Iran, Geopolitics and the Bomb
Asif Naqshbandi January 22, 2006
#33 Posted by rsridhar on January 22, 2006 8:22:00 pm
re: this article
This article builds up a weak defense for a nuclear Iran.
Let us look at this logically.
Iran has surplus gas as the energy source. So, clearly it is not building nuclear facilities for an alternate source of energy. That would be a stupid thing to do.
It is building (or trying to build) a nuclear arsenal in the belief that it would somehow give Iran the kind of political mileage that North Korea has. After all, N.Korea was able to thumb its nose at the West and get away with it mainly because nobody wanted a nuclear conflargration with a crackpot dictator ruling that country.
That is the simple logic that dictates the quest for nuclear weaponry in Iran.
There is then the civilizational angle.
Iranians are peeved (or, shall i say, pissed off) that a vastly inferior race (and Sunnis to boot) that Pakis are have yet managed to become nuclear and get away with it. If Pakis can, why can`t we? That is how the argument goes.
Then there is the civilizational arrogance. Darius was given a sound thrashing by Alexander and his great city of Persepolis was burnt down beyond recognition by the latter and yet the present day Iranians think of themselves as children of Darius the great. There is little resemblance. Present day Iran is a sham democracy with mullocracy at the top. Women have very little rights. I have posted many articles to prove my point in another forum. Yet, Iranians would like us believe it is a great civilization, inheritors of legacy of Darius the great. There is a lot of hypocrisy here.
Iran is no friend of India. Like Pakistan, Iran too is an ideological state. It changes its tunes to suit its ideology.
A denuked and humbled Iran would be better for world peace.
Sridhar
This article builds up a weak defense for a nuclear Iran.
Let us look at this logically.
Iran has surplus gas as the energy source. So, clearly it is not building nuclear facilities for an alternate source of energy. That would be a stupid thing to do.
It is building (or trying to build) a nuclear arsenal in the belief that it would somehow give Iran the kind of political mileage that North Korea has. After all, N.Korea was able to thumb its nose at the West and get away with it mainly because nobody wanted a nuclear conflargration with a crackpot dictator ruling that country.
That is the simple logic that dictates the quest for nuclear weaponry in Iran.
There is then the civilizational angle.
Iranians are peeved (or, shall i say, pissed off) that a vastly inferior race (and Sunnis to boot) that Pakis are have yet managed to become nuclear and get away with it. If Pakis can, why can`t we? That is how the argument goes.
Then there is the civilizational arrogance. Darius was given a sound thrashing by Alexander and his great city of Persepolis was burnt down beyond recognition by the latter and yet the present day Iranians think of themselves as children of Darius the great. There is little resemblance. Present day Iran is a sham democracy with mullocracy at the top. Women have very little rights. I have posted many articles to prove my point in another forum. Yet, Iranians would like us believe it is a great civilization, inheritors of legacy of Darius the great. There is a lot of hypocrisy here.
Iran is no friend of India. Like Pakistan, Iran too is an ideological state. It changes its tunes to suit its ideology.
A denuked and humbled Iran would be better for world peace.
Sridhar
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#34 Posted by masadi on January 22, 2006 8:37:37 pm
The new emerging ``Iran threat`` (just like the earlier ``Saddam threat``) that the US elite are touting now, and their corporate media is hyping in its usual fashion, is mere steam (hot air). In Iraq and Afghanistan the US helped Iran`s agendas in the region and now Iran is paying back the US by the idiotic rhetoric of its president Mr. Ahmadenijad. To me it seems like a classic, ``you scratch my back I scratch yours`` scenario. The US gets to keep a perpetual threat in that region alive now that Iraq has turned sour, while Iran gets to feed off of the US doing its bidding and sending that bank robber Ahmad Chalaby to visit with the Iranian elite time and again. Something smells awful in this ``love/hate`` relationship between Iran and the US.
