     
  @Kaleid  
 
"Oh please. I'm not the one brainwashed into thinking Iran is anything close to a threat."

Familiar words.
Many European nations said the same of Hitler... just before reality came marching through their borders under a Nazi flag.

To each their own. I'm not twisting arms or breaking fingers to make people see what is going on; I'm simply informing.

From reading your profile, I can see that your mind, as well as your eyes, are resolutely closed.

I was intrigued by this quote in your profile. I think it applies to many of the people that post on this site:

"If you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you’re misinformed."

This quote that you promote and herald says that ignorance is inevitable and unavoidable.

I'm not sure that I agree. But, perhaps thats what makes us different.
 
  by: CArnold     09/23/2007 12:06 PM     
  Hitler?  
 
Your comparing Hitler with Ahmadinejad who as I said is not even really powerful?

Iran has no signicant military, it can't and will not try to occupy a large part of the world. They know that in a couple of days USA could pretty much wipe out their entire military. Heck, even Israel with it's FAR more superiour military (to Iran) could do that.

This is Iraq redux. Fearmongering on repeat and some didn't learn a damn thing from it.


The truth is that the world conquerers are Americans this time. PNAC, full spectrum dominance and all that crap.

Bolton wanted Iran to kick out Arms Inspectors, he tells AIPAC (audio track as well as text)
http://www.opednews.com/...

Yes, it's really about nukes - not!
 
  by: Kaleid   09/23/2007 12:18 PM     
  Interesting quote btw...  
 
I can post 50+ more if you like.

I recommend you watch some documentaries:

>War made Easy
>Weapons of Mass deception
>The oil Factor
>Why we fight
>Hijacking catastrophe: The fear and selling of the American Empire
>Independent media in time of War
 
  by: Kaleid   09/23/2007 12:22 PM     
  Haha  
 
“Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of truth and knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.”
-Albert Einstein


Most people cannot see past their favoritism, they take sides and wonder how others could logically oppose them. Because 'I'm the one who knows what's going on, I'm the one who knows the truth'…right?

Any fool can pick and choose a side to an argument, that part is easy. All that you need is a personal preference, and with any personal preference truth is completely irrelevant* (see quote 1 below). This is why most everyone believes themselves to be a ‘realist’…this is why most everyone believes themselves to be ‘logical’, this is why most everyone believes they know “the truth”…all the while “the truth” eludes them.


In summary:
We’re not nearly as smart as we would like to think that we are...no matter how ‘correct’ that we think we might be in any issue. I can't exclude myself from this because doing so would be assuming that I know the truth…but if you think that you are excluded from the above, you’ve just proved to yourself that you are dumber than you think.


*Quote 1:

“The moment we want to believe something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the arguments against it.”
-George Bernard Shaw
 
  by: QuestioningAnswers   09/23/2007 12:36 PM     
  No, we're not as smart as we think we are..  
 
well I don't even think I'm as smart as I should be.

BUT

All you need to do is read the PNAC documents, read their speeches when their not in the MSN selling a war to know what they want. You really don't have to guess what they want. You may not know for certain exactly what will happen but their own main kampfs have been written and that's what they work for.

If Ahmadinejad is the new Hitler. Then what on earth was the soviet union? Iran is drop in the ocean.

You gotta get it inside your heads that the neocons and their followers have already declared that they will wage war for decades to come. They are wars of choice, not something that is needed.

From the polls I've seen the American public for once agrees with me. Deal with it through UN, weapon inspections and use diplomacy. People would be wise not to wish for another - no, worse than Iraq.

A correct crises and the people will fall for it again though. That's why people like Ron Paul and others have warned for falseflag Gulf of Tonkin type of event. He knews perfectly well the war drummings are beating very loudly from some influencal people in USA.
 
  by: Kaleid   09/23/2007 12:50 PM     
  @Kaleid  
 
You sole reason for Iran not wishing for war is because you believe their military wouldn't stand a chance.

What I'm trying to tell you is that is irrelavent. He is not concerned about military might. He is concerned about his 12th Imam. He wants the 2nd coming. He mentioned this when he last addressed at the UN. The second coming is to follow an apocolypse.

I appreciate the suggested documentaries. I will try to find them and watch with an open mind.

Likewise, I ask you to do the same. This is a British documentary on Iran, Ahmadinejad, and the 12th Imam. It's only 9 minutes long, but condenses a lot of information in that little time.

http://www.youtube.com/...


Having watched this... what are your thoughts?
 
  by: CArnold     09/23/2007 01:03 PM     
  It's not irrelevant  
 
You don't come with a knife to a gun battle. They're not that foolish.

"Mahmoud Ahmadinejad[1] (born October 28, 1956)[2] is the 6th and current President of the Islamic Republic of Iran. He became president on 6 August 2005 after winning the 2005 presidential election by popular vote. Ahmadinejad's current term will end in August 2009, but he will be eligible to run for one more term in office in 2009 presidential elections. Before becoming president, he was the Mayor of Tehran. He is the highest directly elected official in the country, but, according to Article 113 of Constitution of Iran, he has less total power than the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of Iran and has the final word in all aspects of foreign and domestic policies.[3][4]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/...

