'Iran ready to send peacekeepers to UK'

[superNova]

OK...So Iran is the self-appointed defender of the Palestinians in the Israeli/Palestinians conflict. And said guardianship involves military means. Am I correct and do YOU approve?

my approval or disapproval works little here for in the middle east, the reality is, one country israel has taken feud with every other possible middle eastern country, and im not sure even if turkey, who long shared warm relations with israel, turns against israel and make some offenses in future which ofcourse will depend on the nature of their bilateral relations, which today is downgrading

you must also understand iran sits in very close neighbourhoods of israel so naturally if israel tries to use nukes of countries like syria and lebanon who cant reply in such circumstances, than it will be the balancing force of iranian nukes which will keep the situation under considerable stability or iran will surely suffer the disasters of israeli nukes

 

[500]

Iranians discovered virtue of trolling.

 

[gambit]

According to the "United States Strategic Bombing Survey", using two nuclear weapons on Japanese population centers was unnecessary, since Japan by that time was already defeated.



Dwight D. Eisenhower himself, wrote that it was unnecessary because Japan was already defeated, in his book "The White House Years". Even Douglas MacArthur said it was unnecessary.

Then after the war ended, we found out that Japan was still quite capable of resisting.

Now I'm no longer going to reply to you as this is off topic. This is about Iran and the UK.

Good...Then do not bring up the A-bombs unless the discussion is about WW II.

 

[gambit]

my approval or disapproval works little here for in the middle east, the reality is, one country israel has taken feud with every other possible middle eastern country, and im not sure even if turkey, who long shared warm relations with israel, turns against israel and make some offenses in future which ofcourse will depend on the nature of their bilateral relations, which today is downgrading

I did not ask if your approval has any effects. I asked if you approve that Iran is the self-appointed defender of the Palestinians, much like how the UN often speak up and appointed itself as guardian of someone in some crisis. So do YOU approved and does that approval extend to military means? The UN extended such guardianship to the Libyan rebels.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Then after the war ended, we found out that Japan was still quite capable of resisting.

Good...Then do not bring up the A-bombs unless the discussion is about WW II.

Haha, don't tell me you know more than the US Strategic Bombing Survey, Dwight D. Eisenhower or even Douglas MacArthur.

On topic: As I said, I don't think Iran is any less responsible, than Russia/China/UK/France/India/Pakistan/Israel... ALL of whom, have never used a nuclear weapon on a civilian population.

 

[gambit]

Haha, don't tell me you know more than the US Strategic Bombing Survey, Dwight D. Eisenhower or even Douglas MacArthur.

Did they know about Ketsu-go?

On topic: As I said, I don't think Iran is any less responsible, than Russia/China/UK/France/India/Pakistan/Israel... ALL of whom, have never used a nuclear weapon on a civilian population.

So if Iran used nuclear weapons on Israel, you would approve since the US have used such on Japan?

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

So if Iran used nuclear weapons on Israel, you would approve since the US have used such on Japan?

No, I wouldn't approve of that at all.

Like I said before, I don't approve of innocent civilians being killed. And that includes the ones that have been killed by my own country.

I also want stability in the Middle East. As most people in the world do.

 

[gambit]

No, I wouldn't approve of that at all.

Like I said before, I don't approve of innocent civilians being killed. That includes the ones that have been killed by my own country.

And I also want stability in the Middle East. As most people in the world do.

Then what military means would you approve in order to stop Israel from committing 'genocide' and assorted hyperboles against the Palestinians? Meaning what methods and tactics how short of nuclear would YOU be willing to approve?

 

[Mike2011]

Iranian leaders are stupid.. but got balls..

 

[gambit]

Iranian leaders are stupid.. but got balls..

What 'balls'? More like water balloons. The Brits are not going to do anything. The Iranian government know that so Ahmed-whathisname is going to milk the PR cow for all he can.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Then what military means would you approve in order to stop Israel from committing 'genocide' and assorted hyperboles against the Palestinians? Meaning what methods and tactics how short of nuclear would YOU be willing to approve?

The Israel-Palestinian conflict is none of my business. And personally, I feel sorry for the innocent people on both sides who get caught in the crossfire.

 

[gambit]

The Israel-Palestinian conflict is none of my business. And personally, I feel sorry for the innocent people on both sides who get caught in the crossfire.

But you got no problems injecting yourself (post #47) into the subject via nuclear weapons from WW II. Try to keep up with your own arguments, be consistent, and not so cowardly when challenged.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

But you got no problems injecting yourself into the subject via nuclear weapons from WW II. Try to keep up with your own arguments, be consistent, and not so cowardly when challenged.

You've used the word "coward" several times in this thread already.

I guess South Vietnamese might have a reason to use it more than most, considering the overwhelming victory by the Northern Communists.

The fact that you've sunk to personal attacks, shows that you clearly have run out of logical arguments. I'll clarify though, I take no sides on the Israel-Palestine conflict, but I don't have any particular issue with the Iranian nuclear programme either.

And that America is the only nation to have used nuclear weapons on a civilian population, is simply a historical fact. Russia/China/UK/France/India/Pakistan/Israel have all proved that they can hold nuclear weapons without using them on civilians, and I haven't seen any evidence to suggest Iran won't follow suit.

 

[gambit]

You've used the word "coward" several times in this thread already.

I guess South Vietnamese might have a reason to use it more than most, considering the overwhelming victory by the Northern Communists.

The fact that you've sunk to personal attacks shows that you clearly have run out of logical arguments.

I have more than amply provided the discussion with logical arguments. And calling you a coward is appropriate considering how you ran away from difficult questions. As for this South Vietnamese, I have more than proved myself, conscript reject.

 

[gambit]

Wow, I've never seen a person give up on his arguments and resort to name-calling so quickly.

You must have broken a record.

Gave up? I persisted. YOU gave up.