Is it now time for Iran to learn their place in the world, courtesy of a missle strike?

Posted by: DCWatson at October 7, 2004 8:21 AM

But didnt the Iranian mullahs say they only needed missiles against Iraq and Israel? Hmmm, isn't that strange. They are hoping to blackmail the europeans (dmminnies)for everything (cash/loot etc) they can get out of them. Gee...wonder where these mullah's got that idea/concept from. Maybe the threat of a 10 000 degree celcius mushroom cloud over my city could jog my memory?

Posted by: obl r us at October 7, 2004 8:32 AM

Please hit Europe then, o mad mullahs and you may unwittingly end up saving western civilization in the old world. The catchword is 'may' coz there's no guarantee the EU dhimmis will wake up even after taking a missile strike in their heartland.

Posted by: voletti at October 7, 2004 8:35 AM

You are right Voletti. If an iranian nuke tipped missile hits the the eu they will probably blame it on a jewish mullah in Tehran.

Posted by: obl r us at October 7, 2004 8:39 AM

I find these comments highly offensive, Robert Spencer should delete them. What is wrong with you people?

What is it with Americans? Flouride in the drinking water? Your minds are poisoned with hate.

Posted by: Karl at October 7, 2004 8:47 AM

....And if they can hit Europe they can definitely hit Israel and Iraq (and any US, or other infidel embassy or base, inside Iraq; or anywhere else in arabia for that matter).

Iran cannot be trusted to own a pea-shooter , let alone uranium/nuclear production, maybe their claims that it's for energy would be more believable if it weren't for the fact that they have threatened to "wipe Israel off the map", and several comments antagonising US forces.

Maybe it's another case of a country trying to make the world believe it's tougher than it is ( as Saddam allegedly did before we bombed Iraq, according to media moguls who say thats what lead us to starting the war on him), but I doubt it.
Iran is a big country with a big military, and now it wants big weapons to match , but not for any benign use, allowing a corrupt regime such as Irans to become a nuclear power would be disastrous.
I believe Bush is waiting to see if he wins the election before he commits to taking out Irans nuke-facilities, but if Kerry gets in there's no chance of him doing the same....hell, he'll probably give Americas nukes to them.
So Bush needs to either make some kind of under the table deal with Ariel Sharon, and take attack Iran via Israel, or get it done US-style now.

Never trust the mad-mullahs!!!

Posted by: Rikki at October 7, 2004 8:50 AM

I don't hate you Karl. I just think you are an theo-fascist. IF you were something else than that I might even like you. I find it strange that you think the mullahs are soooo nice...hmmmmm....your thinking is really theo-fascist....you arn't interested in the truth are you...noooooo...that would be so hard and uncomfortable....you are like a robot...i say something you just blurt it out according to your propaganda little green book.

Posted by: obl r us at October 7, 2004 8:51 AM

Please enlighten me Karl, why should this news be greeted with a nice, respectful "golf clap"?

Moose

Posted by: Moose at October 7, 2004 9:04 AM

obl r us: If an iranian nuke tipped missile hits the the eu they will probably blame it on a jewish mullah in Tehran.

wrong. they will blame it on european islamophpbes who have offended muslims. they'll try to avoid further attacks by being nicer to them (e g financing more koranic schools and criminalizing any criticism of islam).

Posted by: Scandie at October 7, 2004 9:04 AM

Karl. What it is with Americans is that we haven't forgotten what Islamic pigs have managed to destroy all around the world.

Whether you find remarks here offensive or not doesn't much come into the mix, savvy?

You asked what it is with Americans, what wonderful part of the globe are you in?

We enjoy and exercise the right to free speech here. Are you a Muslim appeaser? A Muslim apologist? Or just some tree-hugging, head in the dirt, left winger, still falling for the lies of Muslims around the world? Do you also go by the name Joseph?

There are verses in the unholy Qur'an we could offer you that demonstrate a maniacal agenda, but would you bother to peruse them?

Posted by: DCWatson at October 7, 2004 9:05 AM

By the way, Karl......it's fluoride, not flouride.

Posted by: DCWatson at October 7, 2004 9:09 AM

Folks, mounting evidence suggests that "karl" may be a neo-nazi - hence his endless rants about the Jews. Then again he may be a rabid Leftist or an embittered muslim. Whatever strand of "belief" he follows the above three labels all now safely reside under the name of islamofascist.

