What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
$52 and Up-Airlines Slash Fares On Peak Holiday Flights. view!
travelzoo.com - This year, waiting until the last minute is NOT the best strategy. See why.
194 Comments
- ZenFountain, on 11/14/2007, -5/+88There was a time not long ago under the moderate Khatami government that Iran offered to give up their uranium enrichment program and support of Hezbollah in exchange for security guarantees. They were more anxious than we were to see the Taliban out of power and offered tacit support of the NATO operation there, in fact many have said Karzai is "their" guy. Then we branded Iran part of the "axis of evil" after dismissing their offer to help topple another old enemy of Iran, Saddam Hussein. This was perceived as a stab in the back to the moderates in Iran and paved the way for the hard liners to take power back as it looked like Iran was next on Bush's hit list.
This is not endorsement of moral relativism, because there are certainly some very bad things going on in Iran. I'm sure we have all seen the videos of girls being stoned to death and their attitudes towards gays. But there is also a growing progressive movement in Iran and a real chance for liberal democracy to work there. If you look at Muslims in the middle east as two power blocks, Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shiite Iran, clearly we have lined up behind the Sunni block despite the fact that the Saudi government is the primary funder and protector of radical Islam. Looking at it purely from a pragmatic standpoint, I believe we have picked the wrong side. Bush's good vs. evil mentality for seeing the world rather than way it truly is has proven to be a disaster, through and through. - syroncoda, on 11/14/2007, -12/+64sounds like a BIG FAT LIE to me.
- inactive, on 11/14/2007, -14/+58They are wearing out a military. They've doubled are national debt. The price of a barrel of oil has almost quadrupled. We are now the most hated nation on earth. Our devalued currency is on the brink of collapse. They use fear and deception to remove our rights. Historians see such parallels to fascism that they believe our leaders study and mimic the rise of Stalin and Hitler.
The citizens aren't represented. Congress ignores us. The president can arrest any of us in the middle of the night, torture us, deny of us a fair trial or use evidence that we can't see. He can haul us away to a secret prison.
The media is controlled. While many things appear in the news somewhere, the real news is rarely copied. Local news is usually stupid. Most topics are about countries halfway around the world--places that few of us will ever see.
The president thinks he has control of all three branches of government and the military--just what the founding fathers feared the most.
We're lied to repeatedly and we hate it.
In the meantime, they deny children health insurance. Our roads and bridges are deteriorating. The services we pay for are being reduced. Research for the real killers such as cancer and diabetes have small budgets.
We pay for more than 700 military bases and operations around the world while our borders are open.
We've seen evidence for plans to destroy our dollar, form a north American union, trash the constitution and the Bill of Rights, control the Internet, establish the amero currency.
Our trillion dollar defense was compromised on 9/11. It took years for the national institute of standards and the 9/11 commission to report how three towers collapsed. No mention or explanation was given for how collapse continued. Think about it--there was no resistance on that day.
White house staff and Americans who participate in destroying our nation should be in jail. Senators and congress should be replaced by patriotic Americans that understand the constitution and support the people.
The bill for the war has not been sent to us. A family of four's contribution is now more than $30,000. Who can afford that? Who can afford the additional interest payment. If they sent you a bill, you'd take your arms and march on Washington but now they want to take your arms away so you have no recourse against government.
The founding fathers set up checks and balances as roadblocks. They lived in a day where the pains of evil governments were felt. This government wants you to feel those pains--but they want to do it in a day where you can't do anything about it. - gvlax, on 11/13/2007, -3/+30Under the non proliferation treaty(NPT), Iran is allowed to have nuclear energy for civilian use. Once they step over the civilian use and move to nuclear weapons the IAEA under the UN is the one that needs to step in and enforce action. The U.S. should not declare war on Iran until the IAEA declares the violation of the NPT.
- Groovemaster, on 11/13/2007, -7/+29War is America's biggest and most lucrative business, and the US government will stop at nothing to ensure profits stay at a premium.
Whatever lies and obfuscations they use to start those wars, never EVER forget that the real reason is to make money.
To the US corporate elite, human life is expendable for wealth. - Plasmatica, on 11/13/2007, -7/+28"...the enrichment and reprocessing that can lead to the technologies that can lead to a nuclear weapon."
Going by that rhetoric people wouldn't be allowed to own small pieces of wood because those can lead to modeling a stabbing weapon with it. - inactive, on 11/13/2007, -9/+27Who gives a crap what the USA has to say about other nations' internal business? It's not our place to to decide what Iran does.
- pimpdown, on 11/13/2007, -2/+19That is very big of the U.S. Considering that under the NPT Iran already has the right to develop nuclear energy. When will Israel sign the NPT?
- inactive, on 11/13/2007, -0/+16What about Starbucks? I'm not okay with Iran having Starbucks.
