• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Will Iran ever normalize relations w/U.S.?

WillRockwell said:
In case you hadn't noticed, invading a sovereign nation and killing its civilians along the way is evil, no matter who the country's leader is. If liberals refer to history's evil acts, it's because the right chooses to ignore them, while repeating them.
Click to expand...

In case you hadn't noticed we don't accept hysterical rhetorical characterizations as facts around here.

Try again.
 
Slippery Slope said:
So let me get this straight, it's OK to bash the **** out of Hillary but not Dubya. Check.

Talk about useful idiots...
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but wtf are you talking about?

Where did I object to bashing Bush? Where did I post an okay to bash Hillary?

Why were compelled here to lie?

Well?
 
Slippery Slope said:
And Hillary is who Mussolini, or just a generic fascist? But since you ask, no. Bush is no Hitler, I think Cheney might be... :rofl Both Bush and Cheney are fascists so feel free to decide for yourself.
Click to expand...

Aaaaand here have yet another poseur trying to pretend that he knows what big words mean. This is a clear example of the success our liberal-dominated schools have successfully brainwashed people into believing that fascism is a uniquely right-wing phenomena.

Ironic, ain't it given the history's fascist leaders always, always ruled from the left. :roll:
 
Slippery Slope said:
And Hillary is who Mussolini, or just a generic fascist? But since you ask, no. Bush is no Hitler, I think Cheney might be... :rofl Both Bush and Cheney are fascists so feel free to decide for yourself.
Click to expand...

Isn't fascism an outgrowth of socialism though? Surely you're not suggesting that Bush and Cheney are socialists.
 
JMak said:
I'm sorry, but wtf are you talking about?
Click to expand...
You're whining.
Where did I object to bashing Bush?
Click to expand...
"Yet another useful idiot totally minimizing the horror of the Holacaust and evil of Nazi Germany...and for what? To criticize Bush?"

Sounds like an objection to me.

Where did I post an okay to bash Hillary?
Click to expand...
Well, since you had nothing to say to the person who made the original comment but only started whining when I brought up Bush, it's obvious that you're ok with the bashing of Hillary but not with bashing Bush. Seems like pretty simple deduction.

Why were compelled here to lie?

Well?
Click to expand...
WTF are you talking about?
 
JMak said:
Aaaaand here have yet another poseur trying to pretend that he knows what big words mean. This is a clear example of the success our liberal-dominated schools have successfully brainwashed people into believing that fascism is a uniquely right-wing phenomena.

Ironic, ain't it given the history's fascist leaders always, always ruled from the left. :roll:
Click to expand...
Aaaaaand here we have more whining about a sarcastic comment. Oh and look a lover to thank you for your whining too...
 
Will be hard. Not because of the "radicals" in Tehran, but because of the bad blood many people still have due to the Shah.

You can claim what you want about the fanatics presently in Tehran are bad, but the Shah was far worse. His secret police are legendary and were modelled with US help after the SS and Gestapo. Torture and "disappearing's" was common place. The Shah's secret police made Saddam's look like a kindergarten. And since that the Shah was put in place by the US, funded by the US and held in place for a very long time by the US.. then frankly it will take a very long time for "normal relations" to happen... unless the US apologizes that is.
 
I have a question

WILL AMERICA EVER NORMAILIZE RELATIONS WITH MUSLIMS????????
 
Maybe we don't like to kill Jews.

Someone linked TruthOut trying to prove something ..LOL.
 
Last edited:
quatrotritikali said:
And yes, the Iranian President mentioned "mutual respect", while in the next breath he basically tells the world that Iran could never "normalize" relations with the United States, as anti-Americanism has been a pillar of the Iranian state (since 1979). I take that to mean that so long as the Supreme Council rules Iran, no substantial positive progress will be made.
Click to expand...

Who's "he?" You're talking about two different people, the President and an Ayatollah.

To say no substantial gains can be made has been a self-fulfilling prophecy. Maybe they won't.

I don't think it matters much to Iran who the U.S. invaded.
Click to expand...

Then here is no logical reason it should matter to the US if Iran invades Israel.

Hell, Iran and Iraq had been at odds with one another for years and years.
Click to expand...

So?

As for Afghanistan, not even Iran had much to say about the U.S./Allied invasion of that country.
Click to expand...

The offered to open communication and even help, but then they were labeled in the Axis once our President forgot about Afghanistan.

Anti-Iranianism? Is that even a word? The U.S. is not anti-Iran...just against the current Islamic govt. There is a big difference. The U.S. holds no ill will against the Iranian people.
Click to expand...

Oh, so now only Americans can have Anti put on front of it and it's still a word. Typical hubris.

