You seem to admit you do, in fact, hate America - you just want it known you hate other "modern industrial states" as well. Even though you choose to live in one and enjoy the benefits.

What states do you like?

Matt

See here you make the logical error of thinking there is anything particular about america that makes it more unlikeable than any other state.

I don't even like the notion of states, let alone any state in particular. They are all the same - differences being mainly superficial and petty. I.e., america likes baseball while canada likes hockey and europe likes soccer and india likes cricket, and so on. Big fucking deal - they are all still run by asshole politicians and ecocidal corporations and poulated by people who follow some variation of abrahams delusional concepts of god. That is the only thing that matters.

Andrew

So I was completely accurate when I said you hate the US. You plainly do.

That you also seem to hate every other state doesn't change that.

So what state do you like, if any? And why do you continue to live in and support a state you say you dislike so much? I'll guarantee you have dozens if not hundreds of products produced by "ecocidal" corporations, which makes you every bit as complicit in their "ecocide" as they are.

Matt

oh for god sakeshttp://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...s/rolleyes.gif

afraid is a relative term, yes? If I were a theif I'd be afraid of the police or don't you make those delineations?


....how about Venezuela? http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/images/smilies/lol.gif

That is not true, there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that points to Iran developing nukes but it is subject to debate since the Iranian government denies that it is. I hope you are right, because with each new nation acquriing nuclear weaponry, the liklihood it will be used just increases. If you are wrong, you will then have to switch to the other argument, "well, why shouldn't Iran have nukes! Why does the USA get to have them but nobody else can?"

And i am likewise completely accurate in my assessment of your jingoistic defensive posturing and your blind devotion to insanity.

Is there something to love about the organization of modern corporate ecocidal states that i am missing?

So what state do you like, if any? And why do you continue to live in and support a state you say you dislike so much? I'll guarantee you have dozens if not hundreds of products produced by "ecocidal" corporations, which makes you every bit as complicit in their "ecocide" as they are.

Matt None. Didn't i already say that?

I'm not quite sure how the truth of my dependence on modern industrial states makes modern industrial states likeable or non-ecocidal in any way whatsoever?

And no, i was born into this arrangement and indoctrinated into it over the course of decades. I am in no way complicit in its creation - and if i chose to live outside of it modern industrial states would in no way cease to exist.

So i'm not sure what your point is, or if you even have one.

Andrew

Well,
in respond to the Russians delaying the S-300 missile system deal, Iran plans to develop an air defense system that is comparable to and even more sophisticated than the advanced Russian S-300 system.
In respond to the U.S. planting missile systems (for attack and defense purposes) ,including eight Patriot missile batteries, in Gulf area, Iran is launching a domestically-built air defense system to counter the ballistic missile threat.
They built anti-helicopter missiles, advanced ballistic missiles, etc...

Khomeni might annouce some military advantage .

If Iran became nuclear, Arab states would want to be nuclear. ( UAE and Saudi have already started their nuclear activity--- some are discussing even buying the nuclear bomb).

Iran is dragging the region to war and arms race.

By your exact same logic israel already dragged the entire region into war and an arms race.

Andrew

Israel is not conceived as a threat to Saudi and UAE, and not looking for regional hegemony. Iran's acitivity and political ambitions are a threat Arab states; for example, Iran's involvment with Houthi rebels or Iran's claiming gulf area as a persian territory.

Its the same logic. By israel pursuing military and nuclear hegemony in the middle east they absolutely forced iran to pursue the same technology. Everybody wants the same toys that the other children in the neighborhood have.

Andrew

Agree. Israel needs to give up its nukes. But I see Iran as a real threat to Arab states, more than Israel. Iran expressed their intentions of regional hegemony and proved it by its actions. Israel have not. nuclear Israel is not a threat to Arab states.

EDIT: Israel owned nuclear bomb for 40 years and have not used it, even when they were losing in the 73' war.. and cant use it against Pales cos Israel would suffer, too. In the other hand, Iran can not be trusted for many reasons, as we trusted Saddam before.

yea clinton sure messed that up huh?

well good luck to them, I'll get my third set of teeth first. http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

In respond to the U.S. planting missile systems (for attack and defense purposes) ,including eight Patriot missile batteries, in Gulf area, Iran is launching a domestically-built air defense system to counter the ballistic missile threat.
They built anti-helicopter missiles, advanced ballistic missiles, etc...
attack missiles? I had not heard that, what kind?



Khomeni might annouce some military advantage . yea well he could announce hes an orange kangaroo for all the good it will do.I think I ran has polarized enough that no one, but his specific adherent even listen to him and of the only the whacked out kool aiders believe what they hear, when he spouts that crap anymore.


If Iran became nuclear, Arab states would want to be nuclear. ( UAE and Saudi have already started their nuclear activity--- some are discussing even buying the nuclear bomb).

Iran is dragging the region to war and arms race.
yes, that the biggest risk and danger of all and its not even a risk really, it will happen, ( proliferation) .

I dont know what kind; couldnt find info. I thought patriots can be upgraded to serve as an attacking system, but Im might be wrong. anyhow, the US military presence in gulf are enough for "attacking".


yea well he could announce hes an orange kangaroo for all the good it will do.I think I ran has polarized enough that no one, but his specific adherent even listen to him and of the only the whacked out kool aiders believe what they hear, when he spouts that crap anymore. I agree, We'll know in the near future if they have the claimed-military capabilities.


yes, that the biggest risk and danger of all and its not even a risk really, it will happen, ( proliferation) why do you think it will happen? I hope it doesnt. Arms companies would be the only ones to profit from this.

The patriot systems seem to be send there more as a reassurance symbol for the Arab regimes, than true 100% waterproof defense system. (no real attack weapons needed anymore, all the tomahawks and so on will come from subs, ships and all the rest of the mighty arsenal by planes, there would be no need nor benefit to get the Arab states bases too heavily involved, I guess)

Of course they don't have the claimed military capabilities and their fantasying about obtaining them, just shows what kind of fiscal irresponsible megalomatic freaks they are. Hell even if they could build something close to being a bit effective, the lack of other overall military capabilities would turn it into just another easy target.

I'm sure it's just political grand-standing in Iran. The Ayatollah increases support each time he criticizes the west and talks about Iranian superiority; just as Western leaders increase support each time they talk about the threat posed by Iran, etc. It's all posturing.

Yes, it is true that the arab nations would prefer not see iran gain more power in the region - perhaps with the exception of the iraqi leadership. A powerful shiite ally in iran is a benefit to them.

Andrew

http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/images/smilies/lol.gifyea I see. To bad history doesn't back you up but hey....

amongst whom?

I assume his own people and supporters.