• 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!

Obama refuses to 'meddle' in Iran

CrusaderRabbit08 said:
And we'll continue to have terrorist problems as those groups insure their interests ;)
Click to expand...

Their interests include one world under puritanical Islam brought about through offensive Jihad and it's been that way for the last fifteen hundred years of Islamic Imperialist expansionism.
 
TheNextEra said:
Sorry, but that is not how trade works.

Trading with a country, does not give the right for any party in the trade to meddle with a country politically.
Click to expand...

It certainly gives them a vested interest in said government and a right to a degree of influence within said country especially when a populist demigod is threatening nationalization of billions in foreign direct investment and assets.

Given your logic, it would be ok for China to meddle with the U.S. government because they trade with us.
Click to expand...

Um ya:

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Lobby]China Lobby - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]


But regardless the U.S. would never nationalize Chinese assets or renege on Chinese debt in the first place, and if we did I'm sure they would use every bit of influence at their disposal to stop us, and justly so.
 
You all are missing the point, "meddleing" is good IF there is a rock solid PLAN that all or most agree will serve a good purpose. We meddled in Viet Nam and Afghanistan when the Russians were there and now look. We meddled in Iraq and it may turn out OK. So, like any endeavor make damn sure you are weel schooled and willing to handle the load.
 
Arch Enemy said:
Woo Hoo! Wikipedia being quoted as a credible source. It is not that hard to cite the source where wiki derives it's information.
Click to expand...

They had citations. Did you not know that Iran was invaded by the British and Soviets and installed the Shah's son after forcing him to abdicate, because he was pro-German and even changed the name of Persia during the rise of the Nazi party which literally means (land of the Aryans)?

After WW2 the Soviets refused to withdrawal from Northern Iran and propped up proxy communist agent provocateurs who didn't leave with the Soviets after they were forced to withdrawal under threat of a nuclear counter by Truman.
 
Agent Ferris said:
They had citations. Did you not know that Iran was invaded by the British and Soviets and installed the Shah's son after forcing him to abdicate, because he was pro-German and even changed the name of Persia during the rise of the Nazi party which literally means (land of the Aryans)?

After WW2 the Soviets refused to withdrawal from Northern Iran and propped up proxy communist agent provocateurs who didn't leave with the Soviets after they were forced to withdrawal under threat of a nuclear counter by Truman.
Click to expand...

Do note that I was not batting your argument just your approach to citing a source.
 
Agent Ferris said:
If you want me to give a source for common knowledge I will but it's not really worth my time I have work in an hour.
Click to expand...

That's not common knowledge. It would have taken you 30 seconds to 1 min to cite it.
 
What? Not meddle? What country is he trying to run here? He needs to follow the lead of past leaders and meddle, only to have it go utterly wrong and result in the complete opposite of what we want. Like, for example, in Iran.
 
stekim said:
What? Not meddle? What country is he trying to run here? He needs to follow the lead of past leaders and meddle, only to have it go utterly wrong and result in the complete opposite of what we want. Like, for example, in Iran.
Click to expand...

You mean economic progress, rights for women, stopping a pro-Soviet coup deta backed by the Soviet created Tudeh party during the illegal Soviet occupation of Iran during and after WW2 (an occupation only ended by the threat of U.S. nuclear intervention against the Soviets)? Or perhaps the meddling of folks like Jimmy Carter who put pressure on the Shah to release extremist Islamist and Communist political prisoners then cutting all support for him anyways, paving the way for a democidal Islamist revolution turning the most progressive nation in the region, a staunch ally of both the U.S. and Israel, into one of the most backwards nations in the region who it seems may soon engage in a nuclear arms race with Israel and has attacked by proxy both they and the U.S. militarily on several occasions?
 
Last edited:
Message from the USA to Iran...kill the protestors. We don't care.



More then likely the 'non-meddlers' here will blame the USA for not 'meddling'. That is what they always do.
 
Triad said:
Message from the USA to Iran...kill the protestors. We don't care.



More then likely the 'non-meddlers' here will blame the USA for not 'meddling'. That is what they always do.
Click to expand...

So we should go to war with Iran?
 
NOo we should film the slaughter and say how we just couldn't do anything about it.


Isn't that better. then being Americans?....oh yes becasue the USA is a meddling hate nation!.

Maybe you'll get a snapshot of a man being run over by a tank out of this..you know something to put on the fridge for the kids.

Yes We Can :2sick1:
 
Last edited:
Triad said:
NOo we should film the slaughter and say how we just couldn't do anything about it.


