• 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!

Iran's Khamenei says could accept fair nuclear compromise

Apocalypse said:
Trust issues obviously.
We're both for eliminating the stockpile of nukes in the entire world, but while you're being delusional about it I can see that no Western state is going to give up on its nuclear capabilities as long as it doesn't know for certain that some hostile state in the future wouldn't try and put its hands on some of their own.
Click to expand...

Ok, so we need to continue a bad idea because we think someday somebody else may attempt a bad idea, speak of delusional.
 
Montecresto said:
I'm not promoting any "agenda" I'm pointing out that decades of destructive US policies in Iran and the region are having grave consequences. And a 2006, Bush era NIE concluded such.
Click to expand...

If you're not promoting the Iranian agenda then cease arguing in favor of allowing Iran to gain nuclear capabilities because that's all you've been doing so far. When you try to legitimize the Iranians having these capabilities you are doing exactly that.
Iran should never be and will never be allowed to gain these capabilities.
 
Apocalypse said:
If you're not promoting the Iranian agenda then cease arguing in favor of allowing Iran to gain nuclear capabilities because that's all you've been doing so far. When you try to legitimize the Iranians having these capabilities you are doing exactly that.
Iran should never be and will never be allowed to gain these capabilities.
Click to expand...
why should iran be denied the ability to counter the presence of israeli nuclear arms?
 
Montecresto said:
Ok, so we need to continue a bad idea because we think someday somebody else may attempt a bad idea, speak of delusional.
Click to expand...

Yes that's exactly the 'delusional' I have spoken of.
If you honestly believe that if tomorrow the entire Western world + Pakistan will get rid of their nuclear capabilities then that's the last we've seen of nukes, then you're being absurdly delusional.
 
Apocalypse said:
Then you have strong reading comprehension problems because I pointed out how irrelevant whether Hezbollah was formed due to Israeli actions or not is, to the fact that Hezbollah is an Iranian proxy terror organization. Please do give it your best and try to understand the text better, if only for one more time.
Click to expand...

Not sure what that jibberish means.
 
justabubba said:
why should iran be denied the ability to counter the presence of israeli nuclear arms?
Click to expand...

Because they don't threaten it, exactly the same way as British nukes do not threaten Iran.
As I pointed to you out in a previous post you've apparently ignored - Israel has had no hostility towards Iran, it is Iran that got up one morning and decided that Israel is an enemy and that it must be destroyed, not the other way around. Please do memorize it so I wouldn't have to say it again in a few months when we'll have the same argument again.
 
justabubba said:
and you have just established the legitimacy of iran's rationale for developing its own nuclear weapons
Click to expand...

Not really, no.
After all Iran's desire for the nuke predates the assassination of its nuclear scientists.
So no, that's not a valid argument there bubba, try another one. Perhaps the one with "Iran never initiated a war in its entire history". That was a good one.
 
pinqy said:
What are you talking about? Who said Iran has a nuclear weapon, and why are you responding to me about it?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, you addressed me in post 195, I thought that invited a response. The NPT to witch you referred is for nuclear weapons, so how is it that Iran is in violation??
 
Apocalypse said:
Because they don't threaten it, exactly the same way as British nukes do not threaten Iran.
As I pointed to you out in a previous post you've apparently ignored - Israel has had no hostility towards Iran, it is Iran that got up one morning and decided that Israel is an enemy and that it must be destroyed, not the other way around. Please do memorize it so I wouldn't have to say it again in a few months when we'll have the same argument again.
Click to expand...

you need to read post 194 - you objected to the source used - which post identified the many threats of attack presented by israeli government officials against the nation of iran
 
Apocalypse said:
Not really, no.
After all Iran's desire for the nuke predates the assassination of its nuclear scientists.
So no, that's not a valid argument there bubba, try another one. Perhaps the one with "Iran never initiated a war in its entire history". That was a good one.
Click to expand...

over the past 100 years
compare that of iran versus that of israel
 
justabubba said:
you need to read post 194 - you objected to the source used - which post identified the many threats of attack presented by israeli government officials against the nation of iran
Click to expand...

No, I haven't merely 'objected to the source', I have objected to your claim that this opinion piece contradicts the absolute fact that Iran is the one that initiated the hostilities.
I'm afraid that history is not open for interpretations bubba.
 
justabubba said:
and i am pointing out that this organization was created only as a result of israel's over-reaching actions, as has been expressed by a former israeli prime minister
Click to expand...