To find out what the US elite are upto at the current time, I often visit their main thinktank, Project for the New American Century. Many of its founders are now the leading Neo-Cons in this administration. A while back this thinktank put out an article on Iran and I wrote a rebuttal of it back in September of `05. It is reproduced below. Sorry for taking the extra space, I`m reproducing it here instead of submitting it because experience tells me it will be censored by the editors.
The Incoherence of the Incoherent
The Neo Cons and their ``Project for the new American Century``
Tuesday 13th September 2005, by Muhammed Asadi
The Neo-Conservative movement wants Iran to emerge rapidly as the new military threat facing the U.S. in order to advance their ``Project for the new American Century.`` Being worried by the ``time-delay`` the Washington Post gives Iran in acquiring nuclear weapons (not before 2015 will Iran have them according to the report), Gary Schmitt of the ``Project`` states that because US intelligence, by its own admission, knows very little about nuclear weapons development in Iran, their conclusions on the ``time delay`` might be wrong. Iran (according to Schmitt’s personal intelligence) could have a weapon before that time. How he arrives at that implied conclusion and how his intelligence capabilities are worthy of greater trust than national intelligence estimates, were not stated in this ``memo``, which was written to the highest opinion leaders in the US. He reminds the ``opinion leaders`` in the article that just as national intelligence estimates were wrong on Saddam Hussein’s WMDs before the first Gulf War (they underestimated the threat according to him) and the current Iraq war (they overestimated it this time, according to him), they might well be underestimating Iran’s nuclear weapons capabilities.
What is alarming about these incoherent conclusions coming from the Neo-Conservatives, more so than their blunt hypocrisy (note that this is coming from the same camp whose friends in the establishment were pressuring the intelligence community to practically cook the WMD ``intelligence`` on Iraq ), is the fact that such incoherence is what dictates the foreign policy of the U.S. power elite, and justifies the hundreds of billions given to the military industries, while millions of Americans go without adequate food (37 million) and health care (47 to 82 million during any given year). Little wonder that such ``leadership`` has resulted in a world where over 40,000 die everyday due to preventable causes, and the ecological conditions to sustain life itself are being destroyed by a mad grab for profits. This is the kind of ``leadership`` that the ``project`` seeks to advance.
Why is a time delay in Iran’s alleged acquisition of nuclear weapons causing problems for Gary Schmitt, William Kristol and the rest of the neo-conservatives that run this organization and practically this country? Not being satisfied with the mess and human misery they have created in Iraq, and not concerned at all with the half a million people displaced by hurricane Katrina (their Project for the ``American`` century site does not even make a casual mention of it), Kristol’s gang wants a new ``military threat`` to emerge, in the area they are most interested in, the Israeli neighborhood. They feel the necessity of a new threat at this time because the public is getting weary of their widely advertised ``Iraq threat``, that is being recognized as nonsense by the previously duped masses (as poll numbers reveal). At the same time their banal ``war on terror`` terminology is starting to cause problems for a leadership that rushed into implementing this ideologically inspired ``project``. Busy inventing new threats, the Neo-conservatives have found a comfortable home among Democrats and Republicans alike, in the ``organized irresponsibility`` (as C. Wright Mills put it) that describes the American political establishment. The consequences of that ``organized irresponsibility`` are what the displaced in New Orleans are confronting today.