"The US holds no ill will against the Iranians people and when we dispatch thousands of cruise missiles on their cities it's for them"
 
Joby said:
Who's "he?" You're talking about two different people, the President and an Ayatollah.
Click to expand...


Geez, you really cannot read very well can you? I am not talking about two of anything, Joby. I'm talking about the President of Iran, which is Ahmadinejad...not the Ayatollah (who is the Spiritual Leader, along with the Supreme Council). And I have not mentioned the Ayatollah at all.
 
PeteEU said:
Will be hard. Not because of the "radicals" in Tehran, but because of the bad blood many people still have due to the Shah.

You can claim what you want about the fanatics presently in Tehran are bad, but the Shah was far worse. His secret police are legendary and were modelled with US help after the SS and Gestapo. Torture and "disappearing's" was common place. The Shah's secret police made Saddam's look like a kindergarten. And since that the Shah was put in place by the US, funded by the US and held in place for a very long time by the US.. then frankly it will take a very long time for "normal relations" to happen... unless the US apologizes that is.
Click to expand...

Your statements contain so many falsehoods where can anyone even begin other the recognizing your false rhetoric for what it is:

"but the Shah was far worse"

FALSE

"His secret police are legendary and were modeled with US help after the SS and Gestapo"

Beyond False bordering on lunatic.

"The Shah's secret police made Saddam's look like a kindergarten"

False.

"And since that the Shah was put in place by the US, funded by the US and held in place for a very long time by the US"

False.

But again, with all this false rhetoric you cap it off with Ahmandinejad talking points suggesting that the US apologize for its support of the Shah without once mentioning the radical takeover of the US Embassy and false imprisonment of US citizens for the mere fact that they worked in the embassy and were US citizens.

Your support of radical fringe elements of society is obvious based on your desperate false rhetoric without any historic perspective of the influences on Middle East policy and in Iran in your flagrant anti-American blather.

Carry on; I look forward to many more hysterics about the evil American Empire and your desperate defense of terrorism.
 
Truth Detector said:
Your statements contain so many falsehoods where can anyone even begin other the recognizing your false rhetoric for what it is:

"but the Shah was far worse"

FALSE

"His secret police are legendary and were modeled with US help after the SS and Gestapo"

Beyond False bordering on lunatic.

"The Shah's secret police made Saddam's look like a kindergarten"

False.

"And since that the Shah was put in place by the US, funded by the US and held in place for a very long time by the US"

False.

But again, with all this false rhetoric you cap it off with Ahmandinejad talking points suggesting that the US apologize for its support of the Shah without once mentioning the radical takeover of the US Embassy and false imprisonment of US citizens for the mere fact that they worked in the embassy and were US citizens.

Your support of radical fringe elements of society is obvious based on your desperate false rhetoric without any historic perspective of the influences on Middle East policy and in Iran in your flagrant anti-American blather.

Carry on; I look forward to many more hysterics about the evil American Empire and your desperate defense of terrorism.
Click to expand...

You'll have to provide your version of the truth to everything you claimed as false. Otherwise we can just chalk it up to another bull**** opposition post with no substance.
 
WillRockwell said:
If the US begins to treat Iran as the ancient and respected culture it is, then we have the opportunity to forge a strong ally and trade partner.
Click to expand...
That is a joke, with a bunch of El-sickos(Mullahs) trying to run this uncivilized country..
Never forget the embassy break-in and the taking of hostages - a criminal act by savages, still unpunished....:(..
Ancient is true - their so-called "culture" dates back to the stone age, and there they stay..
 
If France and Germany

or France and England can be at peace with one another. Then American and Iran can.
 
earthworm said:
That is a joke, with a bunch of El-sickos(Mullahs) trying to run this uncivilized country..
Never forget the embassy break-in and the taking of hostages - a criminal act by savages, still unpunished....:(..
Ancient is true - their so-called "culture" dates back to the stone age, and there they stay..
Click to expand...
Your post exposes your complete ignorance of Iran and it's people.
 
quatrotritikali said:
Geez, you really cannot read very well can you? I am not talking about two of anything, Joby. I'm talking about the President of Iran, which is Ahmadinejad...not the Ayatollah (who is the Spiritual Leader, along with the Supreme Council). And I have not mentioned the Ayatollah at all.
Click to expand...

TEHRAN, Iran - Iran is ready for dialogue with the United States, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Tuesday, directly addressing the U.S. administration in his most measured remarks to America since President Barack Obama took office.

"The new U.S. government has announced that it wants to create change and follow the path of talks. It's very clear that true changes should be fundamental and not tactical," Ahmadinejad said during a rally in Tehran to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the Islamic revolution that overthrew the U.S.-backed shah of Iran.

