Jump to content

Iran


indi
 Share

Recommended Posts

Iran issues 'punch' warning to UK

 

Britain has been given a warning by Iran's foreign minister that it will receive "a punch on the mouth" if it does not "stop the nonsense".

 

Manouchehr Mottaki responded after UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband hailed the "great courage" of Iranians who staged opposition protests on Sunday.

 

Iran says the clashes, which resulted in at least eight people being killed, were inspired and aided by the West.

 

The UK ambassador is being summoned by Iran to receive a formal complaint.

 

Mr Mottaki said the protesters "should not be encouraged by a few... statements by certain countries".

 

He added: "They should not pin their hopes on them. Britain will receive a punch on the mouth if it does not stop its nonsense.

 

Mr Mottaki's speech was broadcast on Iranian television with an English translation on screen.

 

"The lowly and downgrading remarks by some foreign officials show the black stain on their record in their... contradictory interactions."

 

 

Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said that "some Western countries are supporting this sort of activities" and that this was "intervention in our internal affairs".

 

He said that, as a result, the British ambassador was to be summoned on Tuesday and a formal complaint would be made.

 

Mr Miliband condemned the lack of restraint by Iranian security forces, saying that reports emerging from the capital were "disturbing".

 

"The tragic deaths of protesters in Iran are yet another reminder of how the Iranian regime deals with protest," he said.

 

"Ordinary Iranian citizens are determined to exercise their right to have their voices heard. They are showing great courage.

 

"I call on the Iranian government to respect the human rights of its own citizens - rights which Iran has promised to respect."

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8433625.stm

 

Wonder what that means?

 

Sadly, I suspect that there's at least an element of truth in his claims that we've got our sticky fingers in there somewhere. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to trust our politicians and media to tell us the truth and to actually know what was really going on in the world. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm... ...well I probably am the only one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Iran issues 'punch' warning to UK

 

Britain has been given a warning by Iran's foreign minister that it will receive "a punch on the mouth" if it does not "stop the nonsense".

 

Manouchehr Mottaki responded after UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband hailed the "great courage" of Iranians who staged opposition protests on Sunday.

 

Iran says the clashes, which resulted in at least eight people being killed, were inspired and aided by the West.

 

The UK ambassador is being summoned by Iran to receive a formal complaint.

 

Mr Mottaki said the protesters "should not be encouraged by a few... statements by certain countries".

 

He added: "They should not pin their hopes on them. Britain will receive a punch on the mouth if it does not stop its nonsense.

 

Mr Mottaki's speech was broadcast on Iranian television with an English translation on screen.

 

"The lowly and downgrading remarks by some foreign officials show the black stain on their record in their... contradictory interactions."

 

 

Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said that "some Western countries are supporting this sort of activities" and that this was "intervention in our internal affairs".

 

He said that, as a result, the British ambassador was to be summoned on Tuesday and a formal complaint would be made.

 

Mr Miliband condemned the lack of restraint by Iranian security forces, saying that reports emerging from the capital were "disturbing".

 

"The tragic deaths of protesters in Iran are yet another reminder of how the Iranian regime deals with protest," he said.

 

"Ordinary Iranian citizens are determined to exercise their right to have their voices heard. They are showing great courage.

 

"I call on the Iranian government to respect the human rights of its own citizens - rights which Iran has promised to respect."

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8433625.stm

 

Wonder what that means?

 

Sadly, I suspect that there's at least an element of truth in his claims that we've got our sticky fingers in there somewhere. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to trust our politicians and media to tell us the truth and to actually know what was really going on in the world. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm... ...well I probably am the only one.

 

I would suspect that UK and U.S agents are working in the shadows, would be a hell of a lot easier if the country sorted itself out rather then the west invading etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8433625.stm

 

Wonder what that means?

 

Sadly, I suspect that there's at least an element of truth in his claims that we've got our sticky fingers in there somewhere. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to trust our politicians and media to tell us the truth and to actually know what was really going on in the world. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm... ...well I probably am the only one.

 

Sadly? Seems the wise move to make IYAM.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A punch on the mouth. Damn, I don't think I've ever seen a statement like that.

 

Know any good books about what went down in 53, indi?

