Iran nuclear issues...

Discussion in 'Every Day Debating' started by azuren82, Mar 16, 2007.

  1. azuren82

    azuren82 Berserk got banned...

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Messages:
    2,795
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -0
    Well, I don't really see a thread for this issue, so I'm starting one now. Basically, what do you guys think about the whole Iran nuke issues? Do you think that they have their own rights in this as Ahmedinejad claims or do you think that the whole uranium enrichment plans the nation has should be banned? On a sidenote, I've seen the online news just now and that the US will be issuing a visa to him in order to enable him to travel to the UN meeting for the whole sanctions issue. What do you guys think his stance will be like? Do post your views here... :draught:
     
  2. Bard

    Bard Erchamion

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,874
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Ratings:
    +22 / 0 / -0
    You know I'm not really sure. I don't think that anyone should have nuclear weapons to be honest with you, but I know people will say "Well the US has them so Iran can have them, too." I can see where they would be coming from, too, but we have to think rationally here. The US is alot more stable than Iran at the moment and it takes more things than simply not liking a country for the President to use nuclear weapons. The way I see it, Ahmedinejad might actually consider using nuclear weapons against Israel just for being there.

    And for the record, I'm not too fond of Israel, but there are innocent people there.

    Another thing, this isn't like WWII.
     
  3. azuren82

    azuren82 Berserk got banned...

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Messages:
    2,795
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -0
    I still remember Ahmedinejad saying some controversial shit in denying the Holocaust and that alone gives Israel the excuse to think up the whole "okay, if Iran goes to forward in their nuke plans, we'll bomb the whole country" kind of crap.

    Remember the disasterous war with Lebanon and when I say disasterous, I mean it for the Lebanese civilians and those Israelites who got killed in the Hezbollah rocket shootings although definitely for sure, the Lebanese were on the losing end of the casualties. Saying frankly, I wonder how many of the pro-Israel buggers here will go for the "killing indiscrimantly for Israel's survival" kind of shit if Iran really goes nuke crazy. Obviously, we have such people here who supported Israel invading Lebanon the last time I create a thread on this issue irregardless of all that the Israeli army did.

    I'm not saying that Israel don't have the right to defend itself, but from that thrice damned Lebanon war it waged, it's obvious that they have a certain tendency to step over the line. IMO, the best option is to convinced Iran to give up the whole uranium enrichment program. There's no reason for this technology to exist in Iran IMO, but I truly doubt the bigwigs over there in Tehran will agree with that. Which basically gives us the uncomfortable possibility that Israel may declare war again and go trigger happy in Iran just like what they did in Lebanon.
     
  4. Bard

    Bard Erchamion

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,874
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Ratings:
    +22 / 0 / -0
    Exactly. I don't think anyone in that part of the world should have that technology. That sounds bad, I know, but that's the part of the world that always seems to have conflicts. The last thing we need over there are people shooting nuclear weapons at each other.
     
  5. Dwimmerlaik

    Dwimmerlaik Captain of Despair

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2005
    Messages:
    5,752
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Angmar (aka. GA)
    Ratings:
    +31 / 0 / -0
    #
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 17, 2007
  6. Tinuviel

    Tinuviel New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,517
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +31 / 0 / -0
    Dwimmer- I find your slanderous post including the word 'gay' to be terribly offensive and ignorant. I, for one, will not debate with someone who resorts to slanderous words and comments.
     
  7. Bard

    Bard Erchamion

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,874
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Ratings:
    +22 / 0 / -0
    I'll translate it, then, Tinuviel. I know Dwimmerlaik in person so I feel I can express what he is saying.

    In his humble opinion, nuclear weapons are pointless. The US is a stable world power, and he doesn't mind that the US has them.

    Iran, on the other hand, is an unstable country that breeds terrorism and terrorists that would not hesitate to destroy another country to make a point.

    I know that it is the principle, but to avoid not discussing important current affairs, I think you should just look at my translation instead of his post. They mean the same thing, but one is more "debate friendly" I guess you could say.
     
  8. Tinuviel

    Tinuviel New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,517
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +31 / 0 / -0
    His opinion was neither humble or misunderstood. It was his inept manner of expressing it that I take issue with.

    Regardless of whether or not the issue is worthy of debate or not is secondary to the conduct of those who partake in such discussions. If one can not rely upon individuals to conduct themselves in a respectful non-slanderous manner it compromises the tone and credit of the debate itself. Anyone who utters or tolerates slanderous comments is not someone I care to spend my time nor thoughts with. The chance of those comments spurring a constructive thought-provoking point of view is slim to none anyhow.

    While speaking of offensive posts, I daresay that yours is personally offensive as well. I, in no way, require your translation of his posts. If ever I am unclear about a person's post, I will ask for clarification. To insinuate that I was unable to understand the true meaning behind his less than stellar choice of words is laughable. The sentiment I comprehend, it is the thought process that allows such vocabulary that I am disgusted with. I am not an proponate for political correctness, however, I am a staunch advocate for common sense. Do not feel the need to 'dumb down' his posts for my benefit, he did that well enough originally.
     
