what would have to have happen?

[Edited on June 6, 2008 at 12:11 PM. Reason : literally not cynically]

6/6/2008 12:11:48 PM

Hillary as VP

6/6/2008 12:13:17 PM

I will not vote for McCain. Now, I may vote for Nader depending on certain items (such as Hillary VP), but I will not vote for McCain.

6/6/2008 12:15:22 PM

^ You could at least give reasons why not. Obviously it doesn't matter because your mind is made up, but I would still be interested to hear what's preventing you from doing so.

6/6/2008 12:20:59 PM

mccain appears to be a warmonger

for me to trust him, he has to stop being that

stop talking about bombing iran

stop saying we shouldn't talk to our enemies

seriously, no more war

[Edited on June 6, 2008 at 12:34 PM. Reason : .]

6/6/2008 12:32:14 PM

^^his healthcare policies, his stance on Iraq. There are many philosophical differences I have with McCain. It makes no sense for an extremely liberal individual, like me, to vote for Mccain.

6/6/2008 12:35:29 PM

mccain would have to offer me even more free stuff and never ever ever ever hurt those poor terrorists

6/6/2008 12:42:16 PM

nastoute,

Aside from one bad joke that went viral on youtube, have you ever actually heard McCain say that we should bomb Iran?

6/6/2008 12:42:51 PM

Ba ba ba ba bombIran

I thought there was a song he wrote about it.

6/6/2008 12:44:12 PM

that joke was not funny and should not of been said

he's known to shoot his fucking mouth off and it shows his lack of judgment

it also shows his REAL OPINION

I believe, as of right now, that if McCain gets into office... that either we will or we will give the green light for israel to attack iran

no sir... I don't want any part of that

6/6/2008 12:46:07 PM

If McCain wants to bomb Iran, then Obama wants to invade Pakistan.

6/6/2008 12:46:46 PM

mccain needs to show us that he has an interest in maintaing peace

and I mean REAL peace, not "peace through arms" or "peace through force" or "peace through strength"

i want us to take a step back from being the bullies of the world

[Edited on June 6, 2008 at 12:48 PM. Reason : .]

6/6/2008 12:47:57 PM

So how do we promote peace between Israel and Iran without threatening Iran with instant annihilation if they attack Israel? Ahmadinejad isn't the most reasonable guy.

6/6/2008 12:51:11 PM

nastoute,

wow.

6/6/2008 12:51:55 PM

How about we allow Israel to fight their own wars.

6/6/2008 12:52:01 PM

^^

you asked for my opinion and I gave it too you

that is what would have to happen... for McCain to make serious statements about promoting peace throughout the world

to treat other countries with respect and not try to bully them or egg them on to war

...

Quote :

"So how do we promote peace between Israel and Iran without threatening Iran with instant annihilation if they attack Israel? Ahmadinejad isn't the most reasonable guy."

you see, THIS is the bully mentality

why is it our job to threaten ANYONE? I mean, who gave us the right?

it's stupid and wrong

[Edited on June 6, 2008 at 12:56 PM. Reason : .]

6/6/2008 12:55:09 PM

Quote :

"make serious statements about promoting peace throughout the world"

I for one would love to hear an example. Just 1. I'm highly interested in this manner to make people have peace.

6/6/2008 12:56:44 PM

well... TALKING to people is the first step to getting them to agree to peaceful solutions

and that's exactly what obama has suggested

i mean, how are you going to achieve anything with other nations if you don't talk to them?

[Edited on June 6, 2008 at 1:00 PM. Reason : .]

6/6/2008 1:00:21 PM

no no no. you've got it all backwards. you first require them to agree with you, and then you go talk to them about how much you agree.

6/6/2008 1:01:36 PM

Quote :

"you see, THIS is the bully mentality why is it our job to threaten ANYONE? I mean, who gave us the right? it's stupid and wrong"

Does Iran have a right to destroy another nation based upon ethnic/ religious intolerance? Should we stand by and watch this happen?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War

They tried it once, they'll try it again.

6/6/2008 1:02:00 PM

^^

for real

how asinine

[Edited on June 6, 2008 at 1:02 PM. Reason : .]

6/6/2008 1:02:05 PM

Quote :

"mccain needs to show us that he has an interest in maintaing peace and I mean REAL peace, not "peace through arms" or "peace through force" or "peace through strength" "

If only Al Qaeda felt the same way.

6/6/2008 1:02:45 PM

a) Al Qaeda is not a country

b) Al Qaeda has nothing to do with Iran

[Edited on June 6, 2008 at 1:04 PM. Reason : .]