A lot of the opinions of Ahmadinejad are TOTALLY irrevelant.

I'll watch is later..

August 11, 2002: Bush’s Advisers Advocate Attacking Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt, and Other Countries
A Newsweek article suggests that some of Bush’s advisers advocate not only attacking Iraq, but also Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea, Syria, Egypt, and Burma, shocking many. One senior British official tells the magazine: “Everyone wants to go to Baghdad. Real men want to go to Tehran.”
http://cooperativeresearch.org/...
 
  by: Kaleid   09/23/2007 01:16 PM     
  LOL  
 
This argument could last forever...and in all likelihood it will until war is finally declared, millions of people lose their lives and depleted uranium munitions again poison our atmosphere.

But how could adding my own argument to a pre-existing one ever incur the end of argument? That's like saying "let's go to war so that there will be peace". It's just nonsensical.

"The well-bred contradict other people. The wise contradict themselves."
-Oscar Wilde
 
  by: QuestioningAnswers   09/23/2007 01:45 PM     
  @Carnold  
 
I believe the terrorists failed to read the fine print when they signed on for the suicide thing.

It is not 72 virgins waiting for them when they get to Heaven.
It is one 72 year old virgin. And she is a pork eater.
 
  by: White Albino   09/23/2007 04:54 PM     
  @cray0la  
 
"well if iran,iraq,our troops getting killed and iran just being able to do whatever they want. basically everything i said in my post is a big joke to you, you need to grow up and get into the real world otherwise you can move to iran and be the 25% or 15% that actaully agrees with the goverenment there."

No, those things aren't a joke to me. Your ignorance, on the other hand is a joke.

As I've said before, Iran doesn't have the 3% refined uranium required for nuclear power, let alone the 99% refinement needed for nuclear weapons.

I fail to see how my calling you out on your ignorance means I need to grow up or move to Iran. Honestly, I'm too busy going back and forth to Iraq and watching my best friends die to do any real traveling.

In fact, your whole emotional response to my comment ignores what either of us said prior to it. I'll summarize: You tried to pass a bunch of opinion as fact, I laughed, you cried.

"and be the 25% or 15% that actaully agrees with the goverenment there."

Wait, I stopped laughing while I responded to your whining, but this started me up again. What's the approval rate for the president and congress of the US? You may want to look it up before you comment on other countries disapproval of their leaders.
 
  by: erasedgod   09/23/2007 05:49 PM     
  OH please  
 
I don't believe that Iran poses any threat or had anything more to do with 9/11 than the Queen of England did. It's all propoganda to get Americans up in arms to support another war. But then again, I knew once we invaded Iraq (which was only a matter of time to finish Daddy's dirty work) that we would try to get to Iran. Afghanistan is on the eastern border, right in the middle between Pakistan (our allies) and Turkmenistan (where you never hear anything about anyone, 14,000 armed forces http://www.nationmaster.com/... Iraq occupies a majority of the west side of Iran and water is on the north and south sides. It's strategy. Take control the surrounding areas and then invade the main target.

If the US Governement is so concerned about threats, why didn't we go after North Korea when they were bragging about having and testing nukes - basically daring us to do something. Oh I remember, we were too busy sya "no don't do that" and trying to gain a case to go to war with Iraq who had no weapons.
 
  by: NoTalentAssclown     09/23/2007 06:23 PM     
  ERASEDGOD! (deep fading echo here)  
 
By the mighty testicles of Jove! (echo again)
You have done well for yourself! (darned echo)
I now officially unerase you that you may go forth in the Universe and poop upon the knaves, the ignorant, the moneychangers, the politicians and
pretty much anybody else that deserves it.

This message has been brought to you by the makers of those Little Fuzzy White Things in the bottom of your shirt pocket.

 
  by: White Albino   09/23/2007 06:35 PM     
  @erasedgod  
 
hmm so your a member of the armed forces? why do the job is you dnt supprt the war. sounds like one of the many members of the left. "We Support the Troops but not the war!"
lol
to be completely honest with you, you keep saying your watching your friends die, well you know signing up for the military is completely voluntary. i mean you assume theres a big chance you might get killed going there. so spare me that comment. you dont sign up for the military and then not support the war or infact be surprised when we have CASUALTIES!!
about the poll numbers i stated were just backing up my statements saying that the ppl there dont really care for there leaders. there was really nothing else to it.
from what i understand the presidents numbers are up and congresses numbers is way down.
 
  by: cray0la     09/23/2007 07:14 PM     
  @ cray0la  
 
Yes, because we all know the only good way to support troops is by sending them to quigmires.
 
  by: Kaleid   09/23/2007 07:17 PM     
  Addition  
 
Tom Delay disagree with you:

"You can support the troops but not the president"

Let's add a few more from this man:
"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarifiedrules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly."
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)
 
  by: Kaleid   09/23/2007 07:21 PM     
  ...  
 