Gary Schmitt informs us in his concluding paragraph: ``There are numerous practical problems we would confront in carrying out that decision (to attack Iran militarily), even if that were in theory the right one to make. But it does mean that we have no reason to relax, nor can we postpone difficult decisions indefinitely.``
Unconcerned about the carnage and human misery their ``right decision`` caused in Iraq, Schmitt concludes that war (with Iran) in the not too distant future, might still be ``the right decision to make``. PNAC’s sister ``patriotic`` organization, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) mirrors these concerns about keeping the flame of perpetual war burning (Report #514) when it says ``Hurricane Katrina is an unmitigated disaster for the people of the Gulf Coast. It shouldn’t turn out to be a look into the future for the rest of us.``
As we read Schmitt’s advocacy of a new war even though such a war might have ``practical problems`` according to him, we are reminded of these prophetic words from the 1950s, by C. Wright. Mills, from his book, The Causes of World War Three (1958):
``The expectation of war solves many problems of the ``crackpot realists``; it also confronts them with many new problems. Yet these, the problems of war, often seem easier (for them) to handle.(compared) to political policies that are distasteful to many politicians...The terms of their long term solutions, under conditions of peace, are hard for the capitalist elite to face.`` (page, 87)
What is distasteful to these Neo-Conservative ``crackpot realists`` is peace in the Middle East, and the resulting effect that might have on regional development in the Arab world. In their uneasy alliance with corporations, whose leadership positions they normally hold when they are not posing as politicians, the Neo-Cons have found a dual fulfillment of purpose. The terms of the ``long term solution`` to the ``Palestinian problem`` are what they do not want to face. If that can be avoided, any ``practical problems`` that a new war might bring are easier for them to handle. The civilians who get killed in the thousands and the US soldiers (chosen by the way from the lower socioeconomic classes) that become casualties of war are of no consequence to them. These are all ``practical problems`` that they feel they can handle. In all such alliances to further power and wealth, human suffering and misery become at best, background noise justified by moral symbols, over used excuses, media distractions, and stage management.
To find out what the US elite are upto at the current time, I often visit their main thinktank, Project for the New American Century. Many of its founders are now the leading Neo-Cons in this administration. A while back this thinktank put out an article on Iran and I wrote a rebuttal of it back in September of `05. It is reproduced below. Sorry for taking the extra space, I`m reproducing it here instead of submitting it because experience tells me it will be censored by the editors.
The Incoherence of the Incoherent
The Neo Cons and their ``Project for the new American Century``
Tuesday 13th September 2005, by Muhammed Asadi
The Neo-Conservative movement wants Iran to emerge rapidly as the new military threat facing the U.S. in order to advance their ``Project for the new American Century.`` Being worried by the ``time-delay`` the Washington Post gives Iran in acquiring nuclear weapons (not before 2015 will Iran have them according to the report), Gary Schmitt of the ``Project`` states that because US intelligence, by its own admission, knows very little about nuclear weapons development in Iran, their conclusions on the ``time delay`` might be wrong. Iran (according to Schmitt’s personal intelligence) could have a weapon before that time. How he arrives at that implied conclusion and how his intelligence capabilities are worthy of greater trust than national intelligence estimates, were not stated in this ``memo``, which was written to the highest opinion leaders in the US. He reminds the ``opinion leaders`` in the article that just as national intelligence estimates were wrong on Saddam Hussein’s WMDs before the first Gulf War (they underestimated the threat according to him) and the current Iraq war (they overestimated it this time, according to him), they might well be underestimating Iran’s nuclear weapons capabilities.
What is alarming about these incoherent conclusions coming from the Neo-Conservatives, more so than their blunt hypocrisy (note that this is coming from the same camp whose friends in the establishment were pressuring the intelligence community to practically cook the WMD ``intelligence`` on Iraq ), is the fact that such incoherence is what dictates the foreign policy of the U.S. power elite, and justifies the hundreds of billions given to the military industries, while millions of Americans go without adequate food (37 million) and health care (47 to 82 million during any given year). Little wonder that such ``leadership`` has resulted in a world where over 40,000 die everyday due to preventable causes, and the ecological conditions to sustain life itself are being destroyed by a mad grab for profits. This is the kind of ``leadership`` that the ``project`` seeks to advance.
Why is a time delay in Iran’s alleged acquisition of nuclear weapons causing problems for Gary Schmitt, William Kristol and the rest of the neo-conservatives that run this organization and practically this country? Not being satisfied with the mess and human misery they have created in Iraq, and not concerned at all with the half a million people displaced by hurricane Katrina (their Project for the ``American`` century site does not even make a casual mention of it), Kristol’s gang wants a new ``military threat`` to emerge, in the area they are most interested in, the Israeli neighborhood. They feel the necessity of a new threat at this time because the public is getting weary of their widely advertised ``Iraq threat``, that is being recognized as nonsense by the previously duped masses (as poll numbers reveal). At the same time their banal ``war on terror`` terminology is starting to cause problems for a leadership that rushed into implementing this ideologically inspired ``project``. Busy inventing new threats, the Neo-conservatives have found a comfortable home among Democrats and Republicans alike, in the ``organized irresponsibility`` (as C. Wright Mills put it) that describes the American political establishment. The consequences of that ``organized irresponsibility`` are what the displaced in New Orleans are confronting today.
Gary Schmitt informs us in his concluding paragraph: ``There are numerous practical problems we would confront in carrying out that decision (to attack Iran militarily), even if that were in theory the right one to make. But it does mean that we have no reason to relax, nor can we postpone difficult decisions indefinitely.``
Unconcerned about the carnage and human misery their ``right decision`` caused in Iraq, Schmitt concludes that war (with Iran) in the not too distant future, might still be ``the right decision to make``. PNAC’s sister ``patriotic`` organization, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) mirrors these concerns about keeping the flame of perpetual war burning (Report #514) when it says ``Hurricane Katrina is an unmitigated disaster for the people of the Gulf Coast. It shouldn’t turn out to be a look into the future for the rest of us.``
As we read Schmitt’s advocacy of a new war even though such a war might have ``practical problems`` according to him, we are reminded of these prophetic words from the 1950s, by C. Wright. Mills, from his book, The Causes of World War Three (1958):
``The expectation of war solves many problems of the ``crackpot realists``; it also confronts them with many new problems. Yet these, the problems of war, often seem easier (for them) to handle.(compared) to political policies that are distasteful to many politicians...The terms of their long term solutions, under conditions of peace, are hard for the capitalist elite to face.`` (page, 87)
What is distasteful to these Neo-Conservative ``crackpot realists`` is peace in the Middle East, and the resulting effect that might have on regional development in the Arab world. In their uneasy alliance with corporations, whose leadership positions they normally hold when they are not posing as politicians, the Neo-Cons have found a dual fulfillment of purpose. The terms of the ``long term solution`` to the ``Palestinian problem`` are what they do not want to face. If that can be avoided, any ``practical problems`` that a new war might bring are easier for them to handle. The civilians who get killed in the thousands and the US soldiers (chosen by the way from the lower socioeconomic classes) that become casualties of war are of no consequence to them. These are all ``practical problems`` that they feel they can handle. In all such alliances to further power and wealth, human suffering and misery become at best, background noise justified by moral symbols, over used excuses, media distractions, and stage management.
#35 Posted by rsridhar on January 22, 2006 8:47:15 pm
re: Israel`s response
While long range missiles of Iran can reach Israel, Israel gets ready to take on a
nuclear Iran
Sridhar
While long range missiles of Iran can reach Israel, Israel gets ready to take on a
nuclear Iran
Sridhar
#36 Posted by ahmedmadani on January 22, 2006 11:23:32 pm
Instead of power politics Muslim nations should start playing cricket as this Indian rate of scoring will put bowlers to sleeping. Cricket is good game and Pakistan can spread popularity in Muslim World. Do not make nuclear bombs but play cricket. The match is 100% draw useless game and useless pitch.
#37 Posted by parthaab on January 22, 2006 11:34:06 pm
Korea which is more amenable to christianity, Iran is fast becoming a threat to Israel, the right hand of the christian USA.
Religion, once again, takes precedence in US foreign policy, over common sense.
Religion, once again, takes precedence in US foreign policy, over common sense.
#38 Posted by ajeya on January 22, 2006 11:38:07 pm
#5 by kaptain
[@harimau..
being a Muslim and having a bomb is not a threat..shun this notion implanted from the West that the Muslims are terrorists. If this would have been a case, no patch on earth would have been without being engaged in petty battles.]