6/6/2008 1:04:09 PM

Quote :

"how are you going to achieve anything with other nations if you don't talk to them?"

i honestly can't wait till obama sits down to talk with the leaders of iran..
lol. i swear to god

he's gonna climb the stairs up air force one, close the hatch and the next words out of his mouth are gonna be: "damn, our boys were right, these motherfuckers are batshit crazy"

he will then proceed to straighten his tie and give the directive to launch the airstrikes.


i'm going to be LOLing so hard when that day comes. I can't wait.

6/6/2008 1:05:29 PM

Quote :

" They tried it once, they'll try it again."

Iran was not involved in the Six Day War, do you even read the shit you link to?

6/6/2008 1:06:13 PM

Quote :

"a) Al Qaeda is not a country b) Al Qaeda has nothing to do with Iran [Edited on June 6, 2008 at 1:04 PM. Reason : .]"

Did I say that Al Qaeda was a country? Did I say they had anything to do with Iran?

You make it sound like everyone should just get together and sing kum-bai-ya and we can all just be friends. You can't be friends with people who's sole motivation in life is to kill you and as many others like you as they can.

Do I think we should explore our options diplomatically with countries we have issues with (Iran, Syria, etc., etc.)? Sure. But we shouldn't be so naieve to think that all they are after is peace or nuclear technology for their power plants.

[Edited on June 6, 2008 at 1:14 PM. Reason : edit]

6/6/2008 1:10:43 PM

I would have to become a self-seeking and disparaging individual, apathetic towards the world's wishes, unappeasable in regards to my taxable income, ethically dishonest while claiming to be holier-than-thou, in the wrong when it comes to healthcare in America, sluggish when it comes to social progress and flat wrong when it comes to warfare.

I would not be myself.

[Edited on June 6, 2008 at 1:16 PM. Reason : -]

6/6/2008 1:11:53 PM

Quote :

"If only Al Qaeda felt the same way."

Surely if we drop lots of bombs and kill lots of people; all the peons in the 3rd world will give up the use of terrorism and submit to US neo-colonialism .

Some people are just retarded that they think "the war on terror" can actually stop terrorism. This is kind of like a dictator who thinks eliminating opposition parties and killing those who oppose them will somehow stamp out the possibility of revolt.

6/6/2008 1:13:32 PM

Quote :

"Iran was not involved in the Six Day War, do you even read the shit you link to?"

Really? Next you're going to tell me that Christopher Columbus wasn't the first man to walk on the moon.

6/6/2008 1:13:40 PM

Obama meets with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Obama: "Hello there"
Ahmadinejad: "In the name of Allah do not block my view of the Koran"
Obama: "ooookkkk.." :moves to a new chair:
Ahmadinejad: "Allah Akbar"
Obama: "So let's discuss nuclear weapons programs. Why are you developing them?"
Ahmadinejad: "In the holy name of Allah, we have none and have given you entry to our labs."
Obama: "um no you didn't. and plus we found them through spies and radar imagery."
Ahmadinejad: "God willing, we will use them to wipe Israel and The Whore of America off the earth"
Obama: "right like you were saying last week. Ok. moving on." :whispers to intel officer, 'plz fuel airforce 1 up quicker':
Ahmadinejad: "would you like to see my torture chambers we built to kill any who oppose our views here in Iran?? the same ones we plan on using on the israelis once we invade??"
Obama: "uh, um. sure hold on a sec. I left my keys in my car... brb"

Runs to Black Hawk on Ahmadinejads palace rooftop and calls General Petraus to begin air strikes.

6/6/2008 1:16:12 PM

Quote :

"Surely if we drop lots of bombs and kill lots of people; all the peons in the 3rd world will give up the use of terrorism and submit to US neo-colonialism . Some people are just retarded that they think "the war on terror" can actually stop terrorism. This is kind of like a dictator who thinks eliminating opposition parties and killing those who oppose them will somehow stamp out the possibility of revolt. "

So what do you propose? That we sit down and talk to Al Qaeda? And if that's really what you think, I would probably say you're projecting when you use the word "retarded".

Sure there are contributing factors to bin Laden's rise to infamy, but those cards have already been dealt. He isn't suddenly going to do an about face in regards to who he terms infidels and targets for extermination. If you're proposing we target cutting off his constant supply of terrorist recruits, I would agree with you. But you can't have a carrot without a stick. If terrorists think they can win a military struggle out right, what incentive do they have and sit down and negotiate?

6/6/2008 1:19:10 PM

Do you guys remember that time Obama said we should pack our shit and get out of Afghanistan because that's where most of the Al Qaeda forces are

It was something like that

EDIT: He's only talking about negotiating with national governments not terrorist groups what is so difficult about this

[Edited on June 6, 2008 at 1:21 PM. Reason : .]