Posted by: Son Of Albion at October 7, 2004 9:11 AM

Why was Iraq invaded? Saddam would have been a counter balance to the mad mullahs in Iran.

Something is really fishy here.

Posted by: Voltaire at October 7, 2004 9:16 AM

Voltaire, they're all nutso and cannot be trusted. When there's insanity on both ends of an issue, an intervention of sanity is the only true way to resolve it.

Posted by: DCWatson at October 7, 2004 9:26 AM

Karl - What's wrong with Americans is that we see the reality of the world of Islam which we are studying. The more we learn about Muslim history and observe how Muslims interact with their non-Muslim neighbors the more convinced we are that blocking the progress of Islam in the United States and in the rest of the West is an act of self-defense. My question to you is why don't you see the predatory nature of these people that has always been there from day one?

Posted by: epg at October 7, 2004 9:30 AM

Why was Iraq invaded? Saddam would have been a counter balance to the mad mullahs in Iran.

Something is really fishy here.
Posted by: Voltaire

The recent report the proves Saddam did not have WMD's said that even if he did have intent of developing them, they would be only for use on Iran, or as Saddam calls it, Persia.

Posted by: Karl at October 7, 2004 9:31 AM

Shucks, the world blew its chance to trust the trustworthy Saddam Hussein and make the Western world safer. We should have just let him have WMD's so he could use them on Iran. I mean, he SAID he would only use them on Iran so there was no threat to America, or anyone living in Western nations...

WOW.

Moose

Posted by: Moose at October 7, 2004 9:46 AM

Karl,
So by that notion your saying that Saddam did intend at some point, producing WMDs. Fuck me , thats progress fro the left.

Whether he did or not , the tyranical son of a pig was sure as hell thinking about making them (why do you think he'd employed the 2 biological weapons specialists.... yes thats right, the ones who Zaqawi wanted releasing in exchange for that crusty old twat Bigley) , nukes included (remember the uranian he tried to buy from Niger??? No thought not), the whole point of the Iraq war was a pre-emptive strike... in other words get him before he gets us, and we did a damn good job of it, and now all the cockroaches (thats insurgents or freedom fighters to you Karl) have come out of the woodwork were they can be dealt with , because the idiots actually believe allah's on their side (BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!) AND GONNA HELP 'EM WIN IT!!!

As for Iran, they are psyco and can't be trusted.

Posted by: Rikki at October 7, 2004 10:01 AM

Moose....exactly. Saddam would never use nukes on anyone except Iran. HE SAID SO...HE PROMISED!!!!! As for Saddam invading Kuwait everyone really knows that his invasion force was really just a big hologram created by the jewish leprechaun aliens.

Posted by: obl r us at October 7, 2004 10:03 AM

Karl says:

"I find these comments highly offensive. . ."

Well, it used to matter to most of us that someone found something we said or did "offensive." We had concerns about good manners, diplomacy, and solving our differences through argument and debate.

Given the Islamic methods of problem-solving, such as sawing off heads, blowing up school buses, ramming planes into buildings, etc., whether we are "offensive" or not is more and more often really WAY down our list of concerns.

PC is a pathological extension of good manners and diplomacy, and it is being eroded every day.

Posted by: cubed at October 7, 2004 10:23 AM

"The recent report the proves Saddam did not have WMD's said that even if he did have intent of developing them, they would be only for use on Iran, or as Saddam calls it, Persia."

Posted by: Karl

http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=\SpecialReports\archive\200410\SPE20041004a.html

But the documents obtained by CNSNews.com shed new light on the controversy.

They detail the Iraqi regime's purchase of five kilograms of mustard gas on Aug. 21, 2000 and three vials of malignant pustule, another term for anthrax, on Sept. 6, 2000. The purchase order for the mustard gas includes gas masks, filters and rubber gloves. The order for the anthrax includes sterilization and decontamination equipment. (See Saddam's Possession of Mustard Gas)

I can understand it may take a couple/few weeks for the mainstream media to pickup, authenticate, verify, and disseminate a story... it'd just be nice if I didn't hafta see 17 top stories every day that say the opposite..

Posted by: dwntmpo at October 7, 2004 10:53 AM

Karl, your mind is poisoned of hatred towards people who speak the truth and those who love their freedom. You know how the expression goes- "The truth hurts."

Posted by: Ummagumma at October 7, 2004 11:14 AM

Karl, your mind is poisoned of hatred towards people who speak the truth and those who love their freedom. You know how the expression goes- "The truth hurts."
Posted by: Ummagumma

I stand for peace and justice.

You haters stand for neverending war and hatred between peoples.

Don't project your pyschosis on me, or if you do at least use your own words! :-D

Posted by: Karl at October 7, 2004 11:42 AM

"I stand for peace and justice" !!! Get over yourself "kkkarl" you arrogant troll. You stand for nothing - just a islamofascist borg whistling in cyberspace. Meanwhile, all around your crummy posts the spreading of real knowledge goes on. Sorry , loser..

Posted by: Son Of Albion at October 7, 2004 12:05 PM

To find out a bit more about "Karl", google Saxonwulf. Hugh (and I believe Carolyn2) posted about his identity and, er, "affiliations" on other threads.

This guy has ZERO credibility. My beloved fellow JWers/DWers, why are you still wasting your time? We have a War to win, and many USEFUL battles to fight. These skirmishes are a waste of an anti-jihadist's efforts.

DON'T FEED THE TROLLS.

Posted by: CGW at October 7, 2004 12:28 PM

KAREZA

Posted by: DCWatson at October 7, 2004 1:00 PM

KARAISIN

Posted by: DCWatson at October 7, 2004 1:00 PM

Its amusing to hear comments from indviduals who insist that state survival should be assessed by Harvard debating rules. To look at Uncle Saddam and somehow impose an intellectual threshold where threat analysis be processed through the same filter used to prosecute criminals under the judicial code is beyond suicidal.

It betrays a self serving arrogance so evident by those who occupy the left, somehow everyone else out there is really just like us and somehow we've got try harder to understand them. I think it was Thomas Jefferson who said it best, we're a peculiar people and the rest of the would should be left well enough alone - unless they interfere with our interests.

One observation, if Iraq is in fact materially not the hub for state sponsored islamic terror, US troops should be sitting around twiddling their thumbs.

Isn't it the first rule of conflict, you engage your enemy where its strategically in your interest. So why aren't the jihad's streaming to retake Afghanistan??? There must be something worth gaining to use up so many islamo suicidiots.

The terrorists seem to think the fight is in Iraq, the absurd part is the most of the public doesn't. Eric Hoffer said it best, you can always tell what your enemy is afraid of by the tactics they use to frighten you. Obviously having Iraq freed is what they're most afraid of.

Posted by: newtopia at October 7, 2004 3:57 PM

I think it would take an Armageddon-type event to wake up the EU to the realities of this ongoing global Jihad vs civilization.

Posted by: Shadow of Locust at October 7, 2004 4:47 PM

Wait a minute. Perhaps we're missing something here.

Didn't Karl the Pacifist -- who thinks that wishing the wholesale anihilation of Israel by which ever proxy happens to undertake the deed isn't inconsistent with pacifism -- recently post something to the effect that the only reason the peaceful Iranians' only interest in nuclear fusion was a clean source of energy for non-weapons use?

He's also so well informed that he's apparently oblivious to the widespread and continued allegations by Arab Muslims that it was Jews/Israel/the Mossad who were responsible for 9/11 even though Osama ultimately took credit for the deed and takes/pretends offense at the Jewish Mullahs in Tehran crack (or maybe he just lacks sense of humour along with all his other deficiencies).

Perhaps he thinks they are developing these missiles to deliver petroleum to petroleum-poor countries or some such.

As for his constant denegrations of Americans (I'm a Canadian, but not a dhimmi), the UK has been the home of such distinguished organizations as the Flat Earth Society, which went on claiming into the 1980s that the world is flat, and the British-Israel Society, which insists that Britons are the true Israelites. In other words, just a Brit loon, who happens also to be in the thrall of Arabists.

But OK CGW, I will try googling Saxonwulf. Hugh before commenting or responding any further to Karl's postings (rantings?).

Posted by: waterdragon52 at October 7, 2004 7:30 PM