This was a gimme...
India - Any PETTY battles with Islamists? Anybody?
Pakistan - ANy Islamic bombings in Churches? Minorities oppressed?
China - Chinese Muslims of Western China vs. the rest of the Chinese population.
A little bit of background:
``Islam flourished during the Ming dynasty (1271-1368), when all religions were tolerated and missionaries from Central Asia entered the country to engage in da`wah. Soon Nanjing, the Ming dynasty’s first capital, became famous as a major center of Islamic learning. The Islamic scholar Wang Daiyu wrote the influential Zhengjiao Zhenquan (Righteous Commentary on True Religion) and several other treatises in that city.
The Chinese Muslims’ peaceful existence dramatically changed during the Qing dynasty (1644-1911), however, when they increasingly asserted their demand for independence.``
It is the same story everywhere - tolerance is interpreted as weakness.
Myanmar (Burma) - Muslims vs. the rest of the Buddhist population.
Malayasia - Muslims are the majority, so only Indian Hindus are discriminated against.
Indonesia - Bombings in Hindu majority Bali. Christians killed on a routine basis.
Australia - Australian tourists targeted in S.Asia. The Australian Govt. is on the hit list of Al Quaeda.
All of the Middle East, North Africa, Central Africa - Muslims vs. Christians and Jews.
France - Riots by Muslim immigrants.
Germany - Local population vs Muslim immigrants from the Middle East.
Belgium, Holland, Sweden - Local population (once the most liberal and generous) now anti-Muslim after Theo Van Gogh was butchered.
England - Train bombings.
USA - 9/11.
[@harimau..
being a Muslim and having a bomb is not a threat..shun this notion implanted from the West that the Muslims are terrorists. If this would have been a case, no patch on earth would have been without being engaged in petty battles.]
This was a gimme...
India - Any PETTY battles with Islamists? Anybody?
Pakistan - ANy Islamic bombings in Churches? Minorities oppressed?
China - Chinese Muslims of Western China vs. the rest of the Chinese population.
A little bit of background:
``Islam flourished during the Ming dynasty (1271-1368), when all religions were tolerated and missionaries from Central Asia entered the country to engage in da`wah. Soon Nanjing, the Ming dynasty’s first capital, became famous as a major center of Islamic learning. The Islamic scholar Wang Daiyu wrote the influential Zhengjiao Zhenquan (Righteous Commentary on True Religion) and several other treatises in that city.
The Chinese Muslims’ peaceful existence dramatically changed during the Qing dynasty (1644-1911), however, when they increasingly asserted their demand for independence.``
It is the same story everywhere - tolerance is interpreted as weakness.
Myanmar (Burma) - Muslims vs. the rest of the Buddhist population.
Malayasia - Muslims are the majority, so only Indian Hindus are discriminated against.
Indonesia - Bombings in Hindu majority Bali. Christians killed on a routine basis.
Australia - Australian tourists targeted in S.Asia. The Australian Govt. is on the hit list of Al Quaeda.
All of the Middle East, North Africa, Central Africa - Muslims vs. Christians and Jews.
France - Riots by Muslim immigrants.
Germany - Local population vs Muslim immigrants from the Middle East.
Belgium, Holland, Sweden - Local population (once the most liberal and generous) now anti-Muslim after Theo Van Gogh was butchered.
England - Train bombings.
USA - 9/11.
#39 Posted by masadi on January 23, 2006 1:54:34 am
#38 Ajeya writes
<<< Myanmar (Burma) - Muslims vs. the rest of the Buddhist population.
Malayasia - Muslims are the majority, so only Indian Hindus are discriminated against.
Indonesia - Bombings in Hindu majority Bali. Christians killed on a routine basis.
Australia - Australian tourists targeted in S.Asia. The Australian Govt. is on the hit list of Al Quaeda.