Isn't that better. then beign Americans..maybe a snapshot of a man being run over by a tank..you know something to put on the fridge for the kids.
Yes We Can :2sick1:
Click to expand...

So what is your plan, other than to complain?
 
So whats your plan, other then to complain?
 
Redress said:
So we should go to war with Iran?
Click to expand...
Not yet. Wait for them to kill the BBC reporters and a few Frenchies. Then the US can go in with the entire UN doing their usual pom-pom cheerleading routine.
 
Triad said:
So whats your plan, other then to complain?
Click to expand...

To do what we are doing. I don't see a good option for us to do anything active. Akhmadinajad(sp?) is already saying we are interfering with the election process.
 
celticlord said:
Not yet. Wait for them to kill the BBC reporters and a few Frenchies. Then the US can go in with the entire UN doing their usual pom-pom cheerleading routine.
Click to expand...

IF they process turn into something more then protests(either naturally or do to being slaughtered) then we should aid them with arms and such.

Otherwise

If they do not stop their nuclear program by March 2010... then or within a year of then the US/UK/FR/GER should declare War on Iran.


Won't happen because we Jimmy Obama is in the WH...he talks only..He'll even push talks over the people protesting for freedoms.
 
Triad said:
IF they process turn into something more then protests(either naturally or do to being slaughtered) then we should aid them with arms and such.

Otherwise

If they do not stop their nuclear program by March 2010... then or within a year of then the US/UK/FR/GER should declare War on Iran.


Won't happen because we Jimmy Obama is in the WH...he talks only..He'll even push talks over the people protesting for freedoms.
Click to expand...

You going to volunteer to fight over there?
 
Redress said:
To do what we are doing. I don't see a good option for us to do anything active. Akhmadinajad(sp?) is already saying we are interfering with the election process.
Click to expand...



Yep Obama piolicy..do nothing ..wow that was hard...pff.


....and you as Obama is worried more about the Iranian governments view of how things then the protestors.
What do the Despots think..we don't want to upsets them! Obama 100%



After they put down the protesters the USA will reward them with a photo op and talks with Obama.
Maybe the messiah can walk on blood?
 
It doesn't matter if you guys meddle or not. The Iranian regime has already blamed you for everything anyway:

Iran accuses US of meddling after disputed vote - Yahoo! News

TEHRAN, Iran – Iran accused the United States on Wednesday of "intolerable" meddling in its internal affairs, alleging for the first time that Washington has fueled a bitter postelection dispute. Opposition supporters marched in huge numbers through Tehran's streets for a third straight day to protest the outcome of the balloting.
The Iranian government summoned the Swiss ambassador, who represents U.S. interests in Iran, to complain about American interference, state-run Press TV reported.
The English-language channel said the government called Western interference "intolerable."
Click to expand...

Seriously, stop your meddling. It's intolerable. :lol:
 
There you go..we're already being blamed for meddling so lets actually meddle.

If meddling is standing behind the principles of the USA and aiding those who want to harm a theocratic despotism then we shoud meddle.

Meddling is American.
Doing nothing is not.
 
Triad said:
Yep Obama piolicy..do nothing ..wow that was hard...pff.


....and you as Obama is worried more about the Iranian governments view of how things then the protestors.
What do the Despots think..we don't want to upsets them! Obama 100%
Click to expand...

Ahh triad, triad. Your obviously poorely informed about the definition of strategic foriegn policy and the relation between war and government debt. The US is in deficit of over a few trillion dollars because of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, one of the most costly wars in US history. Secondly, to invade Iran would be a huge mistake and will mark the definite end of America. As if the muslims dont think we are crusading against them anyway.
Its not Iran that needs to be invaded - at least there partly civilized compared to our communist NK foe in the pacific. With America already stretched fighting two very costly fronts, one front being in a dire situation (Afghanistan), to attack Iran would not only be economically and diplomatically suicidal, but would divert attention from the dangerous activities of North Korea and allow its illegal nucleur activities to thrive behind our backs. We need to sort out the most immediate threat first.



After they put down the protesters the USA will reward them with a photo op and talks with Obama.
Maybe the messiah can walk on blood?
Click to expand...

Meaningless, unreasonable rightist talk.
 
Last edited:
Gibbs said today that the protests are
"A vigorous debate inside Iran"


Yep..please shut up and die USA is not interested.
 
Last edited:
Contrast "Obama refuses to 'meddle' in Iran"


To "Gorbachav tear down this wall"



/thread
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom