Why doesn't psycho Iran just dirty bomb Israel with 500 missiles?



Two things.

1. This is how anarchists see everyone else. Belief in the secular state is also a form of religion, trading mysticism for collectivism.

2. The Iranians haven't attacked anyone in centuries. There is absolutely zero proof anyone has their finger on the fire button.

I don't understand how people free pass (well I do, and it makes me sad) the US, Nato and Israel, actually killing innocent people, and then get all worked up about the supposed imminent threat of a (to date) peaceful Iran.

2. The Iranians haven't attacked anyone in centuries. There is absolutely zero proof anyone has their finger on the fire button.

Your posts are always so smart I am tredding lighty.... But bro are you saying there are not top officials and very powerful rich people there who support open war or acts of terror?
If I convince a bunch of retards to headbutt you isn't that the same as me headbutting you?
 
I'll have to disagree with point 2. There has been proof[1] that they have done stuff by proxy. Yes, it's not directly them doing stuff, but if I pay someone to punch you is it really any different than me punching you directly?
Yeah, Iran should just be like the US and kill thousands of people themselves.
 
I'll have to disagree with point 2. There has been proof[1] that they have done stuff by proxy. Yes, it's not directly them doing stuff, but if I pay someone to punch you is it really any different than me punching you directly?

[1] If you believe the "proof" or if you believe they were provoked is a different story.
I am happy to look at any proof.

Regardless, even if they did something by proxy, that doesn't mean they have a finger on the button.
 
bro are you saying there are not top officials and very powerful rich people there who support open war or acts of terror?
I have no idea. I don't know any top officials or very powerful rich people there.

What I do know, is that Iran has not attacked another country (region) in centuries.

If I convince a bunch of retards to headbutt you isn't that the same as me headbutting you?
Is it the same as you headbutting me?

I have a bad habit. I like to identify things very clearly. If you're saying these two things are the same, then just say I headbutted you when it was -joe- who headbutted you. Does that now make sense?

"It's like" is useful when you're trying to draw context around a foreign idea.

It's not very useful when used to make two different things equal.

But as I said, show me proof. If there is proof, and that is what informs what you know, show me.
 
I'll have to disagree with point 2. There has been proof[1] that they have done stuff by proxy. Yes, it's not directly them doing stuff, but if I pay someone to punch you is it really any different than me punching you directly?

But by that logic, the US needs to invade itself for forming, financing, and training al-Queda.

Or maybe the West shouldn't invade & occupy Iran's neighboring countries, stage coups, impose crippling sanctions, assassinate their scientists, and so on... and maybe Iran wouldn't feel the need to be so defensive.

I don't know, there's obviously alot more to this than we'll ever know. But what I do know is bombing Iran back into the stone age, and killing everyone's women and children isn't going to help anything.
 
Two things.

1. This is how anarchists see everyone else. Belief in the secular state is also a form of religion, trading mysticism for collectivism.

2. The Iranians haven't attacked anyone in centuries. There is absolutely zero proof anyone has their finger on the fire button.

I don't understand how people free pass (well I do, and it makes me sad) the US, Nato and Israel, actually killing innocent people, and then get all worked up about the supposed imminent threat of a (to date) peaceful Iran.

The older I get (and I am getting on) the more I find the idea of government to be something akin to a mass societal delusion. However, I cannot imagine what would replace it and having recently read a book about medieval England there's no way I would want life to be a free-for-all as it was then (though it needn't be like that).

On point 2. Not true I'm afraid. They fought war with Iraq in the 1980s and it was pretty much stirred-up by Khomeini if I remember correctly. Also as someone else has said, they are fighting proxy wars elsewhere in the region. However they are pretty peaceful compared to their neighbours.

In terms of how Iran is portrayed in the media - it makes me ashamed to see how warped a perspective the 'free press' has.
 
The older I get (and I am getting on) the more I find the idea of government to be something akin to a mass societal delusion. However, I cannot imagine what would replace it and having recently read a book about medieval England there's no way I would want life to be a free-for-all as it was then (though it needn't be like that).
It is a mass delusion, and if you're on the wrong side of it, can be deadly. Creeps me out tbh.

On point 2. Not true I'm afraid. They fought war with Iraq in the 1980s and it was pretty much stirred-up by Khomeini if I remember correctly.
Iraq invaded Iran.

Also as someone else has said, they are fighting proxy wars elsewhere in the region.
Would like to see proof of this because a lot of people seem to believe it, there must be some evidence beyond hearsay.

In terms of how Iran is portrayed in the media - it makes me ashamed to see how warped a perspective the 'free press' has.
Peter Hitchens did a really nice piece on Iran a few years ago for one of the major UK papers.

Yep, here it is

Iran: A nation of nose jobs, not nuclear war | Mail Online

You'd never see something like in a US paper because most Americans are insulated from the rest of the world by their media.

At the end of the day, 99% of humanity wants to be left alone, their kids to be raised well, to have some safety and to have some enjoyment.

It's the 1% that the 99% chose to follow who are constantly driving us into conflict, hatred and violence.
 
Iraq invaded Iran.

They did but it wasn't as simple as that because Iran was provoking an uprising in Saddam's backyard. Plus in the counter-offensive Iran invaded Iraq territory.

Interesting that the USA supplied weapons to both side. International Capital - che bastardo.
 
Because they need to have a good reason to throwmissiles at Israel outof the blue. And then of course.......they risk getting nuked in a matter of minutes
 
But by that logic, the US needs to invade itself for forming, financing, and training al-Queda.

Or maybe the West shouldn't invade & occupy Iran's neighboring countries, stage coups, impose crippling sanctions, assassinate their scientists, and so on... and maybe Iran wouldn't feel the need to be so defensive.

I don't know, there's obviously alot more to this than we'll ever know. But what I do know is bombing Iran back into the stone age, and killing everyone's women and children isn't going to help anything.

What you said made no sense in regards to what I said. I never said we should invade them and I don't agree with that. I was stating that there has been "proof" of them funding terrorist groups and thus funding a proxy war. I was implying there's no difference between telling person A to shoot a rocket and actually doing it yourself. I put proof in quotes, because anything I've ever seen has come from US intelligence reports or reports from it's allies intelligence groups. It doesn't matter if it's truthful or not, because the populous believes it.


BTW I agree with what you said, but I still don't see how you got I supported invading and bombing Iran.
 
Yeah, Iran should just be like the US and kill thousands of people themselves.

The US funds proxy wars all the time. So I guess if it's true then they are a lot like the US. cheers :drinkup:
 
I agree to an extent but the wider context is you have people who wholeheartedly embrace an absurd and fascistic religious ideology with their fingers on the fire button. Like I said, Persians are cool, Iranian muslims are fucking nuts.

But on the flip side, it's not exactly difficult to find people in the West who are fully supportive of turning the entire Middle East into a sheet of glass. That doesn't matter though. What matters is what the Western governments actually do. Same goes for Iran, and so far, Iran hasn't done much. Definitely not enough to warrant the upcoming invasion.
 
Orly? Do you know them all? Are you implying they have never heard of Rome?
Sometimes you leave yourself wide open professor.

He probably worded the post wrong. From the context of the post it looks like he was referring to the Middle East and most Christians in America would say there aren't any there.
 
Is it the same as you headbutting me?

I have a bad habit. I like to identify things very clearly. If you're saying these two things are the same, then just say I headbutted you when it was -joe- who headbutted you. Does that now make sense?

"It's like" is useful when you're trying to draw context around a foreign idea.

It's not very useful when used to make two different things equal.

But as I said, show me proof. If there is proof, and that is what informs what you know, show me.

I would say yes it's the exact same thing. If -joe- would have not head butted him without intervention from you. Yes, -joe- is acting on his own free will, but he wouldn't be committing the act if it weren't for some form of compensation or coercion (in this case you could argue he's not acting on his own free will) from you.

If -joe- was acting for compensation then that would make both of you guilty. If he was acting because of coercion then it's possible he could be considered innocent and you considered guilty, but either way he's still a proxy.


This -joe- guy sounds pretty violent. We should probably send in a drone before he hurts anyone else.

EDIT:

I've also been accused of being very litteral. I use to drive my teachers crazy.
 
Would like to see proof of this because a lot of people seem to believe it, there must be some evidence beyond hearsay.

Iran Missiles reach Tel Aviv | Iranian.com

Use of Iran-developed rocket that can reach Israel's civilian heartland points to scale of arms smuggling into Gaza

Fajr-5 missile gives Palestinians rare if short-lived advantage | World news | The Guardian

Palestinian missile hits Jerusalem's outskirts

Fajr-5 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nothing against Iranian people tho, watched some docu about them, they seem the coolest of the surrounding areas. Cant say that about idiotic leaders.
 
@ Wezcountry. This gem is from Sydney.

Y3Sky.jpg