Iran: Middle East Evil Growing

[oldreliable67]

A year ago, Iranians in a move that surprised some, rejected the moderate candidate and elected the most anti-American radical on the slate.

The election process in Iran is a bit more "dictatorial" and less "democratic" than you suggest with these comments. The ruling religious council determines who can and who cannot be on the ballot. Choices presented to Iranian voters are those approved by the mullahs. The inclusion of Khatami -- a "moderate" as far as that can be said in terms of Iranian politics -- on the ballot was generally regarded as an effort to placate the women and youth voters; he was not considered a favorite to win and his election was a considerable surprise.

The Wikipedia entry for Khatami sums it up pretty well:

Khatami is regarded as Iran's first reformist president, since the focus of his campaign was on the rule of law, democracy and the inclusion of all Iranians in the political decision-making process. However, his policies of reform led to repeated clashes with the hardline and conservative Islamists in the Iranian government, who control powerful governmental organizations like the Guardian Council, whose members are appointed by the Supreme Leader. Khatami lost most of those clashes, and by the end of his presidency many of his followers had grown disillusioned with him.

The fact that Khatami was elected at all is often used to try to support the assertion that, given a choice, the Iranian people, especially the youth and women, would favor a more democratic form of government and possibly even regime change. What it really shows is the iron hand of the Supreme Leader and the Guardian Council: though elected, his efforts at reform came to naught due to the power of the mullahs.

 

[Iriemon]

Were we in in Iraq in the 70's when this peace loving nation snatched a couple Americans for a year or so?
You always seem willing to blame all problems on the US and little on those that actually are doing the crime.

And is being naive something your just acting at. You can not believe that Iran is wanting these weapons for defensive purposes. They have repeatedly expressed the desire to eliminate Israel and the US

Why were the US hostages taken? Iranians under the Shah just developed an anti-American attitude for the hell of it?

The Iranians blamed the US for installing the Shah - a brutal dictator who raped the country of its well and spend much of it on US military sales as well has his own personal fortune -- by ousting an elected government. And with good reason, that is what the CIA did. If you cannot "blame" the US for doing that, who do you blame?

 

[Calm2Chaos]

Why were the US hostages taken? Iranians under the Shah just developed an anti-American attitude for the hell of it?

The Iranians blamed the US for installing the Shah - a brutal dictator who raped the country of its well and spend much of it on US military sales as well has his own personal fortune -- by ousting an elected government. And with good reason, that is what the CIA did. If you cannot "blame" the US for doing that, who do you blame?

In November 1979, Iranian student revolutionaries widely thought to be linked to the Khomeini government occupied the American Embassy in Tehran. Iran held fifty-two Americans hostage for 444 days.
Observers say Iran had prior knowledge of Hezbollah attacks, such as the 1988 kidnapping and murder of Colonel William Higgins, a U.S. Marine involved in a U.N. observer mission in Lebanon, and the 1992 and 1994 bombings of Jewish cultural institutions in Argentina.
Iran still has a price on the head of the Indian-born British novelist Salman Rushdie for what Iranian leaders call blasphemous writings about Islam in his 1989 novel The Satanic Verses.
U.S. officials say Iran supported the group behind the 1996 truck bombing of Khobar Towers, a U.S. military residence in Saudi Arabia, which killed nineteen U.S. servicemen

I blame them for there actions and the government for supporting it. The fact is this country is dangerous and needs to be dealth with quickly. The longer you wait for useless posturing and global theatrics, the more difficult it is going to become. This country wants to wipe millions of people off the face of the earth. If we don't destroy them, they will do everything within there growing power to destroy us

 

[Iriemon]

The election process in Iran is a bit more "dictatorial" and less "democratic" than you suggest with these comments. The ruling religious council determines who can and who cannot be on the ballot. Choices presented to Iranian voters are those approved by the mullahs. The inclusion of Khatami -- a "moderate" as far as that can be said in terms of Iranian politics -- on the ballot was generally regarded as an effort to placate the women and youth voters; he was not considered a favorite to win and his election was a considerable surprise.

The Wikipedia entry for Khatami sums it up pretty well:

The fact that Khatami was elected at all is often used to try to support the assertion that, given a choice, the Iranian people, especially the youth and women, would favor a more democratic form of government and possibly even regime change. What it really shows is the iron hand of the Supreme Leader and the Guardian Council: though elected, his efforts at reform came to naught due to the power of the mullahs.

I don't doubt that Iranians were "disillusioned" by Katami in 2005. That was my point.

This argument is the one made by Bush administration defenders contending that the Bush Admin's policies have had no effect on Muslim attitudes.

But it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If the Guardian council controlled the elections as implied, a moderate reformist would never have been elected in the first place, much less for a second term.

And again, IMO the contention that US policies under Bush has had no effect on Muslim attitudes doesn't make sense either. Combine openly biased support for Israel, an invasion and indefite occupation of Muslim holy lands based upon false pretext; our president calling Iran the axis of evil; invasion and occupation of nations bordering both sides of Iran, and then argue his polcies have had no effect on the perceptions of Iranians -- just doesn't make sense, IMO.

 

[Iriemon]

In November 1979, Iranian student revolutionaries widely thought to be linked to the Khomeini government occupied the American Embassy in Tehran. Iran held fifty-two Americans hostage for 444 days.
Observers say Iran had prior knowledge of Hezbollah attacks, such as the 1988 kidnapping and murder of Colonel William Higgins, a U.S. Marine involved in a U.N. observer mission in Lebanon, and the 1992 and 1994 bombings of Jewish cultural institutions in Argentina.
Iran still has a price on the head of the Indian-born British novelist Salman Rushdie for what Iranian leaders call blasphemous writings about Islam in his 1989 novel The Satanic Verses.
U.S. officials say Iran supported the group behind the 1996 truck bombing of Khobar Towers, a U.S. military residence in Saudi Arabia, which killed nineteen U.S. servicemen

I blame them for there actions and the government for supporting it. The fact is this country is dangerous and needs to be dealth with quickly. The longer you wait for useless posturing and global theatrics, the more difficult it is going to become. This country wants to wipe millions of people off the face of the earth. If we don't destroy them, they will do everything within there growing power to destroy us

Under Kermit Roosevelt Jr.'s direction (a senior CIA agent, and grandson of the former U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt), the CIA and British intelligence funded and led a coup d'etat to overthrow the democratically elected prime minister with the help of military forces loyal to the Shah through Operation Ajax. [1] The plot hinged on orders signed by the Shah to dismiss Mossadegh as prime minister and replace him with General Fazlollah Zahedi, a choice agreed on by the British and Americans. Despite the high-level coordination and planning, the coup initially failed and the Shah fled Iran. After a brief exile in Italy, however, the Shah was brought back again, this time through a second coup which was successful. The deposed Mossadegh was arrested, given a show trial, and placed in solitary confinement for three years in military prison, followed by house arrest for life. Zahedi was installed to succeed Prime Minister Mossadegh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi.

While taking hostages is not a defendable action, the Iranians certainly had a reasonable grip with the US. The US hostages were eventually released unharmed, whereupon the US soon after supported Iraq in its attack on Iran.

 

[Calm2Chaos]

Under Kermit Roosevelt Jr.'s direction (a senior CIA agent, and grandson of the former U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt), the CIA and British intelligence funded and led a coup d'etat to overthrow the democratically elected prime minister with the help of military forces loyal to the Shah through Operation Ajax. [1] The plot hinged on orders signed by the Shah to dismiss Mossadegh as prime minister and replace him with General Fazlollah Zahedi, a choice agreed on by the British and Americans. Despite the high-level coordination and planning, the coup initially failed and the Shah fled Iran. After a brief exile in Italy, however, the Shah was brought back again, this time through a second coup which was successful. The deposed Mossadegh was arrested, given a show trial, and placed in solitary confinement for three years in military prison, followed by house arrest for life. Zahedi was installed to succeed Prime Minister Mossadegh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi.

While taking hostages is not a defendable action, the Iranians certainly had a reasonable grip with the US. The US hostages were eventually released unharmed, whereupon the US soon after supported Iraq in its attack on Iran.

You snatched people..... you get bombed.. Simplistic I know ... but true

And the other events of Iran supporting terrorism in the past ? How do we explain those away? Or are we just going to blanket blame the US for everything that Iran has done from that point?

 

[Iriemon]

You snatched people..... you get bombed.. Simplistic I know ... but true

Then given that the US snatched Iran's democratically elected leader from power and installed a brutal dictator, we should be thankful that Iran only held hostages for a while instead of bombing us.

And the other events of Iran supporting terrorism in the past ? How do we explain those away? Or are we just going to blanket blame the US for everything that Iran has done from that point?

Before the Bush admin, was there instances where the Iranians were implicated in terrorist attacks against the US? Or ties to Al-Queda? Or even since the Bush admin?

 

[Calm2Chaos]

Then given that the US snatched Iran's democratically elected leader from power and installed a brutal dictator, we should be thankful that Iran only held hostages for a while instead of bombing us.



Before the Bush admin, was there instances where the Iranians were implicated in terrorist attacks against the US? Or ties to Al-Queda? Or even since the Bush admin?

IObservers say Iran had prior knowledge of Hezbollah attacks, such as the 1988 kidnapping and murder of Colonel William Higgins, a U.S. Marine involved in a U.N. observer mission in Lebanon,
Which bush wqe talkin about ....LOL

 

[Iriemon]

IObservers say Iran had prior knowledge of Hezbollah attacks, such as the 1988 kidnapping and murder of Colonel William Higgins, a U.S. Marine involved in a U.N. observer mission in Lebanon,
Which bush wqe talkin about ....LOL

"Prior knowledge" of one kidnapping ... OK. Any other evidence of Iran's involvement with terrorist attacks on the US?

 

[oldreliable67]

the contention that US policies under Bush has had no effect on Muslim attitudes doesn't make sense either.

Just to be clear, I did not assert that the Bush admin policies had no effect on Muslim attitudes. My objection was to your characterization of "precisely", as in the singular and only cause of Iranian unhappiness with the US. Certainly, Bush admin policies have galvanized many potential terrorists in the ME into becoming active and have polarized opinions.

Before the Bush admin, was there instances where the Iranians were implicated in terrorist attacks against the US? Or ties to Al-Queda? Or even since the Bush admin?

Certainly there were instances before the Bush admin. The Iranians were implicated in a number of terrorist actions against both the US and other countries, going back to the days of airplane hijackings. Just peruse the state dept list of terrorist actions and those known or thought to be responsible.

In the larger context of this discussion of "evil in the middle east" and who might be responsible for its growth, there is an interesting piece in the nationalreviewonline by a former Romanian communist general in which he details Russian involvement with Islamic terrorists as far back as the 1960s. He says, in part:

Today’s international terrorism was conceived at the Lubyanka, the headquarters of the KGB, in the aftermath of the1967 Six-Day War in the Middle East. I witnessed its birth in my other life, as a Communist general. Israel humiliated Egypt and Syria, whose bellicose governments were being run by Soviet razvedka (Russian for “foreign intelligence”) advisers, whereupon the Kremlin decided to arm Israel’s enemy neighbors, the Palestinians, and draw them into a terrorist war against Israel.

General Aleksandr Sakharovsky, who created Communist Romania’s intelligence structure and then rose to head up all of Soviet Russia’s foreign intelligence, often lectured me: “In today’s world, when nuclear arms have made military force obsolete, terrorism should become our main weapon.”

Between 1968 and 1978, when I broke with Communism, the security forces of Romania alone sent two cargo planes full of military goodies every week to Palestinian terrorists in Lebanon. Since the fall of Communism the East German Stasi archives have revealed that, in 1983 alone, its foreign intelligence service sent $1,877,600 worth of AK-47 ammunition to Lebanon. According to Vaclav Havel, Communist Czechoslovakia shipped 1,000 tons of the odorless explosive Semtex-H (which can’t be detected by sniffer dogs) to Islamic terrorists — enough for 150 years.

The terrorist war per se came into action at the end of 1968, when the KGB transformed airplane hijacking — that weapon of choice for September 11, 2001 — into an instrument of terror. In 1969 alone there were 82 hijackings of planes worldwide, carried out by the KGB-financed PLO. In 1971, when I was visiting Sakharovsky at his Lubyanka office, he called my attention to a sea of red flags pinned onto a world map hanging on the wall. Each flag represented a captured plane. “Airplane hijacking is my own invention,” he claimed.
[...]
In 1972, the Kremlin decided to turn the whole Islamic world against Israel and the U.S. As KGB chairman Yury Andropov told me, a billion adversaries could inflict far greater damage on America than could a few millions. We needed to instill a Nazi-style hatred for the Jews throughout the Islamic world, and to turn this weapon of the emotions into a terrorist bloodbath against Israel and its main supporter, the United States. No one within the American/Zionist sphere of influence should any longer feel safe.

According to Andropov, the Islamic world was a waiting petri dish in which we could nurture a virulent strain of America-hatred, grown from the bacterium of Marxist-Leninist thought. Islamic anti-Semitism ran deep. The Muslims had a taste for nationalism, jingoism, and victimology. Their illiterate, oppressed mobs could be whipped up to a fever pitch.

Terrorism and violence against Israel and her master, American Zionism, would flow naturally from the Muslims’ religious fervor, Andropov sermonized. We had only to keep repeating our themes — that the United States and Israel were “fascist, imperial-Zionist countries” bankrolled by rich Jews. Islam was obsessed with preventing the infidels’ occupation of its territory, and it would be highly receptive to our characterization of the U.S. Congress as a rapacious Zionist body aiming to turn the world into a Jewish fiefdom.

The codename of this operation was “SIG” (Sionistskiye Gosudarstva, or “Zionist Governments”), and was within my Romanian service’s “sphere of influence,” for it embraced Libya, Lebanon, and Syria. SIG was a large party/state operation. We created joint ventures to build hospitals, houses, and roads in these countries, and there we sent thousands of doctors, engineers, technicians, professors, and even dance instructors. All had the task of portraying the United States as an arrogant and haughty Jewish fiefdom financed by Jewish money and run by Jewish politicians, whose aim was to subordinate the entire Islamic world.

He lists many of the terrorists actions that the Russians sponsored - its a long list. Though one might wonder about the veracity of a defector, this is an interesting article that provides a different view of the history of the ME terrorism and the Arab-Israeli conflict.

 

[Calm2Chaos]

"Prior knowledge" of one kidnapping ... OK. Any other evidence of Iran's involvement with terrorist attacks on the US?

You must have missed this part and murder of Colonel William Higgins, a U.S. Marine

Is that not an act of war?

How about assisting in some other skullduggery

Bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 (Strong Suspicions - NO definitive proof)
Bombing of U.S. Embassy in Beirut (Strong Suspicions - NO definitive proof)
Bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait
CIA Station Chief William Buckley kidnapped (Buckley was the fourth person to be kidnapped by militant Islamic extremists in Lebanon. The first American hostage, American University of Beirut President David Dodge, had been kidnapped in July 1982. Eventually, 30 Westerners would be kidnapped during the 10-year-long Lebanese hostage-taking crisis (1982-1992).

Hijacking of Kuwait Airways Flight 221Iran arrested the hijackers, saying they would be brought to trail. But the trial never took place, and the hijackers were allowed to leave the country.
Hijacking of TWA Flight 847
Bombing of Pan Am Flight 103(Strong Suspicions - NO definitive proof)


HZ Seems to be a common thread in alot of these actions, backed by whom do you think?

 

[Iriemon]

Just to be clear, I did not assert that the Bush admin policies had no effect on Muslim attitudes. My objection was to your characterization of "precisely", as in the singular and only cause of Iranian unhappiness with the US. Certainly, Bush admin policies have galvanized many potential terrorists in the ME into becoming active and have polarized opinions.

Fair enough. I already addressed theuse of the term precisely.

Certainly there were instances before the Bush admin. The Iranians were implicated in a number of terrorist actions against both the US and other countries, going back to the days of airplane hijackings. Just peruse the state dept list of terrorist actions and those known or thought to be responsible.

I'm not aware of terrorist attacks against the US were Iran was involved.

This site lists terrorist attacks on the US -- in attacks on the US forces in the early 80s in Lebonan, there are reports and suspicians that Iran backed the perpetrators. In 84 there was the Buckley kidnapping. Since then no reliable reports of Iranian involvement in any of the attacks on US, nothing showing a relationship with Al-Queda.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/etc/cron.html

Basically, nothing in the last 20 years indicates Iran was involved in any terrorist activity against the US.

In the larger context of this discussion of "evil in the middle east" and who might be responsible for its growth, there is an interesting piece in the nationalreviewonline by a former Romanian communist general in which he details Russian involvement with Islamic terrorists as far back as the 1960s. He says, in part:

He lists many of the terrorists actions that the Russians sponsored - its a long list. Though one might wonder about the veracity of a defector, this is an interesting article that provides a different view of the history of the ME terrorism and the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Should have known it was the Ruskies behind it! But I'm not sure how far our nation's policies have gone to dispell the propoganda over the past several years.

 

[easyt65]

"Prior knowledge" of one kidnapping ... OK. Any other evidence of Iran's involvement with terrorist attacks on the US?

How about the evidence we have which proves Iran aided the 9/11 attackers get into the U.S., housed them, fed/supplied them.....?

 

[mixedmedia]

As usual, I am in the middle on this issue. I don't see Iran as either evil or ingenuous in their effect on world and middle east politics. I do believe their society is unique in the region for its large segment of educated, forward-thinking citizens. You can not use the words of their leaders, their elections or any news coming out of Iran as a reflection of its populace as a whole. The country's politics and media are tightly controlled by the religious council of mullahs and the ayatollah. BUT, they have been in control for only a short time and have not been able to stem their citizens' fondness for knowledge and the arts - the pursuit of which are traditions deeply rooted in Persian culture.

History shows that wherever you find a people who appreciate knowledge and the arts, you find a potential and then a yearning for democracy. To dismiss Iran as another Iraq or Afghanistan that needs only to be bombed into submission would be a huge mistake. Fortunately, I think even the hawks in power in Washington right now understand this.

 

[oldreliable67]

I'm not aware of terrorist attacks against the US were Iran was involved.

This site lists terrorist attacks on the US -- in attacks on the US forces in the early 80s in Lebonan, there are reports and suspicians that Iran backed the perpetrators. In 84 there was the Buckley kidnapping. Since then no reliable reports of Iranian involvement in any of the attacks on US, nothing showing a relationship with Al-Queda.

It is well known that Iran is the primary state sponsor of Hezbollah; the MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base offers the following profile on Hezbollah:

Aliases: Islamic Jihad, Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine, Organization of the Oppressed on Earth, Party of God, Revolutionary Justice Organization, The Islamic Resistance

Base of Operation: Lebanon

Founding Philosophy: Hezbollah is an umbrella organization of various radical Islamic Shi'ite groups and organizations which receives substantial financial and philosophical support from Iran. It was founded in 1982 in response to the invasion of Lebanon by Israel that same year, and subsumed members of the 1980s coalition of groups known as Islamic Jihad. The group is led by religious clerics who promote the establishment of an Islamic state in Lebanon. After the attacks of September 11th, Hezbollah is responsible for the next largest anti-American terrorist attack. In October 1983, a truck bomb killed 241 American Marines at the multinational force barracks in Beirut. The following year, a suicide bombing at the U.S. embassy in Beirut killed 17 Americans, including many of the embassy's CIA staff. The group is also thought to be responsible for attacks against US and Jewish targets in Africa, Sweden, Denmark, Thailand, Argentina and the UK. The 1992 bombing of the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires and the 1994 bombing of a Jewish cultural centre in Buenos Aires are the most well known.

See also "Patterns of Terrorism" by the Congressional Research Service for a succinct listing of Iranian involvement in terrorism down through the years.