6/6/2008 1:19:32 PM

^What I'm about to say is definitely with a cynical tone, but I'm not so sure that if Obama successfully negotiated with the likes of Iran, he wouldn't then try to do the same for Al Qaeda. I realize I'll get flamed for saying that, but I really think the man puts a little too much stock in his own personal charisma and its ability to help him talk people into doing what he wants.

And the Iranian regime isn't that dissimilar to Al Qaeda. It's a fundamental Islamic group who rules through religious law and only uses it's influence to promote it's own power. The key differences being 1) Iranians are Shia and Al Qaeda is Sunni and 2) the Iranian regime was successful in its attempt to hijack a nation state's government for its own exploits, whereas Al Qaeda was not.

[Edited on June 6, 2008 at 1:30 PM. Reason : asdf]

6/6/2008 1:29:37 PM

Iran is fairly dissimilar to Al-Qaeda. Their gov. is essentially a democracy, and there's (or there was...) a meaningful amount of pro-America people there. Not to mention that the gov. has an element that is religiously-aimed, but also a "normal" section that is not. Saying that the entirety of Iran is religious nutjobs and thus must be bombed is the kind of idiocy from McCain that makes Obama better for foreign policy.

Al-qaeda is a different issue. They're not strongly organized enough, from my understanding, that negotiating could do any good. Who would you negotiate with? Al-qaeda as a terrorist organization is more a symptom than the main problem. The Iraq war exacerbates the symptom, but more diplomatic approaches elsewhere in the region will help alleviate it. But, this doesn't mean you don't keep trying to treat the symptoms while you handle the problems.

6/6/2008 1:35:13 PM

It's going to be like Jimmy Carter all over again. Except this time Jimmy Carter is Obama and Iran is...Iran...again.

6/6/2008 1:35:19 PM

a rapist would have to live in lake park

OH WAIT

6/6/2008 1:39:32 PM

It's going to be like Jimmy Carter all over again. Except this time Jimmy Carter is Obama and Iran is...Iran...again.

6/6/2008 1:40:08 PM

Quote :

"Not to mention that the gov. has an element that is religiously-aimed, but also a "normal" section that is not."

So moron, I bet you wouldn't mind if we just added another branch of our government run by Pat Robertson and Hagee?

You'd just excuse that off as well? Because we have a normal section too?

6/6/2008 1:44:37 PM

Quote :

"Their gov. is essentially a democracy, and there's (or there was...) a meaningful amount of pro-America people there. Not to mention that the gov. has an element that is religiously-aimed, but also a "normal" section that is not."

I think you're using a rather loose definition of democracy there. I'll go along with the pro-America folks part. The government does have both elements as you described, but the only ones wielding the power are the religious fundamentalists. On that part, there's little room for argument.

6/6/2008 1:47:36 PM

^^ You completely missed my point.

I wasn't saying it was okay that their gov. has a religious element, I was pointing out that the religious element doesn't represent the entire gov.

[Edited on June 6, 2008 at 1:48 PM. Reason : ]

6/6/2008 1:47:55 PM

Quote :

"hat we sit down and talk to Al Qaeda? And if that's really what you think, I would probably say you're projecting when you use the word "retarded". "

A more detailed plan then LETS DROP BOMBS AND KILL THOSE FUCKERS.

I will give it to bush though. After lying about Iraq, and involving us in an unjustified war of aggression; at least we are rebuilding the place.

6/6/2008 1:53:56 PM

Quote :

"well... TALKING to people is the first step to getting them to agree to peaceful solutions and that's exactly what obama has suggested"

OH RLY?

How do you figure? Talks with N. Korea under Clinton failed miserably. Are these crazy leaders hellbent on the destruction of the US suddenly going to soften up and get cozy with us if we talk to them?

You have to realize that the source of their political power comes from demagoguing the US. They are gonna continue to agitate and try to puff out their chests, no matter what we do. There has to be an appropriate balance of carrots and sticks. And in some cases, the best thing to do is simply ignore foreign leaders because there are some fundamental issues that cannot be resolved through negotiation.

6/6/2008 1:55:46 PM

Quote :

"A more detailed plan then LETS DROP BOMBS AND KILL THOSE FUCKERS. I will give it to bush though. After lying about Iraq, and involving us in an unjustified war of aggression; at least we are rebuilding the place."

It's kind of hard to negotiate with people who only reveal themselves when they or some of their group are about to kill somone. And I really don't think the American people would be up for negotiating with Al Qaeda under any circumstances. You see there's this event that happened seven years ago that kind of soured Americans on Al Qaeda. Now what was the date for that day again?....Oh, that's right, it was 9/11. How silly of me to forget. You must have made the same mistake I did.

At least we agree on the Bush/Iraq situation.

6/6/2008 2:01:49 PM

Quote :

"...at least we are rebuilding the place."