All of the Middle East, North Africa, Central Africa - Muslims vs. Christians and Jews.
France - Riots by Muslim immigrants.
Germany - Local population vs Muslim immigrants from the Middle East.
Belgium, Holland, Sweden - Local population (once the most liberal and generous) now anti-Muslim after Theo Van Gogh was butchered.
England - Train bombings.
USA - 9/11.
>>>>>
We should pay attention to such writings because this is how illiterates write. No facts just claims or sensationalized cases. The SUM total of what he mentions, the sum total all over the world does not come to be a small fraction of the 19000 people that are murdered every year in America according to the FBI, and ``MUSLIM`` is NO FACTOR in those murders. The fully one third of young African American males involved with the US criminal justice system, that by itself far surpasses any discrimination against minorities in Muslim lands, given the sheer proportion of the population.
Now, will he provide documentation of his claims or merely reproduce rhetoric like and I quote ``Germany - Local population vs Muslim immigrants from the Middle East`` what the hell do these quotes prove? Take another one ``Australian tourists targeted in S.Asia``- what is he writing for the National Enquirer now? He might as well write ``Aliens predict End of World in June 2006``. Or take this one, ``Malayasia - Muslims are the majority, so only Indian Hindus are discriminated against.``- what discrimination and where is your data and how does it compare to the discrimination against African Americans in USA or against Native Americans or against Muslims in France? Give me the facts not nonsense.
<<< Myanmar (Burma) - Muslims vs. the rest of the Buddhist population.
Malayasia - Muslims are the majority, so only Indian Hindus are discriminated against.
Indonesia - Bombings in Hindu majority Bali. Christians killed on a routine basis.
Australia - Australian tourists targeted in S.Asia. The Australian Govt. is on the hit list of Al Quaeda.
All of the Middle East, North Africa, Central Africa - Muslims vs. Christians and Jews.
France - Riots by Muslim immigrants.
Germany - Local population vs Muslim immigrants from the Middle East.
Belgium, Holland, Sweden - Local population (once the most liberal and generous) now anti-Muslim after Theo Van Gogh was butchered.
England - Train bombings.
USA - 9/11.
>>>>>
We should pay attention to such writings because this is how illiterates write. No facts just claims or sensationalized cases. The SUM total of what he mentions, the sum total all over the world does not come to be a small fraction of the 19000 people that are murdered every year in America according to the FBI, and ``MUSLIM`` is NO FACTOR in those murders. The fully one third of young African American males involved with the US criminal justice system, that by itself far surpasses any discrimination against minorities in Muslim lands, given the sheer proportion of the population.
Now, will he provide documentation of his claims or merely reproduce rhetoric like and I quote ``Germany - Local population vs Muslim immigrants from the Middle East`` what the hell do these quotes prove? Take another one ``Australian tourists targeted in S.Asia``- what is he writing for the National Enquirer now? He might as well write ``Aliens predict End of World in June 2006``. Or take this one, ``Malayasia - Muslims are the majority, so only Indian Hindus are discriminated against.``- what discrimination and where is your data and how does it compare to the discrimination against African Americans in USA or against Native Americans or against Muslims in France? Give me the facts not nonsense.
#40 Posted by Behram1 on January 23, 2006 2:52:17 am
Ref:#33 by rsridhar on January 22, 2006 8:22pm PT
{Let us look at this logically. } And what you would know about logic? Have you solved a sudoku puzzle yet?
{There is a lot of hypocrisy here. } Yes, and that is what India has perfected.
{Iran is no friend of India.} Tell that to your leaders, why don`t you?
{A denuked and humbled Iran would be better for world peace.} Iran does not want nuclear technology to gain world`s respect and credibilty. It already has one. And what would you know?
{Let us look at this logically. } And what you would know about logic? Have you solved a sudoku puzzle yet?
{There is a lot of hypocrisy here. } Yes, and that is what India has perfected.
{Iran is no friend of India.} Tell that to your leaders, why don`t you?