 

[Iriemon]

How about the evidence we have which proves Iran aided the 9/11 attackers get into the U.S., housed them, fed/supplied them.....?

Are we supposed to take your word for it?

 

[easyt65]

Are we supposed to take your word for it?

9/11 Commission Report: The commission's final report also offered new evidence of increased contact between Iran and al-Qaeda. The report contains information about how several of the 9/11 hijackers passed through Iran and indicates that officials in Iran did not place entry stamps in their passports.

...some talkative source at the 9/11 Commission told the old media (notably Time and Newsweek) that there was new evidence documenting the longstanding relationship between al Qaeda and Iran, including the fact that ten of the 9/11 terrorists had crossed Iran from Saudi Arabia the year before the attacks in this country, and the Iranians were careful not to stamp their passports, so that the Iranian connection could not be documented.

http://www.nationalreview.com/ledeen/ledeen200407190838.asp

 

[Iriemon]

9/11 Commission Report: The commission's final report also offered new evidence of increased contact between Iran and al-Qaeda. The report contains information about how several of the 9/11 hijackers passed through Iran and indicates that officials in Iran did not place entry stamps in their passports.

...some talkative source at the 9/11 Commission told the old media (notably Time and Newsweek) that there was new evidence documenting the longstanding relationship between al Qaeda and Iran, including the fact that ten of the 9/11 terrorists had crossed Iran from Saudi Arabia the year before the attacks in this country, and the Iranians were careful not to stamp their passports, so that the Iranian connection could not be documented.

http://www.nationalreview.com/ledeen/ledeen200407190838.asp

The 9-11 hijackers are reported to have travelled through Iran, as well as several other nations, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Lebanon. However,

We have found no evidence that Iran or Hezbollah was aware of the planning for what later became the 9/11 attack. At the time of their travel through Iran, the al Qaeda operatives themselves were probably not aware of the specific details of their future operation.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch7.htm

I didn't see anything that supported this:

Originally Posted by easyt65
How about the evidence we have which proves Iran aided the 9/11 attackers get into the U.S., housed them, fed/supplied them.....?

 

[Francaisforever]

Originally Posted by easyt65
Actually, our job to overthorw the tyranical and extremely dangerous regime of Saddam hussein was a complete victory....
-- What about building a democratic Iraq? Wasn't that one of the previously operative statements? What about the shining city on the hill that was to start the dominoes of democracy? You're saying we never intended to do any rebuilding of Iraq? No longer operative statements?

When did I say that was NOT one of the reasons,but it was primarily the threat of Hussein and his interaction with terrorists before we went in, which has been proven but one of those things Liberals try to forget about as well as get others to ignore.


Originally Posted by easyt65
Then the U.N. failed to do its frickin' mission (AGAIN) of nation-building, assisting the new fledgling goverment. If they would have stepped in, we could have done a quick withdrawl.
-- And if wishes were fishes ...We wouldn't turn over control over the rebuilding process, so other folks were hesitant to get involved. If we required UN help, we should have waited until they were willing to give it. We went w/o their blessing. It seems the consequences of such actions are self evident.

We should have waited until the U.N. was willing to give help?!:shock: do you mean pre-war, the 12 years during which they ran the criminal black-marketing scheme to make cash or the oil-for-food scandal crime in which perople from koff to the President of france was criminally making a buck off sponsoring/supporting hussein? Or do you mean how we are STILL waiting on the U.N. now to do anything even remotely close to what their charter dictates they should already be doing right now? dude, israel has waited 58+ years on the U.N. to do something about the terrorist group, Hezbollah, funded/supplied/armed/trained/manned by Iran, during which time they have been suiced-bombed, rocketed, dinapped, and attacked - the only support coming from the U.N. being an unrealistic request to do nothing and verbal attacks by koffi who embraces Hezbollah and refuses to call them a terrorist organization while their own members captured by Israel proudly call themselves that?!

Originally Posted by easyt65
Also, short of the leader of Iran standing on Koffi's desk and screaming profanities at him while declaring he is responsible for all the violence in Iraq right now, the rest of the overwhelming evidence we have will continue to NOT be enough to force the U.N. to grow some b@lls and actually deal with Iran!
If we are indeed playing Chess and not poker now, what is the next best move? The invasion of Iraq improved Iran's position. Folks in the Statre Dept and the CIA as well as civilians offerred warnings. I think the warning were rebutted with hand waving, IIRC. Welcome to the bed that the Pro-War party made. I hope you sleep comfy in it.

Actually no one warned that Iran would do such things as they have. No one foresaw Iraq shipping their nuclear material before we went in to Iran who would use that material to build a nuke. No one warned that the u.N. would wuss out of enforcing Resolution 1559 and that Iran would become so bold as to actually have their own soldiers fighting on the battlefield beside Hezbollah against Israel (although the whole world should have seen the U.N. wussing out and supporting terrorists coming from past history!) I would agree that our situations in Afghanistan and Iraq has given Iran the opportunity - they have taken advantage that the only country in the entire world willing to stand up to them is currently NOT in the position to do so.

The Liberals should be extremely pleased, though! Here we are, almost in the same position we were in before the Iraq war. The world is pointing at another country claiming it has or is developing WMD (except this time the country is bragging they have it). The last time we were in this situation, Kerry bragged how we should just leave it all up to the U.N. to handle, the liberals scrreamed how we should TALK. Well, here ya go - the opportunity to put your freakin' money where your mouth is has finally arrived!

Forget about Resolution 15559, the 12+ years of Hussein-Black marketing, the oil-for-food scandal, the failure of the latest Iranian-backed Israeli-Hezbollah war and the betrayal of Israel by Koffi/France/the U.N......its a new day! Here is your Liberal Opportunity to prove Kerry, Dean, Murtha, and the rest of the Kooks were right. there is no need for military intervention because the Libs are preaching that they do not believe in pre-emptive strikes in order to prevent madmen acuiring the methods to kill/nuke Americans (though Clinton proved he didnb't believe in taking any military action AFTER they killed Americans, either)! So go ahead and TALK Iran out of their current plan to acquire nukes! Trust in the U.N. and show us how wrong we were not to trust the U.N. (because their track record SO FAR proves OUR point)!

Show us the rrror of our ways and how you libs can sweet talk Iran into being nice! :rofl


Originally Posted by easyt65
The U.S. is entrenched in iraq, determined to help Iraq become a Democtratic nation...
OF so there was a little more to our stated mission that merely deposing Hussein?

1st you berated me for not including the fact that we are helping Iraqis fight Iranians and terrorists right now to remain free instead of becoming an Iranian puppet-state like Lebanon and now you give me shi' ite for saying it? :shock: So, are you Pro-Iranian or just Anti-Democracy? Or some other personal problem?

The Dems/Clintion have demanded that there is NO WAR ON TERROR, that it is all part of GOP scare tactics, EVEN in the face of the UK's foiling of the recent terror plot.....STILL they declare there is no war on terror - we are safe.
...but here we are at the libs 2nd opportunity to prove the GOP wrong. You bragged anbd boasted about the good ol' U.N., wailed against military action, and demanded that the U.N., negotiations, and TALK could solve our problems...

GO FOR IT!

......."israel has waited 58+ years on the U.N. to do something about the terrorist group, Hezbollah, funded/supplied/armed/trained/manned by Iran, during which time they have been suiced-bombed, rocketed, dinapped, and attacked -"............

For your information, Hezbollah was declared in 1985. Which doesn't make 58+ years.

............."No one foresaw Iraq shipping their nuclear material before we went in to Iran who would use that material to build a nuke."...........

This is purely speculation from your part. can you provide a link from a reputable and non partisan source? For your information the Iranian nuclear program was restarted in 1985.
From "Issues in Science and Technology" spring 2006.......The IAEA is still trying to uncover what exactly Iran did and when. So far, it seem certain that Iran restarted its program in 1985, contacting the A. Q. Khan network and beginning negotiations for the covert import of the equipment and technical assistance necessary to enrich uranium. It is unlikely that Iranian officials were primarily concerned with the production of electricity at this point. ............
also something pretty ironic. from the same review..........Many of the same officials involved in stopping the program today were involved in promoting it then. During the 1970s, the Shah developed plans to build 22 nuclear power reactors with an electrical output of 23 gigawatts. This effort was supported by Donald Rumsfeld (then secretary of defense), Dick Cheney (then White House chief of staff), and Paul Wolfowitz (at the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency). These nuclear activities were halted when a popular revolution overthrew the Shah in 1979 and installed an Islamic regime led by Ayatollah Ruholla Khomeini. The new revolutionary government inherited two partially completed West German–built nuclear power reactors at Bushehr, but Khomeini froze construction of these reactors and all other work on “Western” nuclear technologies and forced many Western-educated scientists and engineers to flee the country.



......."Here we are, almost in the same position we were in before the Iraq war. The world is pointing at another country claiming it has or is developing WMD (except this time the country is bragging they have it). ".............

First of all Iran was part of WB's "axis of evil". Iran was the financiers of Hezbollah, an organisation on the terrorist list of the USA for a long time. Iran had a nuclear program far more advanced that the one from Iraq. And yet the Neocons administration decided long time before Sept 11 2001 to attack Iraq. WHY? Instead of blaming the UN and France why don't you blame the bush administration for the situation present? Of course taking no responsability for your own action is the favorite game of many Americans.

.........."No one warned that the u.N. would wuss out of enforcing Resolution 1559 and that Iran would become so bold as to actually have their own soldiers fighting on the battlefield beside Hezbollah against Israel (although the whole world should have seen the U.N. wussing out and supporting terrorists coming from past history!)".........

After 2 weeks of conflict, Israel had 30000 troops at the border and never went to a full scale attack leaving them there. But yet, I haven't seen anything regarding the "wussing out" of the IDF in your post, why? It seems that Israel was attacked, not the UN.

 

[easyt65]

I'll answr your post better/in greater detail when I have more time...but for now, the 58 years Israel has been attacked which i referred to has not been all from Hezbollah. Israel has been attacked for 58+ years by Islamic Extremists and terrorists like the PLO, PLA, HAMAS, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran. Most of those terrorist organizations have been funded, armed, trained, and/or manned by Iran for years!

Meanwhile, after each attack, the U.N. demands Israel demonstrate an unreasonable amount of restraint. Heck, koffi even condemned the vicitm in this last conflict, blasting israel for defending itself and reacting against Hezbollah who had committed an act of war - he went as far as to go out of his way to keep from calling Hezbollah exactly what everyone else in the world knows they are - a TERRORIST Organization. While captured hezbollah fighters talked about being trained in Iran, how the kidnapping plot was developed in Iran, etc...Koffi sounded like a complete idiot by declaring simultaneously that there was no proof Iran was involved! :roll:

 

[easyt65]

Snare and Delusion: Negotiations Won't Stop Iran

Snare and delusion: House intelligence report makes clear diplomacy won't end Iranian threat
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/index.jsp?section=papers&code=06-F_22
Iran's much-ballyhooed proposal yesterday to enter into "serious negotiations" with the United States and Europe on an array of issues - including its so-called "nuclear program" - is being seized upon by some as a evidence that the Islamic Republic of Iran is actually prepared to abandon the ambitions and behavior that endanger American and international security interests.

In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. As a brilliantly timed, bipartisan report released today by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) makes plain: "Iran poses a serious threat to U.S. national security and to the security of our friends and allies."

In 29-pages of hard-hitting, unclassified findings and analysis, the Intelligence Committee's report makes clear not only the true character of the Iranian regime - notably, its determination to spread the Shiite version of Islamofascism by various deadly means. It also documents ways in which that purpose is being systematically and steadily advanced. These include:

• The Iranian regime is fixated on developing nuclear weapons and maintains a highly developed infrastructure of laboratories and industrial facilities to support this objective.
• The Iranian regime is acting to retain and modernize key elements of its offensive chemical weapons research and development capability and dispersed mobilization facilities, and probably has an offensive biological weapons program.
• The Iranian regime has the largest inventory of ballistic missiles in the Middle East, and is developing missiles with a range of up to 4,000 km that will be capable of striking Germany, Italy and Moscow.
• The Iranian regime provides funding, training, weapons, rockets and other material to numerous terrorist groups.
• The Iranian regime is actively supporting the insurgency in Iraq that daily takes the lives of U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians.

Taken together, the factual information and conclusions of the HPSCI report make one point abundantly clear: The Iranian mullahocracy will be happy to pursue a delaying strategy to prevent the West from interfering with its nuclear weapons program and other threatening activities. But it will neither be deterred nor appeased into foreswearing such ominous policies and activities.


Here's an analogy for ya - 'The Liberal and the Bear':

A rogue bear has been plaguing the country-side, having killed and eaten several people. The bear has moved into the area and has reportedly shown no signs of moving out any time soon. All the surrounding neighbors are frightened and in danger. So, seeking a solution to the danger, a hunter goes out with his gun to look for the bear.

After a while of searching, the hunter walks out into a clearing and sees the huge, powerful grizzly standing there waiting for him. The hunter quickly shoulders his rifle and takes aim at the grizzly. To the hunter's surprise, the Grizzly SPEAKS to him.

"Stop - hold on a minute. Don't shoot," the bear says.

The hunter lowers the barrel and stares puzzlingly at the bear.

The bear continues: "There is no need for violence here. You and I are both intelligent beings. Surely we can work this out. I am very hungry and want a meal, and you are just interested in getting a fur coat. Instead of violence, let's try diplomacy! Put your weapon aside, lets sit down, and we'll negotiate."

So the hunter put down his gun, and he and the bear sat down to negotiate.

In the end, in a way, the hunter got his fur coat when the bear got his meal!

 

[Francaisforever]

I'll answr your post better/in greater detail when I have more time...but for now, the 58 years Israel has been attacked which i referred to has not been all from Hezbollah. Israel has been attacked for 58+ years by Islamic Extremists and terrorists like the PLO, PLA, HAMAS, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran. Most of those terrorist organizations have been funded, armed, trained, and/or manned by Iran for years!

Meanwhile, after each attack, the U.N. demands Israel demonstrate an unreasonable amount of restraint. Heck, koffi even condemned the vicitm in this last conflict, blasting israel for defending itself and reacting against Hezbollah who had committed an act of war - he went as far as to go out of his way to keep from calling Hezbollah exactly what everyone else in the world knows they are - a TERRORIST Organization. While captured hezbollah fighters talked about being trained in Iran, how the kidnapping plot was developed in Iran, etc...Koffi sounded like a complete idiot by declaring simultaneously that there was no proof Iran was involved! :roll:

The fact of the matter is that the IDF had 30000 soldiers at the border for several weeks and never used them. Now, if you had to piss off the UN or whoever with air strikes, why not doing it in a way that will help you to better secure yourself? First of all, I don't think that Israel really bothers with what the international community says and it has been like that for a while. Second of all, Israel had a good chance to really reduce hezbollah's capability by launching an all out ground offensive, but didn't do it. Since when suddenly it is France or Koffi's fault? The funny thing with the Bush administration is that, when it is its interest, the US is not shy to go unilaterally (see the Iraq war), but when the sheat hit the fan, suddenly lets blame the rest of the world for what you started, didn't do, or broke. But hey what's new in the good ol US of A? Now regarding your next post. After reading it, don't you think that being also part of the "Axis of evil", its support to Hezbollah, its known nuclear program, Iran was much of a present threat than Iraq which was under santions and had very limited military capability after the first Gulf war? Yet the Bush administration went on to invade Iraq, reduced to a thirld world country status. Although you may argue that after Panama and Grenada, the Iraq war was a step up LOL. Something that you could really be proud to claim "Mission accomplished". Hey the USA can't do much about Iran right now and Iran knows it because of one thing and one thing only. The US are pined down in Iraq. That my friend, you like it or not, was not Chirac or Koffi's decision but only the W Bush's administration. It is time to think for yourself and stop regurgitating the Fox news propaganda.

 

[easyt65]

The fact of the matter is that the IDF had 30000 soldiers at the border for several weeks and never used them.

They were hoping and waiting for the U.N. to get off its @$$ and actually do something substantial this time....which, once again, never came!

First of all, I don't think that Israel really bothers with what the international community says and it has been like that for a while.

If the United states had been attacked by 'terrorists' coming across the Mexican border for the last 58 years, conducting suicide bombings, rocket attacks, and kidnappings then told US that we had to restrain ourselves, not go all out in defense, berated US for defending our people instead of calling this group a terrorist organization, and only sent in U.N. observers who only did a great job watching the continued attacks....would you bother with what the international community says after a while? Actually, and more realitically, it would never get to that point because the U.S. would have opened up a whol truck-load of whoop-@$$ before the 1st of those 58 years had passed! All the major powers around the world would have! So why is Israel expected to do this while Koffi Anon conducts criminal activities from his U.N. desk while he smooches Hezbollah's, Hussein's, and Syria's @$$?!

Second of all, Israel had a good chance to really reduce hezbollah's capability by launching an all out ground offensive, but didn't do it. Since when suddenly it is France or Koffi's fault?

1. It should NEVER have come to this in the 1st place. If the U.N. had enforced resolution 1559, Hezbollah would have been disarmed! If the U.N. would have done something when Iran was assassinating Lebonese officials and enslaving Lebanon, lebanon would be free and hezbollah would not be infesting it with an Iranian-supplied/armed/trained/manned army more powerful thatn that of the lebonese goverment! If the u.N. would have made Resolution 1559 a chapter 7 Resolution (which gives U.N. troops the authority to use force to enforce the resolution) instead of giving them only authority to WATCH as hezbollah built up and continued attacking Israel since 2001, this would never have happened! If the U.N. would have pushed for a Chapter 7 Resolution this time, learning its lessons from 2001/1559 instead of allowing France to dictate (through its veto powers and/or influence) another half-@$$ed un-enforcable chapter 6 resolution that does not give UNIFIL troops to use force against Hezbollah, we wouldn't be faced with a future of more violence and a re-occurence of this incident!

The funny thing with the Bush administration is that, when it is its interest, the US is not shy to go unilaterally (see the Iraq war), but when the sheat hit the fan, suddenly lets blame the rest of the world for what you started, didn't do, or broke. It is time to think for yourself and stop regurgitating the Fox news propaganda.

So we shouldn't have any right to blame the rest of the world - specifically the criminals who propped up Hussein's rape, torture, and murder of his own people for 12 years by running the Black Marketing ring and the Oil-for-Food Scandal?! What, we should have waited another 12 years?

And Bush has had neither anything to do with the past 58 years of suicide attacks, rocket attacks, and bombings against Israel nor the U.N.'s complete failure to do ANYTHING to punish those responsible and make the violence stop. The u.N.'s idea of solving the Middle East peace process is for Israel to 'stop whining' about being attacked all the time and sit back and do nothing! Let's not forget the assassination of Lebnon officials and the enslavement of Lebanon by Iran, and the occupation of this nation by the terrorist arm of the Iranian military!

What you and other libs do not and seemingly CAN NOT comprehend is that we are already in the midst of World war 3, not a war on terror. Terror is only a weapon, not the enemy. The enemy is the army of Islamic Extremists/radicals who have declared war on Non-Muslims. bin ladden declared war on the U.S. in the mid 90s. Iran's leader has declared that the war for 1 Muslim world begins with the destruction of Israel, and their systematic war/game-plan is evident: they have taken Lebanon, which is now a puppet-state, have a terrorist army (an arm of iran) using Lebanon as a base for attacking Israel, have invaded Iraq with soldiers and insurgents intent of enslaving the new country of Iraq the way they have Lebanon, and they have nothing to fear, as this latest U.N. intervention has demonstrated, from the U.N. who came to the terrorist hezbollah's rescue, giving them more time to rebuild and start its attacks against Israel over! Just like Hitler told the world in his book 'Mein Kaumpf' what he was going to do before WW2, the muslim world has declared to the world that, whether we know it or accept it or not, we are in a world-wide religeous war where they seek world domination, a world ruled by Muslims/Islamic extremists who either wants everyone to convert or die! THAT is not a result of some Bush action but an independent goal of islamic Extremists....which the dems and libs are doing their best to ignore.

 

[Francaisforever]

......"They were hoping and waiting for the U.N. to get off its @$$ and actually do something substantial this time....which, once again, never came!".....

For your information, Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982 and occupied it for 8 years. They bombed Beyrut for 2 straight months kicked out the PLO, but what happen after that? Hezbollah was born. If Israel couldn't get rid of terrorist organizations in Lebanon after 8 years of occupation why would you expect the UN to do a better job with 2000 peacekeepers ?

........"If the United states had been attacked by 'terrorists' coming across the Mexican border for the last 58 years, conducting suicide bombings, rocket attacks, and kidnappings then told US that we had to restrain ourselves, not go all out in defense, berated US for defending our people instead of calling this group a terrorist organization, and only sent in U.N. observers who only did a great job watching the continued attacks....would you bother with what the international community says after a while? ".........

You see now you prove my point. Israel didn't invade Lebanon because of international pressures. Again the same question you don't answer. Why would the UN be responsible for not doing what Israel for its own protection wouldn't do? Well my friend read again what's above and you will understand. And also what happen to the US in this all ordeal. I thought that Israel was its best ally?! What has the US done to protect Israel against the Hezbollah and its rocket attacks?

......."1. It should NEVER have come to this in the 1st place. If the U.N. had enforced resolution 1559, Hezbollah would have been disarmed! If the U.N. would have done something when Iran was assassinating Lebanese officials and enslaving Lebanon, Lebanon would be free and hezbollah would not be infesting it with an Iranian-supplied/armed/trained/manned army more powerful than that of the Lebanese government! If the u.N. would have made Resolution 1559 a chapter 7 Resolution (which gives U.N. troops the authority to use force to enforce the resolution) instead of giving them only authority to WATCH as hezbollah built up and continued attacking Israel since 2001, this would never have happened! If the U.N. would have pushed for a Chapter 7 Resolution this time, learning its lessons from 2001/1559 instead of allowing France to dictate (through its veto powers and/or influence) another half-@$$ed un-en forcable chapter 6 resolution that does not give UNIFIL troops to use force against Hezbollah, we wouldn't be faced with a future of more violence and a re-occurrence of this incident!
army.

It seems that you do not understand the mechanism, effect and consequences of resolution 1559 cosponsored by FRANCE and THE UNITED STATES of AMERICA. Here from the American Center for Law and Justice ................"Arguments Against the Resolution

Although Resolution 1559 was aimed at restoring Lebanese sovereignty throughout the territory of Lebanon, ironically, speaking against the resolution was Mr. Mohammad Issa, Secretary-General of the Lebanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Emigrants. Issa asked the Security Council to withdraw the draft resolution for two reasons. According to Issa, the draft resolution impermissible interfered with bilateral relations between Lebanon and Syria.[4] Issa argued that Syrian troops came to Lebanon at Lebanon’s request, in accordance with the Taif Accord, which had been supported by the Security Council.[5] According to Issa, Syria’s involvement in Lebanon served only to rebuff Israel’s actions there:[6] “Friendly Syria has helped Lebanon to maintain security and stability within its boarders. . . . To say that Syria supports radical movements in Lebanon i therefore untrue. To the contrary, . . . [Syria] supports a national resistance movement seeking to liberate the territories occupied by Israel.”[7]

In that vein, Issa also argued against the proposal that Lebanon disarm and disband Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias. He argued that, because Israel was the real threat to Lebanon’s political independence and because Syria supported a “national resistance movement” against Israel’s occupation, “there [we]re no militias in Lebanon.”[8] He continued:

The Lebanese national resistance appeared following the Israeli occupations of Lebanese territory and will remain as long as the Israelis occupy parts of Lebanon, because we look forward to putting an end to the Israeli occupation. The resistance force exists alongside the Lebanese national forces; our military authorities determine their presence and their size according to our needs. The authority of the Lebanese State extends over all of Lebanese territory except the Israeli-occupied areas, which we resolved to liberate by peaceful means, if possible.[9]

Thus, Issa maintained that groups like Hezbollah were not really militias because Hezbollah was working in conjunction with the Lebanese “national forces” to oust occupying Israeli forces. In that regard, he argued that Hezbollah was not a threat to Lebanese sovereignty and that there were “no militias in Lebanon.” Hence, in effect, Issa argued that Hezbollah was a legitimate and welcome actor in Lebanese affairs.

Arguments in Favor of the Resolution

United States Ambassador John Danforth claimed that Syria had imposed its political will on Lebanon “to amend its Constitution and abort the electoral process by extending the term of the current President by three years.”[10] He explained that because the vote in the Lebanese national assembly to amend the Lebanese Constitution was scheduled within days, it was necessary for the Security Council to address the problem immediately.[11] Noting that the Lebanese elections should represent the free will of the people through a fair process, Danforth claimed that Syrian actions made “a crude mockery of this principle.”[12] Moreover, Danforth argued that the presence of Hezbollah together with Syrian forces in Lebanon undermined Lebanon’s political and territorial sovereignty.[13] He argued:

We strongly support the extension of the control of the Government of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory, including southern Lebanon, as called for by the Security Council over the past four years. The continued presence of armed H[e]zb[o]llah militia elements, as well as the presence of the Syrian military and Iranian forces in Lebanon, hinders that goal.[14]

France echoed the concerns of the United States. Ambassador de la Sabliere of France argued that Syria threatened the independence of Lebanese politics, as well as “the continued occupation and persistent presence of armed militias.”[15] De la Sabliere said removing militias was necessary to preserve Lebanon’s compliance with international objectives. He noted:

France is deeply concerned that Lebanon might retreat from the objectives that are constantly reaffirmed by the international community. That is why the rapid mobilization of and a decisive response by the Security Council seems essential to us. The withdrawal of foreign forces from the entire territory of Lebanon and the dismantling of Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias should be delayed no longer. The electoral process should proceed without any foreign influence.[16]

Finally, de la Sabliere also claimed the draft resolution did not interfere with the internal affairs of Lebanon because it “denounce[es] the risk to international peace and security represented by the current crisis.”[17] On the contrary, de la Saliere argued that the without the resolution the Security Council would passively permit “inadmissible interference by a State in the internal affairs of another sovereign State.”[18]

Impact of Failure to Disarm Hezbollah

Today, the ongoing crisis between Israel and Lebanon can be directly traced to Lebanon’s failure to disband and disarm Hezbollah. It was Hezbollah terrorists who precipitated the current crisis on July 12, 2006, by firing rockets into Israel, entering Israeli territory, and killing and abducting Israeli soldiers. They did so without the sanction of the Lebanese Government. Yet, it is the Lebanese Government and people who are paying the heavy price for Hezbollah’s actions.