:lol: If you honestly intend to argue that, then, dude, you have no idea what you are talking about. Hezbollah well predates 2004. :lamo

Hell, they taught AQ the car-bombing tactics that they later used in Pakistan :)

Hezbollah was created out of (and, this is funny) originally anti-Palestianian Shia groups in Lebanon who came together under the support banner of the IRGC, who then re-directed them against Israel in support of Qods. They were a major player in the early 80s. Who did you think it was that bombed the Marine Barracks? The Malaysians? :)

if israel truly wanted a nuclear free iran it should sign the NPT and relinquish its nuclear arms. it would remain adequately defended by the USA in the event of a nuclear attack
Click to expand...

Oh, you mean just like we guaranteed Ukraine that no one would screw them over if they gave up their nukes?

Israel was founded to make sure that Jews never came to place their lives in others' hands again. Not only is there no way they are going to accept our (worthless) pretty-promise that we will somehow magically defend them from a nuclear attack, they shouldn't.
 
justabubba said:
over the past 100 years
compare that of iran versus that of israel
Click to expand...

Haha, bullseye isn't it?
Iran has engaged in wars through proxy, through Hezbollah, engaged in terrorism through proxy.
So what difference does that make?
Now Israel? Israel never initiated a single damned war. Sure it may have attacked first at some of the events, but it didn't initiate the aggression.
Never ever ever ever.
 
Apocalypse said:
If you're not promoting the Iranian agenda then cease arguing in favor of allowing Iran to gain nuclear capabilities because that's all you've been doing so far. When you try to legitimize the Iranians having these capabilities you are doing exactly that.
Iran should never be and will never be allowed to gain these capabilities.
Click to expand...

Ok my man, after numerous posts pointing out that MY PREFERENCE IS THAT NOBODY have nuclear weapons, you must stop falsely accusing me of wanting Iran to develop nuclear capabilities (other then of civilian/commercial nature) it is my preference that Iran does not develop one, and my further wish that the rest of the nuclear powers eliminate their stockpiles, or I will stop responding to you, which would probably be your objective given the uncomfortably hypocritical view you have of nuclear weapons possession.
 
cpwill said:
:lol: If you honestly intend to argue that, then, dude, you have no idea what you are talking about. Hezbollah well predates 2004. :lamo

Hell, they taught AQ the car-bombing tactics that they later used in Pakistan :)

Hezbollah was created out of (and, this is funny) originally anti-Palestianian Shia groups in Lebanon who came together under the support banner of the IRGC, who then re-directed them against Israel in support of Qods. They were a major player in the early 80s. Who did you think it was that bombed the Marine Barracks? The Malaysians? :)



Oh, you mean just like we guaranteed Ukraine that no one would screw them over if they gave up their nukes?

Israel was founded to make sure that Jews never came to place their lives in others' hands again. Not only is there no way they are going to accept our (worthless) pretty-promise that we will somehow magically defend them from a nuclear attack, they shouldn't.
Click to expand...

here is what was presented by a former prime minister of israel:
In 2006, former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak stated, "When we entered Lebanon ... there was no Hezbollah. We were accepted with perfumed rice and flowers by the Shia in the south. It was our presence there that created Hezbollah".[43]
Click to expand...
Hezbollah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Apocalypse said:
Haha, bullseye isn't it?
Iran has engaged in wars through proxy, through Hezbollah, engaged in terrorism through proxy.
So what difference does that make?
Now Israel? Israel never initiated a single damned war. Sure it may have attacked first at some of the events, but it didn't initiate the aggression.
Never ever ever ever.
Click to expand...

israel attacks "pre-emptively"
got it
so, why should iran not be concerned about an israel which would also attack iran pre-emptively with a nuclear weapon
post 194 lists the multitude of threats against iran by israeli officials
 
Montecresto said:
Ok my man, after numerous posts pointing out that MY PREFERENCE IS THAT NOBODY have nuclear weapons, you must stop falsely accusing me of wanting Iran to develop nuclear capabilities (other then of civilian/commercial nature) it is my preference that Iran does not develop one, and my further wish that the rest of the nuclear powers eliminate their stockpiles, or I will stop responding to you, which would probably be your objective given the uncomfortably hypocritical view you have of nuclear weapons possession.
Click to expand...

My view isn't hypocritical in any way and it isn't my objective to stop you from posting mate.
I'm merely pointing out the dishonesty in suggesting that you aren't holding the opinion that Iran should be allowed to gain nukes when all you did so far is to point out that if it's legitimate for the free world to possess nukes then the same goes for Iran.
 
justabubba said:
israel attacks "pre-emptively"
got it
Click to expand...

No you haven't got it, apparently you have strong issues with accepting history when it isn't in line with your arguments.
Did Israel ever initiate aggression? Nope, never. Is attacking a nation that is organizing its troops to launch an attack against you - initiating aggression? Not at the slightest I'm afraid. But that's just common sense, don't let it get in your way.

so, why should iran not be concerned about an israel which would also attack iran pre-emptively with a nuclear weapon
post 194 lists the multitude of threats against iran by israeli officials
Click to expand...

Why would Israel attack Iran pre-emptively if Iran isn't going to attack it? :lol:
As I said several times before now you fail to recognize the basic truth that Iran was the one that initiated the hostilities with Israel and not the other way around. It was Iran, not Israel, that got up one day and decided that Israel is the enemy and that it must be destroyed. Period.
 
Apocalypse said:
My view isn't hypocritical in any way and it isn't my objective to stop you from posting mate.
I'm merely pointing out the dishonesty in suggesting that you aren't holding the opinion that Iran should be allowed to gain nukes when all you did so far is to point out that if it's legitimate for the free world to possess nukes then the same goes for Iran.
Click to expand...

If talks fail, what actions should the P+5 take? Russia may not agree to all of them, but what the heck.
 
JANFU said:
If talks fail, what actions should the P+5 take? Russia may not agree to all of them, but what the heck.
Click to expand...

I'm one of those that believe the issue can be solved diplomatically.
Meaning, stronger sanctions.
So far the sanctions have had a great effect on Iran's progress, up until the point when the P+5 had decided to ease them up.
If talks fail - stronger sanctions, save the military option as the last resort.
 
Montecresto said:
I have pointed out that both Israel and the US in the course of history have treated Iran dishonourably, and as such haven't the credibility to be pointing fingers.
Click to expand...

You may have asserted that. But I don't care what you think about how this country's morality compares to that of Khomeinist Iran. I don't want to hear, still one more time, the tired leftist lie that the U.S. brought all this on itself way back in 1953, when it sided with Reza Pahlavi--who had already been Iran's king for a decade--against a crackpot political enemy named Mohammed Mossadegh because he had gotten too cozy with communists. That is only an earlier version of the leftist slander that the U.S. brought 9/11 on itself--whether Jeremiah Wright's claim that it was just America's chickens coming home to roost, or Ward Churchill's equally disgusting comparison of the people murdered at the World Trade Center to the Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann.

The simple fact is that you are sticking up for the evil pack of Jew-hating Islamic jihadists in Tehran that is doing all it can to acquire nuclear weapons. That regime has always been a strong supporter of terrorism. It is the enemy of both Israel and the United States, with the blood of thousands of Americans on its hands. And yet you continue to do all you can here to defend the Khomeinists and other Islamic jihadists, wherever they may be. That makes your repeated protestations that you are politically neutral and support your country ring hollow. I doubt you are selling anyone here on that. You've made clear that you are willing to let the enemies of the U.S. do whatever they please--that you would not favor the use of force to defend your own country. Thank God there were very few Americans who subscribed to those views in December, 1941.
 
justabubba said:
israel attacks "pre-emptively"
Click to expand...

That is correct. For example, if I swing at you, and you step forward to block, you have pre-emptively struck me - you have pre-empted my strike. As you should.
 
matchlight said:
You may have asserted that. But I don't care what you think about how this country's morality compares to that of Khomeinist Iran. I don't want to hear, still one more time, the tired leftist lie that the U.S. brought all this on itself way back in 1953, when it sided with Reza Pahlavi--who had already been Iran's king for a decade--against a crackpot political enemy named Mohammed Mossadegh because he had gotten too cozy with communists. That is only an earlier version of the leftist slander that the U.S. brought 9/11 on itself--whether Jeremiah Wright's claim that it was just America's chickens coming home to roost, or Ward Churchill's equally disgusting comparison of the people murdered at the World Trade Center to the Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann.

The simple fact is that you are sticking up for the evil pack of Jew-hating Islamic jihadists in Tehran that is doing all it can to acquire nuclear weapons. That regime has always been a strong supporter of terrorism. It is the enemy of both Israel and the United States, with the blood of thousands of Americans on its hands. And yet you continue to do all you can here to defend the Khomeinists and other Islamic jihadists, wherever they may be. That makes your repeated protestations that you are politically neutral and support your country ring hollow. I doubt you are selling anyone here on that. You've made clear that you are willing to let the enemies of the U.S. do whatever they please--that you would not favor the use of force to defend your own country. Thank God there were very few Americans who subscribed to those views in December, 1941.
Click to expand...

There are people on both the far left and the far right who devote so much of their energies to the notion that the U.S. is bad, that they have difficulty with the concept that anyone else can be.
 
Montecresto said:
So no proof that Iran is the worlds chief supporter of terrorism, ok. 70 years ago, or seven years ago, the US remains the sole country to use a nuclear weapon on civilian targets, something you would INSIST would be an act of terrorism were Russia or China or Iran to do it. You're on the list with the other hypocritical.
Click to expand...

When did he say they were the world's chief supporter of terrorism?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom