Ruh Row, Korean Conflict Brewing (3 Viewers)

[JBF]

Why are you so opposed to a scoiety where everybody can believe what they want independent of government, which is run for the good of all and not just a specific religious group?

Is an integrated, multiculutral society so abhorrent to your world view?

Im not Dan, All im opposed to are the assumptions some made here that an Islamic system in a country or any religious one for that matter is doomed for failure. While Im sure and many examples around us points for certain that secular governments do succeed on multiple occasions.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Im not Dan, All im opposed to are the assumptions some made here that an Islamic system in a country or any religious one for that matter is doomed for failure. While Im sure and many examples around us points for certain that secular governments do succeed on multiple occasions.

Middle Ages, Spanish Inquisition, the witch hunts, et cetera...


All through secular governments.

 

[IrishZebra]

Im not Dan, All im opposed to are the assumptions some made here that an Islamic system in a country or any religious one for that matter is doomed for failure. While Im sure and many examples around us points for certain that secular governments do succeed on multiple occasions.

What I'm talking about is a secular liberal democracy, not like the Shahs' Iran or Saudi Arabia, those were/are dictatorships.

I'm sure you can understand how a country run primarily at the behest of a certain religion makes me fearful for my rights to express myself and choose my own belief system and live my life according to it. Ireland is very religious at it has led to many,many problems, but fundementally an religious state will always fail purely because it is elitist, it favours one set of beliefs over another.

Middle Ages, Spanish Inquisition, the witch hunts, et cetera...


All through secular governments.

A governmant that isn't ruled by a preist/rabbi etc isn't automatically a secular society, oh wait you're being Burkish

 

[Azzurri7]

GRAHAM, SAVE WANG CHUNG AND SINGJUVESING!

 

[X Æ A-12]

And yea, all religious people would start a nuclear holocaust when given the opportunity, if it wasn't for the reasonable atheists we wouldn't have got past the 20th century

And you can come up with the reason why any country for that matter deployed/is deploying Nuclear weapons?

Now you could have said that yesterday, the fact that you don't want Iran to have Nuclear weapons because you know that israel wont accept it thus making their move and costing a new war in the middle east, is understandable yet asking Iran to back down from their Nuclear project for that reason is ridiculous to say the least.

And Calm the fuck down, Kyle.

Actually wanting to prevent nuclear or any other kind of war, at least IMO, is a perfectly legitimate reason. Not that I need a specific reason to not want nuclear weapons in the hands of a religious dictatorship.

I am completely calm, don't get your panties in a knot.

Nobody ever got on a bus full of innocent people and blew themselves to shit in the name of a tolerant secular society.

+rep

 

[Ahmed]

Kylie, you're naive and misinformed, please give it up.

@ Vinman

I specifically remember your Dept. Sec of State threatened to 'bomb us back to the Stone Age' if we (Pakistan) did not go along with your war on terror, so please check who you have and have not threatened in the past.

 

[Quetzalcoatl]

Yeah, it's kinda hypocritical inside of here.

 

[Fred]

unless their attacked first, they wont use them (you really think they would attack any neighboring counties ?? They would be signing their death warrants as well by nuclear fallout

Well the same can be said of Iran. They are smarter than to nuke a country unless they were attacked first.

An arab discussing Israel is going to call a neutral party biased?

I already said last page that Israel shouldn't have nuclear weapons either but its already to late for that anyway. The fact that the Israeli's have nukes is not at all a good reason to let the Iranians have them.

No country ruled by a religious dictatorship should have such weapons, whether they be Christians, Jews, or Muslims.



No I don't agree at all.

There is absolutely no way you can claim to know the reason the Iranian government is developing nuclear weapons, I don't claim to and that is what is frightening about it.

I am completely against Israel having nuclear weapons as well but of course I'm happy my own country has them if other countries do. The US is not going to be nuking anybody anytime soon because many people here view the use of nuclear weapons on Japan as absolutely shameful. Even though the use in WWII saved millions of lives that would have been lost on both sides had the United States instead done a land invasion of Japan. The projected loss of life would have been over 5 million who once again mostly would have been Japanese soldiers or citizens.



As I said before, I don't think the Iranian government is going to attack anybody, but their development of nuclear arms could spark a war with Israel which my country will somehow drag itself into. I would like to avoid this at all costs.

I completely disagree with this bit, who does the US need to Nuke?

I really think you are way more paranoid about the US using nuclear weapons than you should be. Jessica Alba will show up naked at my doorstep before the US nukes anybody again.

.

I think you are more paranoid about Iran using nuclear weapons. I base my opinion on facts, you base it on pure speculation about a country you probably just recently found out was in Asia.


This is what I say:


Why is it ok for Israel and the US to have nuclear weapons but its not ok for Iran to have them?

Why do some people consider Iran to be more likely to use their weapons, when Israel has a history of using banned substances and banned weapons and its government is responsible for the death and deportation of hundreds of innocent civilians per year?

Why do people consider Iran to be more likely to use nuclear force than the US who has already demonstrated its ability to use nuclear weapons?

Why do people consider Iran to be a bigger threat to the middle eastern region when its the US that funds dictators like Mubarak so they can stay in power, and its the US that has invaded countries like Afghanistan and Iraq on false pretenses and its the US that is only second to Israel in terms of who kills more innocent civilians every year?



This is what you say:


Its ok for the US to have nuclear weapons because other countries have them too. The fact that other countries have nuclear weapons however is not a good enough reason for Iran to have nuclear weapons(double standards??)

There is a bigger chance that Iran will use its nuclear weapons than the US. (Reasons for this have not been fully explained yet)

 

[Ahmed]

Why? because Uncle Sam loves us all and will always protect us...except when you're brown and have a funny name.

 

[Dragon]

Why? because Uncle Sam loves us all and will always protect us...except when you're brown and have a funny name.

The US will invade countries and support dictatorships if it benefits them. See Iraq, they invaded the country and removed Saddam H for the oil. If they had invaded Iraq to give Iraqis freedom why don't they do that with Cuba? Myanmar?

 

[Fred]

The US will invade countries and support dictatorships if it benefits them. See Iraq, they invaded the country and removed Saddam H for the oil. If they had invaded Iraq to give Iraqis freedom why don't they do that with Cuba? Myanmar?

 

[Bjerknes]

We should invade Venezuela and obliterate everything.

 

[Bjerknes]

Why? because Uncle Sam loves us all and will always protect us...except when you're brown and have a funny name.

Well, we all know Muhammed loves us all and will always protect us... except when you're an American, then he just wants his followers to blow their brains out.

Two can play that game.

I suggest not doing it.

 

[Dragon]

We should invade Venezuela and obliterate everything.

You are more than welcome.

In fact join the army and when it happens you can stay at my house.

 

[Ahmed]

Well, we all know Muhammed loves us all and will always protect us... except when you're an American, then he just wants his followers to blow their brains out.

Two can play that game.

I suggest not doing it.

if it was that way you would've been facing an army of a billion, not a thousand.

 

[Dragon]

if it was that way you would've been facing an army of a billion, not a thousand.

I see his point and I see yours. Radical Islam should be erradicated IMO. Same with radical Jews and radical christianism but I haven't known of recent terrorism acts made by radical christians/catholics someone please correct me if I'm wrong

 

[Quetzalcoatl]

There isn't a group that is specifically radical though, just radical people that are Islam/ Christian/ Jewish. So you can't really wipe out radicalism.

 

[Ahmed]

I see his point and I see yours. Radical Islam should be erradicated IMO. Same with radical Jews and radical christianism but I haven't known of recent terrorism acts made by radical christians/catholics someone please correct me if I'm wrong

believe me, no-one knows that better than us Muslims...their behavior and rhetoric hurts us more than anybody else, symbolically and practically.

 

[Dragon]

believe me, no-one knows that better than us Muslims...their behavior and rhetoric hurts us more than anybody else, symbolically and practically.

 

[Bjerknes]

if it was that way you would've been facing an army of a billion, not a thousand.

Same can be said about the US. Just remember that not everybody here is for the invasion of Iraq and Iran. Hell, some of the soldiers aren't for it either.

Only the criminal leaders really are.