......."So we shouldn't have any right to blame the rest of the world - specifically the criminals who propped up Hussein's rape, torture, and murder of his own people for 12 years by running the Black Marketing ring and the Oil-for-Food Scandal?! What, we should have waited another 12 years?"......

Either you are a total hypocrite or you have absolutely no sens of history. What is it gonna be?
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/
You should start to think for yourself instead of regurgitating the Fox news propaganda.

 

[easyt65]

For your information, Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982 and occupied it for 8 years..... If Israel couldn't get rid of terrorist organizations in Lebanon after 8 years of occupation why would you expect the UN to do a better job with 2000 peacekeepers ?

1. You forget to mention WHY Israel invaded Lebanon - because they were constantly attacked.
2. the U.N. can NOT do any better with 2,000 peacekeepers. they couldn't do any better with 1 MILLION peacekeepers when they bind their hands and give them the authority to ONLY sit back and watch the enslavement of lebanon,the build up of terrorists to the point where they are stronger than the Lebanese military, and the constant attacks on Israel. Instead of negotiating for 15,000 Hezbollah sympathizers led by 200 French engineers who do not have the authority to use force at all except when being fired upon, the U.N. should have submitted a Chapter 7 Resolution calling for armed troops forming a buffer zone along the Israeli/Lebanon border. You KNOW this would have cut down on the violence, the cross-border raids, and the kidnappings! Possibly not all of Lebanon, but the UNIFIL troops, armed with the authority to fire on Hezbollah if necessary, could have moved into Southern Lebanon - cleared by Israeli troops. they could have prevented armed hezbollah from coming back in, could have confiscated all the Hezbollah weapons stashed in houses, hospitals, etc. You are not convincing anyone that a fully commited U.N. could not move in and make a real difference for peace!

Israel didn't invade Lebanon because of international pressures. Again the same question you don't answer. Why would the UN be responsible for not doing what Israel for its own protection wouldn't do? Well my friend read again what's above and you will understand. And also what happen to the US in this all ordeal. I thought that Israel was its best ally?! What has the US done to protect Israel against the Hezbollah and its rocket attacks?

1. No, Israel did not invade lebanon due to 'international pressure' - they invaded to defend its nation and its people from an act of war, war constantly on-going. Israel did the same exact thing the U.S. would have done, as would have Germany, Russia, France, etc....I pointed out the hypocrisy of the U.N. sending in nothing but what amounts to Voyeurs to watch the attacks on Israel up close, always demanding that Israel use an unrealistic amount of restraint to the constant attacks. How do you respond? You throw up your hands and do your U.N.-apologist routine: "There's nothing the u.N. could do'! If that is the case, 'my friend', then the U.N. is TRULY a useless organization with nothing to offer the world and therefor should just break up/go away! If nothing else, Koff the criminal can stop kissing Hezbollah's @$$ by declaring that they are NOT a terrorist group, insulting our intelligence by saying Iran is not behind this when the captured Hezbollah fighters themselves are saying otherwise!

According to Issa, the draft resolution impermissible interfered with bilateral relations between Lebanon and Syria. Issa argued that Syrian troops came to Lebanon at Lebanon’s request, in accordance with the Taif Accord, which had been supported by the Security Council. According to Issa, Syria’s involvement in Lebanon served only to rebuff Israel’s actions there: “Friendly Syria has helped Lebanon to maintain security and stability within its boarders. . . . To say that Syria supports radical movements in Lebanon [is] therefore untrue. To the contrary, . . . [Syria] supports a national resistance movement seeking to liberate the territories occupied by Israel.”

Oh this is priceless! Your parroting of this dribble shows you have no idea what is going on inside Lebanon! Of course 'Lebanon' invited Syria in - hard not to when the people asking them in are either Syrian supporters, Syrian, or Lebonese with a gun to their heads. The assassinations of Lebonese diplomats/leaders who were against Syrian occupation of Lebanon is well documented. Just a few years ago there was a movement by the people of Lebanon against Syria, and they demanded Syria withdraw its troops!

Syria's involvement in lebanon was to rebuff Israel's actions. So, Syria and Iran attack Israel from Lebanon. Israel defends itself, and Syria/Iran uses that defense as an excuse to move troops into Lebanon - not just insurgents and special Ops guys any more - to 'defend Lebanon'! :roll: You sound like Hussein's PR guy who was declaring to the world how Iraq was kicking the American's butts and how there were no American in Baghdad while you could see troops coming up the street nehind him! :rofl

And no one is regurgitating anything, unless you count your Pro-Syrian/Iranian/Hezbollah, U.N.-apologist views -- you must write Koffi's speeches. I have 1st hand knowledge of what I speak, and before you waste your time screaming about that comment let me add - I don't care what you say or what you believe because truth is truth.

You need to take the blinders off, 'my friend'. There is a religeous war going on! Islamic Extremists are in a war to re-make the world into a Muslim-controlled/run place. Their plan is to eliminate Israel and then destroy US because they know there is no one else in the world with the b@lls or backbone willing to do anything to stop them. If they EVER accomplish that mission, the only choice left in the world will be converting to muslim or being beheaded/killed! Lebanon is a puppet state controlled by Iran and used as a base for attacks against israel. it has been that way for a LONG time! The majority of the fighters and cause of problems in iraq right now is due to Iran, who seeks to enslave Iraq just as they have Lebanon. Just as Israel caught Iranian soldiers - not Iranian-trained soldiers, I am talking about soldiers and Special ops soldiers from IRAN - fighting in Lebanon with Hezbollah, we have caught the same in Iraq! The world is at war. That war was declared by Osama Bin Ladden back in the mid 90s, and it was ignored by President Clinton! It did NOT go away when it was ignored, did it? No, it escalated!

You throw up your hands, apologize for criminals who are sworn to protect and defend people like the iraqis who were raped, tortured, and murdered by a madman and his sons. You defend the men who chose to take advantage of those people, supporting the murderer while stealing their money. You support the men who sat back and watched Syria assassinate another country's leaders, move in its military, build a terrorist group even larger that the country's military, and use the country as a staging point for terrorist attacks against a soverign nation....then verbally attacks that victim nation for defending itself. You say the U.N. can do NOTHING.....then what you are really saying is the U.N.'s time has passed and it should be disbanned!