{A denuked and humbled Iran would be better for world peace.} Iran does not want nuclear technology to gain world`s respect and credibilty. It already has one. And what would you know?
#41 Posted by Behram1 on January 23, 2006 2:59:35 am
Ref:#25 by Kulharee on January 22, 2006 5:22pm PT
{I like Persian pussies.} Thank God, you have some class. Persian pussies are a whole lot classier than those smelly and ugly looking Indian pussies, eh!
#42 Posted by Behram1 on January 23, 2006 3:07:02 am
Ref: #17 by rahulmal on January 22, 2006 11:39am PT
{Iran is doomed!} Yeah, right!
{Iran is doomed!} Yeah, right!
#43 Posted by Behram1 on January 23, 2006 3:23:33 am
Ref: #34 by masadi on January 22, 2006 8:37pm PT
{Something smells awful in this ``love/hate`` relationship between Iran and the US.} That something is the Hindoo India`s @ss, not sure which side to turn their @ss to get their sugar cane therapy. As usual, these Indians will try to please their new masters the MNC`s and then at the same time would want to keep Nehru`s socialistic ideology alive. In the upcoming debate between Iran and the West, India would be the loser, once again in the world political arena.
Over 300 million Latin Americans are under some sort of a leftist government, and almost every where you see India is becoming a pariah nation. India is in favor of the MNC`s and there is a war against golbalization raging on. But, heck if Hindoos had any brains at the right place they would use it. Most Hindoos` brains are located between their legs. Hindoo mouths are independent of their brains. And that is one major reason they developed Yoga. In Yoga, they can bend over and bring their mouths closer to their brains, when they are shoving it up their stinking @ss. And all the more reason for them to be squatting on railroad tracks.
Indians are strange creatures for humans to understand.
#44 Posted by Behram1 on January 23, 2006 3:41:35 am
Dear Chowk Staff:
This is going to be an explosive site. Shortly, factoid junkie Arjun_m is going to innundate us with his cut & paste technolgy and his venom against Pakistan. For what Pakistan becomes the topic of discussion only his corrupt mind would know.
And then that other danger to humanity creature who calls himself rsridhar. He can never make up his mind (as he himself has acknowledge that his brains are in his b@lls), whether he likes or hates Pakistanis. This creature has continuously be seen spewing hate on these chowk sites.
And of course there is yet another creature that has been spotted who calls himself Ajeya. He is still a novice in this world, but is fast learning the hate from his mentors at the RSS.
And this has become the quality of your Chowk. No wonder, we do not see any new names coming on to your site any more. You must seriously consider your interact policy and not allow those Indians who are smelley, ugly and brainless on this site. You must be vigilant in allowing member privilages to interact with some modicom of decency.
Well, this is your site and you can make a decision. But, who soever I have personally invited, consider this site as junk yard, where Indians come and spew their hate CONSTANTLY against Pakistan and against muslims.
Obviously this should not be tolerated.
Respectfully submitted,
#45 Posted by rf786 on January 23, 2006 7:02:16 am
Your artcle raises various issues, American hegemon policies, Israeli axis, complete subjugation of western press and Persian civilization. Lets take them one by one.
American policy of preemption (better described as hegemony) has been the major source of unrest, states like North Korea have added to the perception that the only way to defend is offence and to ward off American unilateral policies the only option is nuclear capability. This counteroffensive can only succeed when states can deliver a comprehensive and definite threat, unfortunately for Iranian Govt they are decades away from that capability and surrounded by sunni dominated states who would like nothing better than a neutralized shia power.
At the center of this entire controversy is the state of Israel, no doubt about that. It is their sense of state security which considers Iranian technological advances as a threat which needs to be neutralized. Both, the Iranian and Israeil states are dominated by a religious doctrine which cannot enter into a dialogue with the other, they are both mutually exclusive rendering any chances of finding a solution null and void.
Iran has clreic dominated/directed/vetted democracy which can never be a good thing for anyone, especially the Iranians. Democracy in its true spirit cannot be cloned for a particular school of thought or group of people. Mullahs/Ayatollahs are also responsible for bringing Iranians closer to this situation, instead of choosing the path of moderation and particiaption they have opted for exclusivity and hardline approach. Whether they succeed or fail has yet to be decided, but dark clouds of American preemption are gathering over Iranian skies.
American policy of preemption (better described as hegemony) has been the major source of unrest, states like North Korea have added to the perception that the only way to defend is offence and to ward off American unilateral policies the only option is nuclear capability. This counteroffensive can only succeed when states can deliver a comprehensive and definite threat, unfortunately for Iranian Govt they are decades away from that capability and surrounded by sunni dominated states who would like nothing better than a neutralized shia power.
At the center of this entire controversy is the state of Israel, no doubt about that. It is their sense of state security which considers Iranian technological advances as a threat which needs to be neutralized. Both, the Iranian and Israeil states are dominated by a religious doctrine which cannot enter into a dialogue with the other, they are both mutually exclusive rendering any chances of finding a solution null and void.
Iran has clreic dominated/directed/vetted democracy which can never be a good thing for anyone, especially the Iranians. Democracy in its true spirit cannot be cloned for a particular school of thought or group of people. Mullahs/Ayatollahs are also responsible for bringing Iranians closer to this situation, instead of choosing the path of moderation and particiaption they have opted for exclusivity and hardline approach. Whether they succeed or fail has yet to be decided, but dark clouds of American preemption are gathering over Iranian skies.
#46 Posted by Netizen on January 23, 2006 7:12:50 am
masadi:
could you please reply to #125 and #127 on ``Digital Giant`` board.
could you please reply to #125 and #127 on ``Digital Giant`` board.
#47 Posted by Netizen on January 23, 2006 7:22:52 am
re: rf786 #45
``Both, the Iranian and Israeil states are dominated by a religious doctrine which cannot enter into a dialogue with the other, they are both mutually exclusive rendering any chances of finding a solution null and void. ``
iranian govt. does even consider israel right to exist. they call it an ``illegitimate`` country which should be destroyed. thats the problem. israel will be more than happy to have relations with muslim countries as they have with egypt, turkey, jordan. (and now pakistan trying to befriend it for ammo.) as having diplomatic relations will give further strenghten israels right to exist.
also, isn`t the shia-hezbollah supported by iranians.
``Both, the Iranian and Israeil states are dominated by a religious doctrine which cannot enter into a dialogue with the other, they are both mutually exclusive rendering any chances of finding a solution null and void. ``
iranian govt. does even consider israel right to exist. they call it an ``illegitimate`` country which should be destroyed. thats the problem. israel will be more than happy to have relations with muslim countries as they have with egypt, turkey, jordan. (and now pakistan trying to befriend it for ammo.) as having diplomatic relations will give further strenghten israels right to exist.
also, isn`t the shia-hezbollah supported by iranians.
#48 Posted by Kulharee on January 23, 2006 7:37:41 am
The country where the national slogan is “Marge-ba-Amrika” (death to America) should be bombed the hell out of. Why don’t they say Marge-ba-Iraq or Marge-ba-Wahaibis who killed over a million Iranians not too long ago? Iran wants to be the big bully in the region full of morons (bar Israel). Hope they wake up from this dream and face the music. They should concentrate on making carpets (which they are good at) before they are carpet bombed by Israel.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- tahmed32: #131 nb: where was... The Correct Turn
- KaalChakra: tahmedji, the lady has... The Correct Turn
- tahmed32: #129 well said again,... The Correct Turn
- nb: Tahmed, are you saying... The Correct Turn
- hamidm2: Re: # 112 shankar mian, ........ The Correct Turn
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 120 You... The Correct Turn
- tahmed32: nb #124 where were... The Correct Turn
- stuka: Is Kashmir key to... The Correct Turn
