Islamic-mein-kampf!...

You do realize that the majority of terrorists comes from...Get this. Saudi Arabia. You don't see videos on that. Saudi Arabia far worse than Iran can ever hope to be. Women in Saudi are covered head to toe. They are not allowed to even sit in the same starbucks as men. In Iran, women at least get to goto Universities. Militants in any country is bad. Why focus on islamic militants? O wait, thats probably because you hate islamic people.

You must be stupid if you don't realize that attacking Iran only fuels militants. In fact, Al Qaeda couldn't be happier that we invaded Iraq. Their membership has gone up and more people hate the U.S. than ever. It's people like you that perpetuate the hatred.

Iran has absolutely no reason to even considering invading Israel. It's not even worth it for them. The only reason why they support the palestinian "terrorists" is because they see the Zionist Regime as illegal.

 

You have got to be kidding me. You are severely underestimating the Israel's military capabilities. Israel has one of the top military armies in the world. Iran doesn't even come close in comparison.

 

No they aren't. They have amazing toys from Americans, but those toys do not mean victory. Iran would win a war against Israel. Iran would lose to Russia, India, China and NATO.

 

David Horowitz...the man never ceases to amaze me.

 

you cant be serious. isreal could totally destroy iran in about a day. there is absolutely no comparison b/t the two countries militaries.

 

Israel's war machine would outlast the Iranian war machine, but the Iranians' fight would outlast the Israelis'. Iran successfully implemented asymmetric warfare in Northern Lebanon.

 

Actually, that's not even close to being true. The Saudis have even cracked down hard for the past few years on terrorism financing, which was the biggest issue for them, not actual "terrorists" but "terrorist-sponsoring".

Saudi isn't at war, most terrorism in the world is confined to the conflict areas of the world, which is to be expected (e.g. Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, Pakistan, Chechnya, Sri Lanka, etc). 9/11 hijackers were not a 'representative sample' by any means. All indications are that Bin Laden wanted to purposely strain US-Saudi relations and picked his 'martyrs' accordingly.

He was right, it worked...

 

important points you have been making the last couple pages, but the things you are saying are going to go over the heads of people who dont even know the difference b/t shiite and sunni muslims, dont understand that al-quada are sunni and the iranians are shiite and that dont know what wahhabist islam is or where it originates.

i would also add to what you are saying the fact that the iranian president and the mullahs have similar approval ratings in iran as bushs here. attacking them would be the best thing for the iranian leadership as it would serve to unite the country behind them.

 

isareals war machine could totally decimate iran and its infrastructure in a matter of hours. there would be no iran to "outlast" the israelis.

 

The irony, or tragedy, is that it is their version of Islamic law, twisted by their narrow, ****ed up perspective. The majority of Iranians would love to join the modern world, in my opinion, and have a government that reflects their beliefs and desires. This abomination has morphed into something now imposed upon them by a minority, relishing their power and abusing the people. Someday, they will rise up and toss them out, but that is something they need to do, not have it imposed by another power from outside the country.




Impeach Bush!!

 

In terms of military technology, obviously Israel has the superior military thanks largely to U.S. hardware. The only country that could theoretically 'compete' with Israel's military hardware is Saudi, and those two are probably the least likely dyad to get into a conflict in that region right now.

However, outside of the United States right now, Iran probably has the largest capacity of any other state in the region to 'project' its forces beyond its borders. So targeting Iranian military/civilian infrastructure wouldn't be enough to 'destroy' Iran's ability to retaliate effectively, although undoubtedly it would reduce it.

The Iranians are smarter and more capable that you give them credit for. Israel's security dilemma and its primary focus is still trying to ensure than no neighboring state would come even close to 'balancing' it out on the military front. Israel's paranoia about Iran now -- and Iraq before that -- is understandable, they're pretty much forced to think 'preventively' (they can't act preemptively, it would be too late then) and their inability/unwillingness to directly confront Iran now and lobbying for the U.S. to do so on their behalf is them coming to a realization that their power is 'limited' in its scope. The Arab states won't let Israel operate nearby the Iranian border (the Kurds were willing to do it but once it was 'uncovered' in the media they had to quickly backtrack and were basically forced to severe all security ties with the Israelis), but Iran has the luxury of projecting its influence all around Israel, to the point of having a paramilitary force (Hezbollah) and a friendly state/agents that can 'facilitate' its operations (Syria, pro-Syria factions in Lebanon, even an alliance of 'convenience' in Hamas inside the Palestinian territories). Israel doesn't have that luxury, and even its friendliest ally (Turkey) wouldn't be completely excited about the prospect of helping facilitate attacks on Iran, a country that's helping Turkey counter Kurdish terrorists in northern Iraq (amusingly enough, they have a counterterrorism alliance of their own, however temporary it may be).

I love the Middle East

 

"In the West the calculated manipulation of public opinion to serve political and ideological interests is much more covert and therefore much more effective than a propaganda system imposed in a totalitarian regime.

Its greatest triumph is that we generally don't notice the influence of propaganda — or laugh at the notion it even exists.

We watch the democratic process taking place - heated debates in which we feel we could have a voice — and think that, because we have “free” media, it would be hard for the Government to get away with anything very devious without someone calling them on it.

The American approach to social control is so much more sophisticated and pervasive that it really deserves a new name.

It isn't just propaganda any more, it's “prop-agenda.” It's not so much the control of what we think, but the control of what we think about.

When our governments want to sell us a course of action, they do it by making sure it's the only thing on the agenda, the only thing everyone's talking about.

And they pre-load the ensuing discussion with highly selected images, devious and prejudicial language, dubious linkages, weak or false “intelligence” and selected “leaks”.

With the ground thus prepared, governments are happy if you then “use the democratic process” to agree or disagree — for, after all, their intention is to mobilise enough headlines and conversation to make the whole thing seem real and urgent.

The more emotional the debate, the better. Emotion creates reality, reality demands action."

Noam Chomsky

 

It depends on if you mean allowed him to succeed as a leader of Germany, or in carrying out the Holocaust.

the main thing that allowed Hitler to have as much success wit his plans regarding the holocaust as he did was that for decades if not centuries people were being fed and buying into antisemitic stereotypes, and bigotry. Every American who bough a Ford automobile were given a free copy of a book Ford wrote talking about how evil and bad Jews were.

Things had eroded that was seen as acceptable, and nobody cared enough to stop it. That was here in the U.S. In Europe it was the same if not worse. That attitude is what allowed Hitler to succeed. There were concentration camps all over Europe killing off the Jewish population.

 

I don't think he made that case. I've seen writing by some of the people he mentioned in which they spoke against Hitler but applauded his hatred of the Jews. They just found someone who had a similar idea and mentioned him. They weren't inspired by him.

 

Nails what the Administration did leading up to, and after, the invasion and occupation of Iraq. And they are still at it. A nice, and depressing, post.



Impeach Bush. Yesterday.

 

I just hope that you realize that Islamic militant terrorists target and kill many times the amount of other Muslims than they do Jews or Christians. To portray it as a unified movement against Israel, or the U.S. or Jews or Christians isn't accurate.

 

Exactly.

Also if it were as rapant in Iran as you claim, you would hardly see photos like these.

http://www2.irna.ir/occasion/turismo-en-iran/descubra-Iran/La-mujer-irani/la_mujer.htm

 

Too long to post all, but here is an interesting Iran article by Chomsky regarding Cold War II, circa August 2007.

http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20070827.htm

I don't always agree with Chomsky's stance vis-a-vis Israel, but otherwise, well, you judge...

Here is an excerpt:

"Unquestionably, Iran's government merits harsh condemnation, though it has not engaged in worldwide terror, subversion, and aggression, following the US model – which extends to today’s Iran as well, if ABC news is correct in reporting that the US is supporting Pakistan-based Jundullah, which is carrying out terrorist acts inside Iran. [13] The sole act of aggression attributed to Iran is the conquest of two small islands in the Gulf – under Washington’s close ally the Shah. In addition to internal repression – heightened, as Iranian dissidents regularly protest, by US militancy -- the prospect that Iran might develop nuclear weapons also is deeply troubling. Though Iran has every right to develop nuclear energy, no one – including the majority of Iranians – wants it to have nuclear weapons. That would add to the threat to survival posed much more seriously by its near neighbors Pakistan, India, and Israel, all nuclear armed with the blessing of the US, which most of the world regards as the leading threat to world peace, for evident reasons."