- Grumps, on 11/13/2007, -3/+19Are there any non fabricated evidence that shows that Iran are setting goal to produce nuclear weapon?
No! - inactive, on 11/13/2007, -6/+21The USA should not declare war on any nation unless that nation attacks the USA. There is no excuse for military aggression. It is illegal. The disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan should have illustrated that clearly enough for a blind man to see. If the UN decides they want to intervene in Iran, the USA should fulfill it's obligations to the UN, but that is all the USA should do.
- CrazedLeper, on 11/13/2007, -5/+20Damned lie. WMD was a lie in Iraq and it's a lie in Iran.
- chris9902, on 11/13/2007, -2/+17"No, no, it's ok you take this WMD. Think of it as a present from the US to Iran..."
"quick! they have WMDs! lets blow them up!" - Waiting2awake, on 11/13/2007, -0/+13what is suspicious about it? Oil has value and there are other energy methods that can allow the Iranian people power, and enable them to sell their oil. Sounds like a win win situation to me...
- Trublmakr, on 11/13/2007, -2/+14EXACTLY! I thought I was the only one that smelled the arrogance here... for what it's worth, Canada says it's okay for the United States to use nuclear power.
- whiledo, on 03/25/2009, -0/+12The US is the world's second largest coal producer. And the US has the world's largest reserves of coal. Yet we have nuclear power and there are certainly a lot of groups (including the current administration) pushing for more.
And there's nothing remotely suspicious about this, either. - Krakn3Dfx, on 11/13/2007, -1/+12/me waits patiently until we go into Iran to dispose of their Weapons of Mass Electricity...
- dunnylovehun, on 11/12/2007, -2/+13Doesn't this smell of diplomacy more than anything else? And isn't that a refreshing change of pace?
It's one thing to be cautiously skeptical of the administration, which I wholly endorse. But we should also applaud them when they make a statement that isn't "X will disarm or else" shouldn't we? - smek2, on 11/13/2007, -4/+14To which Iran replied, but we don't have nor want to build any nuclear weapons. We just want Nuclear Power Plants. To which USA replies "You liars! Sorry, we tried it reasonable, now we have to bomb you"
- blackmage439, on 11/13/2007, -2/+12Apparently, offer resistance in the form of a never-ending stream of insurgents...
- Frei, on 11/13/2007, -1/+11Infect the bowels, sicken the big fish and drain his funds on medical care?
- monkey32123, on 11/13/2007, -1/+10I don't understand what the big deal is. If Iran wants nuclear power plants, let them have them. The thing you need to realize is that the refining process for nuclear materials in a power plant is extremely diferent than the process by which you create weapons great nuclear materials. The facilities are different are also extremely different.
If Iran wants Nuclear power they just have to prove they arn't building weapons. Which isn't that tough, all they should ahve to do is have their facilities open to routine and suprise inspection by U.N. nuclear agency.
I honestly cant think of why we shouldn't allow them to use an extremely useful clean energy if they are willing to abide by a fair set of guidelines. They are actually a democratic state, contrary to claims of being a fascist regime by the Bush administration. It is infact, the largest democracy in the middle east. If we want to spread freedom and democracy, specifically in the middle east, it is fairly important that we start to form some sort of working relationship with Iran - Nerys, on 11/13/2007, -1/+9Maybe I will be dugg down. Maybe I am a minority here. I have no problem with WHATEVER Iran wants to have. Its really simple for me. SOVEREIGN NATION means you can do anything you want IN YOUR NATION. FORGET about the POWER levels for a moment. Would you have a problem with IRAN coming over to the USA and "dictating terms and conditions" on what we can do here? I know I would. THEN why the hell do you think its ok for US to do this to IRAN? EVEN IF WE DESIRE that they have no nuclear weapons that desire means ***** to me till WE ALSO have no nuclear weapons....
- Aleman360, on 11/13/2007, -3/+11I like how we tell other countries they can't have nukes yet we have thousands and are the only country that has actually used them in war.
- Apocolypse, on 11/13/2007, -0/+8Iran may have the oil supply, but through intense sanctions since the 1970's, Iran has no infrastructure with which to extract, refine and use the oil. The embargos ensure that Iranian oil does not flood the market and drive down prices and it also keeps the nation on the brink of starvation. The paradox is not lost on the Iranians at all...
- TheBuzzKiller, on 11/13/2007, -3/+11you totally just set off a "Free Thinker Alarm" in the whitehouse ... let us see how long before the suits are knocking at your door.
- CrazedLeper, on 11/13/2007, -2/+10Bull(*sneeze*)it!
People in Colombia don't drink much coffee--not that they don't want to but because it's the nations largest cash crop and all the best coffee gets exported. The same is true of Iran. They have so much oil, that it is most valuable to them as an export while they generate their energy by other means. It isn't necessarily wise to burn a lot of polluting oil just because they can.
The US wants control of that oil as a strategic resource; they well know that there is no nuclear weapons program but they assume that *you* don't know that. - inactive, on 11/13/2007, -6/+14I'm not OK with the US killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, organizing coups against democratically elected heads of state or funding armed militias, such as Al Qaeda, to covertly fight against other nations for political and financial gain at the detriment of humanity.
You have absolutely no moral leverage against Iran.
And btw, there's still a genocide going on in Darfur and it's entirely funded by your Chinese friends. How about doing something about that, since you're all so worried about the oppressed? Why wait until it's over, like you did with Rwanda? - cozmoz365, on 11/13/2007, -2/+9Lets not forget we never found weapons in Iraq
- pimpdown, on 11/13/2007, -2/+9It does not matter what U.N. inspectors or IAEA inspectors like Nobel peace prize winner Mohamed ElBaradei find. The U.S. will ignore the findings unless they justify war. Remember Scott Ritter? Remember how they ignored ElBaradei when it came to Iraq?
- DashingLeech, on 11/13/2007, -0/+7Not allowing IAEA inspectors into the country would be a violation in itself. But according to the IAEA, Iran is not only letting them into the country, it is fully cooperating with agreed plans and timelines dealing with particular issues regarding their program. Iran doesn't seem to be resisting international checks on their nuclear program.
- Amazetbm, on 11/12/2007, -1/+8It's great when some one can present the situation in logical and unbiased manner. People these days are too driven by their passions with little room for logic.
- Frei, on 11/14/2007, -1/+8I think it goes, never get high on your own supply.
- cozmoz365, on 11/13/2007, -0/+7Little fish can also bite!
- LostinService, on 11/12/2007, -2/+8Esquire had a fantastic article on this.
- inactive, on 11/13/2007, -6/+12"Iran sits on so much oil that there's really no need for them to have nuclear power."
That is Iran's decision to make, not the USAs. - banthis, on 11/12/2007, -2/+8Yeah, I'm still thinking wheres the damn catch...
- Frei, on 11/12/2007, -1/+7http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...
"Among the committee's assertions is that Iran is producing weapons-grade uranium at its facility in the town of Natanz. The IAEA called that "incorrect," noting that weapons-grade uranium is enriched to a level of 90 percent or more. Iran has enriched uranium to 3.5 percent under IAEA monitoring"
So, where are you getting the information that the project isn't civilian? - gvlax, on 11/13/2007, -1/+7Um if you read the non proliferation treaty you would know that the North Korea, Pakistan and India were the ones that did not sign the non proliferation treaty, giving the UN no power to stop them. Research before you post.
- inactive, on 11/13/2007, -3/+9*****.
Iran as allowed for a complete transparency with IAEA.
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Focus/IaeaIran/inde ...
And in any case, YOU DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO CONTROL IRAN. Barbarians. - inactive, on 11/13/2007, -4/+9"they just need to give up their goal of producing nuclear weapons."
for which she has absolutely no idea whatsoever if it's true.
this administration has long before demonstrated they lie for propaganda and for propaganda only. - drizzlelicious, on 11/13/2007, -0/+5Nuke the hell out of the big fish.
- bsmang, on 11/13/2007, -0/+5replace 'expendable' with 'eagerly offered in exchange'. (And maybe the 'To' with a 'For' in the same sentence.)
- Frei, on 11/12/2007, -1/+6Frontline did a piece on this and other issues. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/showdown/
- inactive, on 11/12/2007, -2/+7It's not your place to allow or disallow anything. You don't own the world.
- elipabst, on 11/13/2007, -2/+7They signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Uranium enrichment is a critical part of the NPT. Funny how a few threads up you are talking about how the US should follow international law, but then turn and ignore parts of it that don't agree with your world-view.
- norman619, on 11/13/2007, -0/+5Your research needs to go beyond the blurbs and sound bites you get from the popular media. Iran lacks the refinement capacity to refine enough oil for itself AND it's customers. The Iranian government has done a horrible job of managing their oil assets and as a result they are facing a very real energy crisis. They truly do need nuclear power.
- CondoleezzaRice, on 11/13/2007, -2/+7I think nuclear power is essential for any developing country.
Of course nuclear weapons are out of the question, we wouldn't want them to retaliate against the abuse from our Israeli friends. - alphasixtyone, on 11/13/2007, -1/+6First, the Agency has been able to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran. Iran has continued to provide the access and reporting needed to enable Agency verification in this regard.
there's more, here's the link: http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2007/ebs ...
yes, that's from the IAEA website, not by any US media. Please stop perpetuating the *****, thanks. -
Show 51 - 100 of 196 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is