Discussion in 'Politics' started by Bonnie, Jun 1, 2006.
I think what we need to be consider is whether or not the negative aspects of Ahmadinejad's reign warrant an invasion.
Perhaps the article is not proposing that the ruler is free of flaw, but that there is potential here for a more free and peaceful Iran.
The treatment of Jews in Iran can not be tolerated. The infringement on civil rights should be frowned upon. But if there is a human side to Ahmadinejad then perhaps these things--along with the nuclear weapon issue--can be eased through negotiations.
Sure if we could all just get passed his anit-christ complex and his desire to destroy Israel then the US things would be peachy!!!
Why not post the article itself and let each of us decide? Or, maybe we're too stupid to do that for ourselves so you just posted what we're supposed to think instead? This article horribly mischaracterizes the article I see from the 27th (is there another?)...
I suggest letting everyone read it for themselves and see if the editorial commentary provided by intellectualconservative.com rings true.
Yes that's exactly what I did, or did you lose your reading glasses again?? Perhaps you are adverse to people writing their opinions.. psssst...it's called commentary, what you do with it is up to you.
I would, but I'm not giving that commie rag any information on me. Not even a made up username.
I think if we can survive Khrushchev banging his shoe and shouting "we will bury you" without invading the USSR, I'm pretty sure we can do the same to Iran.
I suggest you not dictate what another memeber wants to post, blockhead.
So, you're admitting that you think we're too stupid to read the article and decide for ourselves? Fair enough.
Yes, it looks like she's admitted t hat. No-ting get by you. You better head back to your village, it might burn down without you there to point out the fire.
Separate names with a comma.