  9. Tinuviel

    Tinuviel New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,517
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +31 / 0 / -0
    Lest anyone think that I am a person that gets all hot and bothered and offended if people do not phrase things in just the right manner with just the right words, I will tell you that I am a very hard person to offend. This is the first time that I have ever been offended in my entire time at TFF. It is not so much the fact that he used 'gay' inappropraitely, it is the casual, negative, disparaging manner in which he did so that offends me. Then, to have anyone defend and excuse such behavior adds insult to injury.

    Do carry on with your debate...
     
  10. Harbringer

    Harbringer New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    2,066
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0
    Next time keep your rants via Private Message, no one wants to hear it in here. Keep it on topic.
     
  11. Skyanide

    Skyanide The Big Meanie Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Canada
    Ratings:
    +77 / 0 / -0
    Nobody died and left you as moderator.

    Tinuviel, however, IS a moderator. Capiche?

    The point Tin is making (if I need to translate) is that people can expand their vocabulary to not have to resort to using "gay" as a synonym for something they don't agree with.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2007
  12. Harbringer

    Harbringer New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    2,066
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0
    I'm going to have go ahead and ask you to keep it on topic. No spam!
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2007
  13. Skyanide

    Skyanide The Big Meanie Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Canada
    Ratings:
    +77 / 0 / -0
    In my house, kids get the timeout chair for backtalk.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Bard

    Bard Erchamion

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,874
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Ratings:
    +22 / 0 / -0
    You know what, Tinuviel, I wasn't dumbing down his post. As a matter of fact, I was making it more grammatically correct. I took out the offensive sides of his argument and asked you to look at that instead of his post. You took something that isn't a big deal and wasted half a page to get your point across.

    I'm sorry if you felt that I was trying to make you feel stupid, I wasn't. I was trying to clean up the debate and replace a poor post with one that would benefit the debate.

    My bad.
     
  15. Bard

    Bard Erchamion

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,874
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Ratings:
    +22 / 0 / -0
    Not that my opinion matters, but I think that people should practice what they preach.
     
  16. Unraveller

    Unraveller <a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Messages:
    4,128
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    t' hEmerald hOile
    Ratings:
    +62 / 0 / -0
    I'm sorry, I just thought this was so preposterous that it should be highlighted.
     
  17. Justice

    Justice New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,260
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Southern California
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0
    No one ever said you had to have common sense.

    I find it very hard to argue with people who seem to hate America more than they do Islamic Terrorists. There is really no point in debating with them, better they just be ignored sometimes.
     
  18. Unraveller

    Unraveller <a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Messages:
    4,128
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    t' hEmerald hOile
    Ratings:
    +62 / 0 / -0
    Maybe you should try debating instead of arguing, that is after all what this section is all about. As far as hating America goes, I don't. I try not to hate anyone and I certainly wouldn't be so narrow-minded as to make a sweeping statement such as "I hate...... group of people". if that's your idea of common sense then you can keep it.

    To label a the ENTIRE POPULATION of a COUNTRY as terrorists? To assume that because your country is the most powerful it gets to make executive decisions about what others should be able to do? To assume the role of parent to the world?

    There are plenty of people in the world (usually those who have just seen their village razed by a Huey for no reason that is apparent to them) who believe that the US is a terrorist nation. Why is this opinion any more valid than theirs? There are those who believe that the US tries to use its nuclear supremacy to prevent any other country opposing it when it butts its nose in where it's not wanted (the mood prevalent in China).

    Did the UK declare war on Ireland because terrorists were living here?

    As far as nuclear issues go, I think all nukes should be controlled by the UN, whatever country they're based in.
     
  19. Bard

    Bard Erchamion

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,874
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Ratings:
    +22 / 0 / -0
    Their opinion is no less valid, but thinking practically, the opinion of the US is going to be taken more seriously than a peasant villager in China.

    Is that right? No, but that's how it is.

    Iran is unstable, you can't debate that. Any country that would threaten to DESTROY another entire country is not capable of controlling nuclear weapons.

    I fear I'm about to be made an example of, by the way.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2007
  20. Justice

    Justice New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,260
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Southern California
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    No, but I'm afraid equating the US with a terrorist supporting state like Iran is mind boggling to say the least. There are many people who hate America so much they like to side with their enemies often times no matter who those enemies are.

    Their opinion that the US nation is a terrorist nation is in fact plain BS because it isn't based on any fact whatsoever. Saying such is the same as saying you believe in dragons simply because you want to believe in them, despite the fact you have no evidence to back up your claims.

    Second, you make a statement, you didn't say you felt America was a terrorist nation, yet you point out the idea that Iran being a terrorist supporting nation and America isn't is a funny statement. If that doesn't mean you think the US is a terrorist nation, I'd like to hear the reasoning.

    Third, I see a big difference between a totalitarian state ran by Muslim extremists who finance terrorist groups around the Middle East like Hezzbollah and Hamas to help carry out further aggression and domination towards those not under Sharia law, and claiming that their main goal and desire is to wipe another nation and race off the face of the earth to the US who may have invaded another country, but set up a Democracy and allowed their people to choose their destiny rather than having it thrust upon them. I see an enormous difference in that. More cynical people don't.