Not if the democrats have their way.

6/6/2008 2:03:31 PM

Quote :

"Their gov. is essentially a democracy"

Iran is a sham democracy, and it's pathetic that there are people like you who actually believe it to be democratic at all.

Where to start?...

They do not tolerate dissent. At all. In the press, from opposition political parties, or academia. Do you consider that to be democratic?

They have a council of unelected Mullahs who decide the candidates allowed to run for office. In the last election cycle, they "disqualified" hundreds of potential presidential candidates, effectively rigging the election in advance. And besides, these religious clerics, headed by Khamenei, have the final say on all decisions. Is that what you consider to be "essentially democratic"? A religious thocracy thinly veiled by a sham democracy?

C'mon, get the fuck outta here with that shit, moron

6/6/2008 2:07:55 PM

^ It clearly is more democratic than most of the middle east, and as least as democratic as Russia.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7297923.stm

Quote :

"However, many of the conservative winners are critics of hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Reformists saw a small increase in their representation, despite the disqualification of many of their proposed candidates. They are claiming a relative success, given the circumstances of the poll. "

And it depends on what you mean by "tolerate" dissent. The young people there are pushing the country forward, and the entrenched gov. is trying to stick to old ways. Things are changing slowly, but they are changing.

There's apparently a women's rights movement going on, and they gave one of leaders a supsended sentence, rather than executing her:
http://www.iranfocus.com/en/women/award-winning-feminist-given-suspended-jail-term-in-iran-report.html

Quote :

"TEHRAN (AFP) — Iran has handed down a suspended jail sentence to an award-winning women's rights activist found guilty of seeking to harm national security, press reports said on Saturday. "Parvin Ardalan was sentenced to two to three years suspended jail," reformist newspaper Etemad said. "She was accused of illegal gathering ... and defying the police in order to harm national security." Ardalan, who won Sweden's Olof Palme Prize in 2007, faced the charges for a June 2006 demonstration at a Tehran main square demanding equal rights for women on divorce, inheritance and child custody."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/16/iran1

Quote :

"The rules of the coffee houses - in comparison with the street - reflect the fundamental division in Iran. It is not the divide between the 'Reforms' and the 'Principalists' of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who competed for Iran's parliamentary elections on Friday. For many of the young, including Mehdi and Shareh, those elections represented an increasingly irrelevant distinction in a clerical system they feel is stacked in favour of itself. Instead, the division is between what Iranians do and say in private, or in places where they feel comfortable, and how they are forced to behave in public. The inevitable tension between the two is defining the boundaries of the country's culture wars. For it is here, rather than in the polling booths, that Iran's most crucial competition is taking place - over the limits of what is acceptable self-expression. It is the struggle to push the boundaries of freedom in Iran. "

We have a lot of people on our side in Iran if we don't screw up by invading or bombing them. If we invade, all these people who have a pro-west bend will swing the other way, just like many of the Iraqis did.

Painting them as beyond reprieve like you are doing doesn't help things, is dangerous, and can only make things worse. You would only be serving to increase rather than abate terrorism by demonizing people who don't actually hate you.

6/6/2008 2:30:04 PM

Quote :

"There's apparently a women's rights movement going on, and they gave one of leaders a supsended sentence, rather than executing her"

Oh how nice. ALL HAIL THE IRANIAN DEMOCRACY! THEY DIDN'T KILL HER!

6/6/2008 2:33:17 PM

I love it when Prawn Star tells people they are full of shit, only to be shot down with an overload of links and information.

6/6/2008 2:33:29 PM

The Republican Party: We jump to conclusions with our arms to avoid using our heads.

[Edited on June 6, 2008 at 2:41 PM. Reason : -]

6/6/2008 2:40:17 PM

^^LOL, still upset that I called you out on all your bullshit in that ANWR thread? Don't hold a grudge, I do it to everybody that's full of shit

^^^^I'm sorry Moron, but for the life of me I cannot understand how those links help your point. They crack down on dissent? Women don't have fundamental rights? Unregistered public gatherings are an offense punishable by long jail terms? Yes, that sounds pretty undemocratic to me.

Quote :

"We have a lot of people on our side in Iran if we don't screw up by invading or bombing them. If we invade, all these people who have a pro-west bend will swing the other way, just like many of the Iraqis did."

I agree with this statement completely. I have nothing against the Iranian people, and in fact I am well aware of their rich and diverse culture.

The problem is that THEY ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY, which is what you posted earlier. Here is a good article (from the LA Times nonetheless, hardly a neocon source):

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-ganji12nov12,0,5461346.story?coll=la-opinion-rightrail

[Edited on June 6, 2008 at 2:43 PM. Reason : 2]

6/6/2008 2:43:13 PM