"These talks should be held in a fair atmosphere in which there is mutual respect," he added, laying out a precondition for any discussions.

Ahmadinejad wrote several unanswered letters to Bush and congratulated Obama on his election victory. Still many Iranian officials are suspicious of renewed relations between the nations.

"If pro-American tendencies come to power in Iran, we have to say goodbye to everything. After all, anti-Americanism is among the main features of our Islamic state," said Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, head of the Guardian Council, an assembly of 12 appointed clerics and jurists who have the power to vet laws and election candidates, in remarks 10 days ago.
Click to expand...

In your story, the President of Iran never says anything distinctly anti-American, and it goes on to say that Ahmadinejad has the support of the Supreme Council. From the story,

"When he speaks, he does so with the approval of the Supreme National Security Council," a group that includes representatives of the country's religious, military and other power centers, said Mohammad Marandi, head of the North American studies department at the University of Tehran.

"They will decide if Iran will really deal with the United States," Marandi said. "It's the United States that should send signals first. They need Iran more than we need them," he added. "Iran can help the U.S. in Iraq, Afghanistan. Pakistan is unraveling; Iran also wants security and stability in those nations. The fact that they now work separately makes it impossible to get things done."

In March 2006 Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, decided that talking to America about Iraq was not a taboo, marking a shift in Iran's foreign policy toward the U.S.
Click to expand...
 
Yes France and Germany eventually reached a point where they could stomache each other..

But that wasn't when the NAZIS where in Germany!

Which is basically what some people are telling us to do now..just be friends with the "Nazi" in Iran... they don't really mean it when they say they want to exterminate Jews..and yes we know they kill American Soldiers and sponsor terrorists globally but if we just feel their pain and learn to understand them it will be peace in our time.

Problem is Obama actually believes that convoluted horse pucky and the regime in Iran will take full advantage of him.

I expect all sorts of major threats from various countries to be facilitated and advanced to our detriment by Obama's need to declare himself some sort of peacemaker.

He's willing and utterly capable of ignoring his own nations soldiers in preference to a speech he gave. He will sell out anyone to be praised.
 
Iran will never be attacked as long as it keeps the Persian Gulf open and allows the oil exports as well as other goods to flow. Does anyone remember not long ago when the Iranian government threatened to block the Gulf? That was when the U.S. was going to take action. After all, you don't threaten Big Oil®.

In turn, the only reason why the U.S. opposes Iranian nuclear arms is not because of Israel or threats to the region, but because an Iranian nuclear deterrent means it actually gets its sovereignty back. It could close the Persian Gulf and tariff the trade route, and the U.S. would not be able to do anything about it.

When are people going to peel back the religious veneer that the media and governments are using to spin current political conflicts, and see that it is pure economics?

Iran does not want a nuclear war. It's all talk. A nuclear deterrent would be far more profitable for Iran than a war, and that's what it wants. There are enough moderates in the Iranian government to assure that greed takes precedence over fundamentalist looneyville Mullahs.

If we ever catch wind that the moderates in their government have been murdered by the extreme right, then we should be worried. But that's not going to happen because they are all greedy and corrupt. Business means more to them than the Quran!
 
Last edited:
Triad said:
Yes France and Germany eventually reached a point where they could stomache each other..

But that wasn't when the NAZIS where in Germany!

Which is basically what some people are telling us to do now..just be friends with the "Nazi" in Iran... they don't really mean it when they say they want to exterminate Jews..and yes we know they kill American Soldiers and sponsor terrorists globally but if we just feel their pain and learn to understand them it will be peace in our time.

Problem is Obama actually believes that convoluted horse pucky and the regime in Iran will take full advantage of him.

I expect all sorts of major threats from various countries to be facilitated and advanced to our detriment by Obama's need to declare himself some sort of peacemaker.

He's willing and utterly capable of ignoring his own nations soldiers in preference to a speech he gave. He will sell out anyone to be praised.
Click to expand...

No, I think what we are saying is that we (America) instigates trouble and then complain or feign outrage when our chickens come home to roost.
 
Joby said:
The President of Iran said that talks could begin, so long as they were based on mutual respect.

It's the US which has kept normalization from going forward, not the other way around.
Click to expand...
LOL.

How do you normalize relations with people who support terrorists, fund them to kill our troops in Iraq, took Americans hostage and claim they want to wipe Israel off the map?

You talk to your enemy without preconditions and get your lunch handed to you, just as Kennedy had.

They'll use the talks with The Great Satan, as they so lovingly call us, for their own benefit... and to the civilized world's detriment.

Let the talks begin... they'll use Obama as a mop.
It might be the best use of his head in the coming four years.
welovenukes.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom