you really should read from more than just the Bush bible Philosopher!!
Read this its not biased....

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070514/Iran_strikes_070514/20070514?hub=World

"Both parties have confirmed the talks will take place in Baghdad in the
presence of the Iraqi government," Ahmadinejad said Monday. "We decided
we were ready and prepared to do this to support the Iraqi people."


The Iranian president, in a subdued mood after the previous night's
raucous anti-American rally in a Dubai soccer stadium, repeated his
calls for the United States to leave the Gulf region. Washington holds
military bases in all Gulf countries except Saudi Arabia.


In stark contrast to Cheney's low-key visit, Ahmadinejad was greeted
with fanfare by the top leaders of the Emirates, who apparently had no
objection to Sunday's rally.

funny how the reports from their neighbors all contradict the Bush
manuals!!

err ... Brown is not the Prime Minister of the UK ... the Bush-lapdog
Blair is.

he will be wont he?

Blair, who has seen his popularity plunge because of his steadfast
support for the U.S.-led Iraq war, announced Thursday that he will
resign June 27, ending 10 years as prime minister. Bush had an upbeat
reaction to the news, saying he thinks Blair's expected successor,
Gordon Brown, is "an open and engaging person" who "understands the
consequences of failure" in Iraq.

All the violence and war is solving nothing, the Islamic extremists
still hate us and will always hate us..they hate anyone who does not
follow their path.What will help the people of Iraq the most is
education and helping them rebuild their country. Bush is an idiot all
he's doing is making things worse for our own men and women over there
and for Iraq's innocents.Enough I say, bring them home!!!

bravo CCherub ....instead of dropping bombs we should build
schools with free classes that introduce students to western
culture and ideals...change the mindset for the future

Thank you DaVinci

Philospoher why are Fanta's opinions and thoughts on this so much less
important than anyone else's?? You love this country?? The learn on of
the basics..EVERYONE HAS FREEDOM OF SPEECH.....no one should be
silenced, their opinions and thoughts matter just as much as your's do.

Cherub, Fanta's opinions are fine, I just simply disagree with him for
the most part. Fanta, your facts are mostly opinions as mine are. You
post the opinions of people who agree with your opinions.

I happen to have my own opinions and I am not on the bandwagon with Bush
or anyone else. I think the administration is missing some opportunities
here.

Davinci, The schools in Iran are seedbeds for anti American hatred.
Their teachers are not free to express their opinions about
international relations unless they agree with the party line. Unless
you can change that you will never be able to build schools and teach
the people the good things about the west. The population there with the
average of 30 is partly because when the present government took over
they killed off huge numbers of the opposition, as well as the compliant
who participated in the Shaw's regime.

I agree that the people of Iran largely have a more favorable opinion of
the West than the government there will permit, but these people are
strongly suppressed. If you can free them the situation will likely
improve. Unfortunately there is also an extreme portion of the
population there who have unyielding hatred for anything western. This
is not so small as many would like us to believe. They are said to have
millions of people lined up to run into the face of western guns unarmed
on suicide missions to accomplish their agenda. Davinci, this is largely
the result of their education structure. Building more schools for them
is not likely to solve that. Changing the education system from within
will only happen with some moderation of the regime.

So long as the present regime has billions of dollars in oil revenue and
a growing military, I believe you are not going to be able to effect a
significant change.

As for Saudis in Iraq supporting the Sunni insurgents, well surprise
surprise. What would you expect with Iran yanking the tail one way
except for the Saudis to yank it the other.

Fanta you express your opinion about the Saudis being there as if they
were the main problem rather than Iran. It overlooks their need to act
as a reactionary force to prevent Shia incursion in the region and
threatening their own security. So the way you make your point is a
deceptive fabrication to support your position and it misses the point.
This is an example of why I consider you opinions to be insignificant
and a distraction from reality.

There is another point here to consider. That is the long term effect
the US has on the region and the effect it is likely to have on the
future. If the US walks away and leaves Saudi Arabia and Iran in a
battle for Iraq, either country who prevails will have the feeling that
they only had to fight that fight because of the US meddling. There may
well be some truth to that although other countries were involved as
well.

To mitigate the situation the only solution is to manage a peaceful
development in the country. Managing a peaceful development means taking
Iran out of the picture. Davinci you prefer to do that by diplomacy and
negotiations, a well meaning and noble idea, but it ignores the lack of
success with the country in the past. It also overlooks the methodology
being used to win time and accomplish their agenda, which, while not
modeled after North Korea's bargaining example, resembles the technique
in key characteristics. The practice is to delay, deflect and seem to
give only to take back at opportune times so that effectively they give
up nothing and meanwhile do whatever they want internally.

My opinion, many of you will hate this I'm sure, is to take out their
military, then implement the good will efforts wanted by Fanta and
Davinci. I think you'll have more success in this manner, and be more
likely to have the people inside Iran rise up and oust the regime
themselves.

The important issue is this, as I see it. If you can get the wealth and
weapons out of the hands of the zealots you can cut a swath through
their ability to support terrorist organizations from Afghanistan to
Lebanon to Iraq and others. By doing so a new structure can be grown in
place with some of the education reforms and a basis for opportunity
that can be shared within the populace.

Fanta ... True that Blair is leaving a legacy that is muddied by his
blind faith in that Bush-boy, but there is a worthwhile candidate to
challenge Brown, its just whether the challenger will actually try for a
battle and risk his own career, and position.

I agree Brown is a very strong position, and any challenger could end up
with the Home Office job (guaranteed to be the most unpopular minister
there is) should the challenger lose, but it is not a foregone
conclusion.

Anyway, there should be a general election within the next 2 years
anyway.

Cool, I know only who the press says, I will look at it, but I am not
educated in the British political system. We have plenty of problems
with our own, but I promise I will look it up. Maybe you could post some
links. I read a lot!!

Peace is not made with the sword the arrow and the spear.

Peace is made with the olive branch.

You can not enforce peace. For peace to be present you must uphold it
with honor.

Take out their military first? Are you nuts. Such an action would
cause irreparable damage to the infrastructure of the country you apply
that action, piss of those that are inclined to make peace and place
those that want war at the front of policy.

Here is an experiment for you. Go to a neighbors house. Punch him in
the nose as hard as you can (or kick him in the nuts if you prefere).
Then ask him then if he would like to be your friend.

What manner of man are you that you would hold in your hand the sword
while all about you hunger abounds. Put away the toys of war and put
your hand to the plow that we may feed the world in hope and love and
not murder it with hatred and fear.

I for one have no wish to rule Persia. I have my own house to rule.
Let them rule themselves.

This is pretty much dedicated to Brown.

He is an overwhelming favourite .. not that he is the right man for the
job, but in absence of anything better ... he will win ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6652651.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6651301.stm

Thats a couple of them ...

The problem is that the left (Labour) and the right (Conservatives) have
both moved to the centre.

So socialism and public ownership (Labour's platform) has been abandoned
in favour of moving towards the Conservative's ideals of privatising
everything and abandoning the trade unions.

The third major party have no real chance of getting in (Social
Democrats) But in the event of a hung parliament (no overall majority)
the SDP could form a majority.

Their manifesto includes legalising class C drugs (Grass, hash) a return
to the death penalty, proportional representation, legalising
prostitution and closing our borders to immigrants.

WOW, I wished I could talk that elegant.
No **** well said ad......

My way is more fun though....

Thanks Belushi, Ill get on that later..

Do the people in Britain elect the PM or does parliament elect him?

Like in China they claim they are democratic but the vote is only among
party members. Im not suggesting yall are communist, only asking is that
how the PM is selected?
Im pretty sure members of Parliament are elected in a general election
in Britain, unlike the Chinese communist who are lifelong members of the
party. That is a big difference, but is that how the PM in England
chosen, by Parliament?

Adventure, while I support the notion of the olive branch as noble and I
prefer the olive branch, sometimes it can not take the place of the
sword. Some people are simply intractable. Chavez is an example.
Ahmadinejad is another. Do not read into this that I am promoting action
against Venezuela.

Iran is killing US soldiers. They are sponsoring terrorism. I can not
help but be surprised that you consider this acceptable, or that you
blame that activity on the United States.

If my neighbor is killing people in my yard I am going to do a lot more
than go over there and punch him in the nose and then invite him to be
friends. That's what kind of man I am. What kind of man are you?

Adventure, I have noticed that you are thinking your way through issues.
You take positions that are reasonable and based on convictions and I
respect that. I differ in that I think some intervention is necessary
here.

my idea was to have a school attached to our embassy staffed by
americans that would be open for children to come and learn...of course
SOME schools in existence now are propagandized...
there is a need to present america as a positive rather than a
negative..

In that point we differ.

How would you feel if a country from the middle east invaded canada and
then pointed their sword at us placed their fleets off your shores with
oars shipped and spears out and invited you to treat with them in peace.

Would you go to the table of peace under the weapons of your enemy with
the blood or your neighbors still upon the blade?

Perhaps Iran does have intentions of conquering all of lands in the
middle east. Perhaps not.

Peace is offered first and twice. Peace offered in good faith while
wearing the robes of peace and not the armor of war.

Iran has nothing real to gain from the strife that is near their borders
and much to gain from peace in our time.

Perhaps it is time to let the lean merchants of the food vendors become
fat and not the fat merchants hawking the toys of war grow fatter. If
we contine to feed the carrion birds they that follow the smoke of the
beast of war will but demand more.

what is the real truth? Is it all about Isreal? If Iran does get the
(bomb), I firmly believe it well be directed at Isreal. Iran is not
cable of hitting us with Missles... Not now anyway.
Of course Isreal seems to be another state in this USA. And dont we
have many treaties with them to protect them? Wouldnt this lead us to
the 3rd and final war? we all know Isreal had nucular cababilities,
although we don't hear much about it.

Isnt this all about The Holy Land?

If as you beleive Israel has the weapons of abomination and has not used
them why then would Iran. Do you truely believe that Iran is less then
the United States in morals and the truth of reality. We used such a
weapon once and the results were horrifying. Its lesson continues to
burn in the eyes of the entire world. Who in their right mind would use
such a weapon of evil. I would bet you that the Iranians have allready
taken steps to ensure that religiously fanatic persons have no access to
their research programs. With nuclear power comes nuclear
responsibility. They are a nation amoung nations as are we. Give them
some credit.

Should Iran rain fire upon the shores of the mediteranean they would
reap the fire of pestulance from their own hand.

They have no more wish to bring the end of times than do we.

Whoa, I disagree with almost all of that. First yes I think Iran is more
likely to use them. Second, yes I think controlling factions in Iran
would be happy to bring about the end of the world as we know it. Third
I think they have not made efforts to control their weapons and weapons
technology except in the case where the control is to distribute them
widely among terrorist organizations in various countries.

If in fact they are controlling the access to their weapons and weapons
technology well, that points an ill finger towards their regime. Since
they have been shown to be providing improvised explosive devices and
extremely deadly shape charges which penetrate armor to kill our
soldiers. Your comment would suggest that the authority to distribute
these weapons comes from the highest authority. Otherwise your comment
would demonstrate that they haven't the competency to manage deadly
weapons. Can't have both here.