" hmm so your a member of the armed forces? why do the job is you dnt supprt the war."

I would guess it's because he loves his country enough to fight and die for it. Do you?

Any more stupid questions?
 
  by: StarShadow     09/23/2007 07:55 PM     
  @cray0la  
 
"to be completely honest with you, you keep saying your watching your friends die, well you know signing up for the military is completely voluntary."

Indeed, but when I enlisted, I bought all the hype. Saddam worked with Osama on 9/11. He has all manner of WMD's just waiting to pull the trigger. Smoking gun will be a mushroom cloud. All that shit. I can't say I'm not embarrassed by it.

I'm not surprised that we have casualties. I'm pissed that young men and women are dying for no reason. Honestly, if there were an actual threat to our country and our way of life (read: Bush), I'd gladly give my life to protect the country from it... but until that happens, each death is in vain.
 
  by: erasedgod   09/23/2007 08:17 PM     
  @starShadow  
 
not really stupid.
just a completely 100% valid question that would explain alot.
you wouldnt serve if you thought the military was wrong or the mission wasnt right in your mind.
think a little bit.

@erasedgod
thanks for the reply.
now i understand where you are coming from.
 
  by: cray0la     09/24/2007 03:34 AM     
  iranian idiot  
 
the president of iran needs a serious aditude adjustment, or maybe a reality check. The American people are still angry at him for the support that his gave to the terrorists like bin laden. To go to ground zero would probaably get him killed.
 
  by: einhrajar   09/25/2007 09:58 PM     
  You mean, like Saddam did?  
 
When did he support bin Laden?

Al Quada is sunni, Iran is largely shia..
 
  by: Kaleid   09/25/2007 10:02 PM     
  Mixed reaction to Ahmadinejad  
 
We do live in a country w/ freedom of the press. However, the press is owned and operated by people w/ big business or political affiliations. We don't ever hear the whole truth. Look around it seems like most of the rest of the world is against us. Are you to tell me that billions of people are wrong and that the 100 or so millions people in this country who agree with Bush are right? Get real. I don't know much about Ahmadinejad, I know the Holocaust happened and it was disguting and I would never agree with any denial or justification of that. However our current foreign polich is questionable at best and I think we're in the wrong.
 
  by: GoRedSox   09/28/2007 08:35 AM     
  CArnold  
 
We have missles pointed at other countries as well. We also have alliances with other countries(although the list shrinks every day). Does that mean we're itching for war? No it doesn't(we the people aren't anyway, the Pres. is another story). Read about Bush's Fundamentalist Rapture Evangelical religion. It sounds alot like Ahmadinejads beliefs. We need to stop electing idiots and find someone who will tell us the truth. We need to get back to worrying about our own country and what's best for the people, not big business. I believe the Jewish people are entitled to a state of their own, to defend themselves especially in the face of all the anti-semitism that exists. However, after watching Munich(produced by Speilberg who is Jewish), I feel for Palestinians. One scene portrays the PLO member asking, "My father killed no Jews, I sent no one to the concentration camps, why was I kicked off my land?" This is a fair question, why was part of Germany not annexed for a Jewish state? Interesting question isn't it. I think it's time for a two state solution. Remeber, the men we call our founding fathers were considered barbaric terrorists by the British, a country considered to civilized at the time of the Revolutionary war.
 
  by: GoRedSox   09/28/2007 08:49 AM     
  @GoRedSox  
 
"However, after watching Munich(produced by Speilberg who is Jewish), I feel for Palestinians. One scene portrays the PLO member asking, "My father killed no Jews, I sent no one to the concentration camps, why was I kicked off my land?"

That movie was a scripted rendition of an historical event. To use its dialogue as a deposition of the events that actually took place would be very naive.
On the flip side, nobody is saying that *all* Palestinians hate Jews. To say that is akin to saying that all American hate G.W. Bush, or all Americans love G.W. Bush. It’s a generalization that has no foundation nor truth.
 
  by: CArnold     10/01/2007 09:57 AM     
  @GoRedSox  
 
"However, after watching Munich(produced by Speilberg who is Jewish), I feel for Palestinians. One scene portrays the PLO member asking, "My father killed no Jews, I sent no one to the concentration camps, why was I kicked off my land?" This is a fair question"

It has a fair answer too, their was a civil war, well not that civil, the surrounding countries all got involved too, the Israelis won and evicted the losing palestinians, as did the Jordinians, although they were in theory at war with Israel, they didnt fight them and grabbed more than half of Palestine.
Then of course there are the palestinians who sold their land, and now want it back.
 
  by: AnsweringQuestions     10/01/2007 10:11 AM     
 
 
Copyright ©2018 ShortNews GmbH & Co. KG, Contact: info@shortnews.com