 

Nope, afraid not. I'm largely ignorant of it to be honest, but if you find one let me know, it would be interesting to find out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8433625.stm

 

Wonder what that means?

 

Sadly, I suspect that there's at least an element of truth in his claims that we've got our sticky fingers in there somewhere. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to trust our politicians and media to tell us the truth and to actually know what was really going on in the world. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm... ...well I probably am the only one.

 

Sadly? Seems the wise move to make IYAM.

 

Yeah, because fucking about in other people's countries has worked out really well for us recently hasn't it!?! :lol: Well not since the empire anyway, but then we were big enough to get away with it, now we're not. Nowadays not only do we lose the moral-argument, we lose the argument-argument too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A punch on the mouth. Damn, I don't think I've ever seen a statement like that.

 

Know any good books about what went down in 53, indi?

 

Nope, afraid not. I'm largely ignorant of it to be honest, but if you find one let me know, it would be interesting to find out.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4588.htm

 

 

 

 

not a book but as good a synopsis as i've read.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A punch on the mouth. Damn, I don't think I've ever seen a statement like that.

 

Know any good books about what went down in 53, indi?

 

Nope, afraid not. I'm largely ignorant of it to be honest, but if you find one let me know, it would be interesting to find out.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4588.htm

 

 

 

 

not a book but as good a synopsis as i've read.

 

Cheers man, Fisk is great, does he still write regularly for the Independent?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8433625.stm

 

Wonder what that means?

 

Sadly, I suspect that there's at least an element of truth in his claims that we've got our sticky fingers in there somewhere. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to trust our politicians and media to tell us the truth and to actually know what was really going on in the world. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm... ...well I probably am the only one.

 

Sadly? Seems the wise move to make IYAM.

 

Yeah, because f***ing about in other people's countries has worked out really well for us recently hasn't it!?! :lol: Well not since the empire anyway, but then we were big enough to get away with it, now we're not. Nowadays not only do we lose the moral-argument, we lose the argument-argument too.

 

My point is that Iran is heading to be a nuclear state. This is surely indisputable. They have to be stopped one way or another in my view. One of the best ways to attempt to do this, for a country involved in two wars already, may be to stimulate the already disenchanted masses into revolt.

 

I don't claim to be an expert or to have inside information and this is just my humble opinion. I await your next response dripping with patronising sarcasm and a laughing smiley to tell me where I'm going wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8433625.stm

 

Wonder what that means?

 

Sadly, I suspect that there's at least an element of truth in his claims that we've got our sticky fingers in there somewhere. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to trust our politicians and media to tell us the truth and to actually know what was really going on in the world. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm... ...well I probably am the only one.

 

Sadly? Seems the wise move to make IYAM.

 

Yeah, because f***ing about in other people's countries has worked out really well for us recently hasn't it!?! :lol: Well not since the empire anyway, but then we were big enough to get away with it, now we're not. Nowadays not only do we lose the moral-argument, we lose the argument-argument too.

 

My point is that Iran is heading to be a nuclear state. This is surely indisputable. They have to be stopped one way or another in my view. One of the best ways to attempt to do this, for a country involved in two wars already, may be to stimulate the already disenchanted masses into revolt.

 

I don't claim to be an expert or to have inside information and this is just my humble opinion. I await your next response dripping with patronising sarcasm and a laughing smiley to tell me where I'm going wrong.

 

If you felt patronised by that then you've got a seriously thin skin. For future reference, if I'd been intending to patronise you I'd have used this smiley :rolleyes: sarcastic yes, patronising no. I'd have thought you'd have been around this place for long enough to not let a little bit of sarcasm get to you. I chose to use sarcasm as a short-hand in order to make the point that we've interfered in a number of countries' affairs over recent years and almost without exception it's turned out bad for us. I could have gone into great detail about that and been all serious with my response, but I assumed that everyone would be au fait with what I meant, without going over old and somewhat boring ground yet again. I added a laughing smiley in an attempt to take the edge off what I had said and show that my sarcasm was not directed at you in an aggressive way - that worked out well didn't it!?! - and in a highly appropriate way my good intended actions blew up in my face. So there you go, reason enough to not go blundering our way into yet another middle-eastern country with "good intentions".

 

Whoops there I go being sarcastic again - this is me being patronising by the way. ;) - so I'll add a serious response too just in case.

 

Why do you think Iran feels the need for nuclear weapons? My personal opinion is it's largely due to them feeling threatened, either by the west's unquestioning support of Israel or by our record of interfering in countries in that region to the detriment of their people for a very long time. Yes the Iranian regime is not a very nice one, yes they are paranoid, but that doesn't mean we're not out to get them. Lots of countries have been involved in wars, we've been involved in many more than Iran have over recent years and we're a nuclear power, more importantly so have, and is, Israel and they've made threats against Iran, just like Iran has against them. You have to wonder why everyone is so bothered about Iran possibly having a nuclear weapons programme, when no-one's that bothered about Israel - one of the world's most aggressive countries - definitely having already existing nuclear weapons. The main difference as far as I can see is that Israel is one of our "allies" (although what they've ever done for us, I don't know) and Iran is one of our "enemies". It's a sad fact that everyone can see propaganda when it's being directed towards someone else, yet is nearly always blind to it when it's directed towards them. You and I only know what we "know" about Iran based upon what other people have told us and can we believe what they're telling us? I have no idea, but I'm pretty sure that at least some of it is bullshit. We like to think that our press is free and honest and the other side's isn't, but that's been proven not to be the case time and again, I mean how stupid would our government be not to use propaganda on us if it's as affective in other countries as they'd have us believe?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8433625.stm

 

Wonder what that means?

 

Sadly, I suspect that there's at least an element of truth in his claims that we've got our sticky fingers in there somewhere. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to trust our politicians and media to tell us the truth and to actually know what was really going on in the world. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm... ...well I probably am the only one.

 

Sadly? Seems the wise move to make IYAM.

 

Yeah, because f***ing about in other people's countries has worked out really well for us recently hasn't it!?! :lol: Well not since the empire anyway, but then we were big enough to get away with it, now we're not. Nowadays not only do we lose the moral-argument, we lose the argument-argument too.

 

My point is that Iran is heading to be a nuclear state. This is surely indisputable. They have to be stopped one way or another in my view. One of the best ways to attempt to do this, for a country involved in two wars already, may be to stimulate the already disenchanted masses into revolt.

 

I don't claim to be an expert or to have inside information and this is just my humble opinion. I await your next response dripping with patronising sarcasm and a laughing smiley to tell me where I'm going wrong.

 

You might want to read the link that madras posted, says it better than I ever could.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Kinzer would have been better off making a less sweeping judgment: that TPAJAX got the CIA into the regime-change business for good—similar efforts would soon follow in Guatemala, Indonesia, and Cuba—but that the Agency has had little success at that enterprise, while bringing itself and the United States more political ill will, and breeding more untoward results, than any other of its activities.14 Most of the CIA's acknowledged efforts of this sort have shown that Washington has been more interested in strongman rule in the Middle East and elsewhere than in encouraging democracy. The result is a credibility problem that accompanied American troops into Iraq and continues to plague them as the United States prepares to hand over sovereignty to local authorities. All the Shah's Men helps clarify why, when many Iraqis heard President George Bush concede that "sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe,"15 they may have reacted with more than a little skepticism.

 

And that's on the CIA's own website! They obviously don't read their own stuff. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8433625.stm

 

Wonder what that means?

 

Sadly, I suspect that there's at least an element of truth in his claims that we've got our sticky fingers in there somewhere. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to trust our politicians and media to tell us the truth and to actually know what was really going on in the world. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm... ...well I probably am the only one.

 

Sadly? Seems the wise move to make IYAM.

 

Yeah, because f***ing about in other people's countries has worked out really well for us recently hasn't it!?! :lol: Well not since the empire anyway, but then we were big enough to get away with it, now we're not. Nowadays not only do we lose the moral-argument, we lose the argument-argument too.

 

My point is that Iran is heading to be a nuclear state. This is surely indisputable. They have to be stopped one way or another in my view. One of the best ways to attempt to do this, for a country involved in two wars already, may be to stimulate the already disenchanted masses into revolt.

 

I don't claim to be an expert or to have inside information and this is just my humble opinion. I await your next response dripping with patronising sarcasm and a laughing smiley to tell me where I'm going wrong.

 

If you felt patronised by that then you've got a seriously thin skin. For future reference, if I'd been intending to patronise you I'd have used this smiley :rolleyes: sarcastic yes, patronising no. I'd have thought you'd have been around this place for long enough to not let a little bit of sarcasm get to you. I chose to use sarcasm as a short-hand in order to make the point that we've interfered in a number of countries' affairs over recent years and almost without exception it's turned out bad for us. I could have gone into great detail about that and been all serious with my response, but I assumed that everyone would be au fait with what I meant, without going over old and somewhat boring ground yet again. I added a laughing smiley in an attempt to take the edge off what I had said and show that my sarcasm was not directed at you in an aggressive way - that worked out well didn't it!?! - and in a highly appropriate way my good intended actions blew up in my face. So there you go, reason enough to not go blundering our way into yet another middle-eastern country with "good intentions".

 

Whoops there I go being sarcastic again - this is me being patronising by the way. ;) - so I'll add a serious response too just in case.

 

Why do you think Iran feels the need for nuclear weapons? My personal opinion is it's largely due to them feeling threatened, either by the west's unquestioning support of Israel or by our record of interfering in countries in that region to the detriment of their people for a very long time. Yes the Iranian regime is not a very nice one, yes they are paranoid, but that doesn't mean we're not out to get them. Lots of countries have been involved in wars, we've been involved in many more than Iran have over recent years and we're a nuclear power, more importantly so have, and is, Israel and they've made threats against Iran, just like Iran has against them. You have to wonder why everyone is so bothered about Iran possibly having a nuclear weapons programme, when no-one's that bothered about Israel - one of the world's most aggressive countries - definitely having already existing nuclear weapons. The main difference as far as I can see is that Israel is one of our "allies" (although what they've ever done for us, I don't know) and Iran is one of our "enemies". It's a sad fact that everyone can see propaganda when it's being directed towards someone else, yet is nearly always blind to it when it's directed towards them. You and I only know what we "know" about Iran based upon what other people have told us and can we believe what they're telling us? I have no idea, but I'm pretty sure that at least some of it is bullshit. We like to think that our press is free and honest and the other side's isn't, but that's been proven not to be the case time and again, I mean how stupid would our government be not to use propaganda on us if it's as affective in other countries as they'd have us believe?

 

I've already said that I'm no expert so my opinions could well be way off. I genuinely try to keep up to date with current affairs but there are so many of them! If my ignorance leads to opinions at odds with reason and overwhelming(?) historical precedent, then I'd expect to be patronised. I deliberately made my first post short and sweet though to avoid displaying my ignorance. That's, I guess, why I was a little testy earlier when I thought you were being prematurely dismissive in a sarcastic manner and I thought I'd last a little further into the thread before that happened! Anyway never mind that...

 

In answer to your serious response, why do I think Iran feels the need for nuclear weapons? Possibly because it's the fastest way to "wipe Israel off the map". Maybe to bring about the oft-recited "death to America". Maybe Ahmadinejad just wants to ride on the back of it for a laugh. Who knows what they'll do first. None of these reasons sit right with me though, except maybe the last one.

 

The fact that the UK and Israel have nukes, have had wars and haven't used them is surely in some sense proof that we can possess them responsibly? About Iran, I'm not so sure. Also, it's in violation of the non-proliferation treaty.

 

I can't agree with your cynicism as regards the UK press. I think the government would love to use it to spread disinformation, yes, but I don't think it can happen. Not in the modern age. There are too many ways to get to the truth, e.g. Twitter during the Iranian election saga (you surely don't think that was the work of the British government?).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8433625.stm

 

Wonder what that means?

 

Sadly, I suspect that there's at least an element of truth in his claims that we've got our sticky fingers in there somewhere. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to trust our politicians and media to tell us the truth and to actually know what was really going on in the world. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm... ...well I probably am the only one.

 

Sadly? Seems the wise move to make IYAM.

 

Yeah, because f***ing about in other people's countries has worked out really well for us recently hasn't it!?! :lol: Well not since the empire anyway, but then we were big enough to get away with it, now we're not. Nowadays not only do we lose the moral-argument, we lose the argument-argument too.

 

My point is that Iran is heading to be a nuclear state. This is surely indisputable. They have to be stopped one way or another in my view. One of the best ways to attempt to do this, for a country involved in two wars already, may be to stimulate the already disenchanted masses into revolt.

 

I don't claim to be an expert or to have inside information and this is just my humble opinion. I await your next response dripping with patronising sarcasm and a laughing smiley to tell me where I'm going wrong.

 

If you felt patronised by that then you've got a seriously thin skin. For future reference, if I'd been intending to patronise you I'd have used this smiley :rolleyes: sarcastic yes, patronising no. I'd have thought you'd have been around this place for long enough to not let a little bit of sarcasm get to you. I chose to use sarcasm as a short-hand in order to make the point that we've interfered in a number of countries' affairs over recent years and almost without exception it's turned out bad for us. I could have gone into great detail about that and been all serious with my response, but I assumed that everyone would be au fait with what I meant, without going over old and somewhat boring ground yet again. I added a laughing smiley in an attempt to take the edge off what I had said and show that my sarcasm was not directed at you in an aggressive way - that worked out well didn't it!?! - and in a highly appropriate way my good intended actions blew up in my face. So there you go, reason enough to not go blundering our way into yet another middle-eastern country with "good intentions".

 

Whoops there I go being sarcastic again - this is me being patronising by the way. ;) - so I'll add a serious response too just in case.

 

Why do you think Iran feels the need for nuclear weapons? My personal opinion is it's largely due to them feeling threatened, either by the west's unquestioning support of Israel or by our record of interfering in countries in that region to the detriment of their people for a very long time. Yes the Iranian regime is not a very nice one, yes they are paranoid, but that doesn't mean we're not out to get them. Lots of countries have been involved in wars, we've been involved in many more than Iran have over recent years and we're a nuclear power, more importantly so have, and is, Israel and they've made threats against Iran, just like Iran has against them. You have to wonder why everyone is so bothered about Iran possibly having a nuclear weapons programme, when no-one's that bothered about Israel - one of the world's most aggressive countries - definitely having already existing nuclear weapons. The main difference as far as I can see is that Israel is one of our "allies" (although what they've ever done for us, I don't know) and Iran is one of our "enemies". It's a sad fact that everyone can see propaganda when it's being directed towards someone else, yet is nearly always blind to it when it's directed towards them. You and I only know what we "know" about Iran based upon what other people have told us and can we believe what they're telling us? I have no idea, but I'm pretty sure that at least some of it is bullshit. We like to think that our press is free and honest and the other side's isn't, but that's been proven not to be the case time and again, I mean how stupid would our government be not to use propaganda on us if it's as affective in other countries as they'd have us believe?

 

I've already said that I'm no expert so my opinions could well be way off. I genuinely try to keep up to date with current affairs but there are so many of them! If my ignorance leads to opinions at odds with reason and overwhelming(?) historical precedent, then I'd expect to be patronised. I deliberately made my first post short and sweet though to avoid displaying my ignorance. That's, I guess, why I was a little testy earlier when I thought you were being prematurely dismissive in a sarcastic manner and I thought I'd last a little further into the thread before that happened! Anyway never mind that...

 

In answer to your serious response, why do I think Iran feels the need for nuclear weapons? Possibly because it's the fastest way to "wipe Israel off the map". Maybe to bring about the oft-recited "death to America". Maybe Ahmadinejad just wants to ride on the back of it for a laugh. Who knows what they'll do first. None of these reasons sit right with me though, except maybe the last one.

 

The fact that the UK and Israel have nukes, have had wars and haven't used them is surely in some sense proof that we can possess them responsibly? About Iran, I'm not so sure. Also, it's in violation of the non-proliferation treaty.

 

I can't agree with your cynicism as regards the UK press. I think the government would love to use it to spread disinformation, yes, but I don't think it can happen. Not in the modern age. There are too many ways to get to the truth, e.g. Twitter during the Iranian election saga (you surely don't think that was the work of the British government?).

 

Israel has made similar threats against Iran and it actually has the capability to carry them out, unlike Iran, it also has a record of attacking it's neighbours pre-emptively, unlike Iran as far as I'm aware (I'm not 100% on that though). Also, we're both making the assumption that Iran is actually developing nuclear weapons, which is uncertain. As for the death to America thing, how oft-recited is that in reality? Not sure I've seen them say that myself.

 

How can you be sure that Iran would use them if they had them, so the fact that we or Israel haven't used them yet and your point that that implies a responsible attitude is a mute one. Israel has never signed up to the non-proliferation treaty, if it had, it would have been in breach of it as it has developed nukes since it was put in place. It also did so covertly - in much the same way that it is now claimed Iran is - and still does not admit to having them even though everyone knows that they have. Pot, kettle and black comes to mind here.

 

Come on man, how naive is it to believe that there is no propaganda contained within what we see and read in the news? It may not be blatant or overt, but that's because it doesn't need to be and is more effective if it isn't. In this modern world of rolling 24-hour news, where it's become way more important to be first, rather than right, it's easy for governments to manipulate the media because they just regurgitate what they're told immediately and unquestioningly. For example, the government said there were WMDs in Iraq, the media reported it as fact, there wasn't. Look at the way in which wars are reported, all those "embedded" reporters, do you think they're allowed to say exactly what they want? When was the last time you saw a reporter covering a conflict in which the west was involved who wasn't embedded? It never happens any more, the media isn't independent, it isn't unbiased, not because it's run directly by the government, but because it's too lazy and feckless to be any other way. Remember the BBC is actually the "state-broadcaster", think about how we view statements from other countries' state broadcasters and ask yourself why it should be so different here from everywhere else in the world. Yes there are ways to get to the truth, but how do you know that you've got there when you have? There's so much news out there and most of it conflicts with each other, it can't all be the truth, can it? People should view news as opinion, because that's what it is, no-one simply states the facts any more (if they ever did!), which one you believe is up to you, but don't ever forget it's an opinion and opinion is by definition biased.

 

I have no idea if Iran is developing nuclear weapons or what their intentions would be once they'd got them, I've heard a lot of opinions about it though and from those opinions I've made my own, I could be totally wrong though and I am aware that it is likely that some of what I accepted as the truth will have been propaganda. One thing I am certain of though is that meddling in other countries' affairs usually ends up getting us in the shit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if we are stirring, which isn't proven.  They are killing Iranians, not us.

 

That's true. Personally, I don't want to see any government killing any people, either it's own, or foreigners and I'm happy to see our government speaking out about it, but I'd prefer it if they did so in all cases rather than just when it's a country we don't like and if when they did so I was safe in the knowledge that they weren't making massive hypocrites of themselves. Sadly, I don't think that'll ever be the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if we are stirring, which isn't proven.  They are killing Iranians, not us.

 

That's true. Personally, I don't want to see any government killing any people, either it's own, or foreigners and I'm happy to see our government speaking out about it, but I'd prefer it if they did so in all cases rather than just when it's a country we don't like and if when they did so I was safe in the knowledge that they weren't making massive hypocrites of themselves. Sadly, I don't think that'll ever be the case.

i used to think that way till someone gave me the example  of "would you step in if a local psycho you knew could kick your arse was beating up his girlfriend..........probably not, it doesn't make you a hypocrite if you step in to stop someone later, who's arse you know you can kick"
Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if we are stirring, which isn't proven.  They are killing Iranians, not us.

 

That's true. Personally, I don't want to see any government killing any people, either it's own, or foreigners and I'm happy to see our government speaking out about it, but I'd prefer it if they did so in all cases rather than just when it's a country we don't like and if when they did so I was safe in the knowledge that they weren't making massive hypocrites of themselves. Sadly, I don't think that'll ever be the case.

i used to think that way till someone gave me the example  of "would you step in if a local psycho you knew could kick your arse was beating up his girlfriend..........probably not, it doesn't make you a hypocrite if you step in to stop someone later, who's arse you know you can kick"

 

There are plenty of countries whose arse we could kick who we let get away with stuff like this because they're our "friends".

 

The hypocrite thing was more to do with the possibility that we could be agitating behind the scenes and therefore partly responsible for what's going on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...