yea that 1+1=5 thing again...imgine that their leaders have already threatened at least 5 other countries, lied to the UN, and keep trying to make nuclear weapons... but lets turn it into oil...

ok seriously....let's debate the topic without getting personal

Kim

Noo I didnt mean just libiya lol yes england is judt as bad probably the smallest contry in the world but one of the most successful but yes every country has its needs n frankly england dont really have great resources n a abundance for coal n oil thats y they team up with america sp often to c wht they can gain lol every one is proud of thier respective nations but every nation forget that every person has a dark secret n motives lol

even if it is about oil, so what? spoils of war, and it's not like we keep it... they will still have a government, like iraq, lybia, and afganistan... just a little more sane goverment

i agree... why buy it when they can take it? England has to have resources too...

Aye but its not theres to take in the first place

never stopped other countries before...
i like england, but i do think they are the ones that start most of the crap in the world...but they are good allies, and mostly a good people too

Its never the ppl of the country ul find amazing ppl every where its hows its run n corrupt n greedy government filling thier pockets first then trying to give ppl limited options on what they think is freedom lol ie voting etc for certain things to happen but they were going to do anyway but make u vote for it to make u feel free choice but 1 wich has been manipulated thru media.etc leading u to believe in certain things lol im going on to other things
But taking whats not urs will cause fights etc n like in a relationship if ur controlling ul fight disagrre n breakdown its same type of thing lol anyway peeps im off to bed x goodnight x

Well analysed...

Flip the logic.

Revolutionary Guard eats the profits of Irans oil. Who then is 'profiting'? Certianly not the People of Iran, they live day to day by their own means. Certainly not the People of the US, we get our oil elsewhere.

Biggest diference between the People of Iran and the People of the US is we can defy our leaders when we see a problem. Iranian people can only do this if they wish to die.

Yet their leaders have publicly stated a wish to use a weapon of abomination on another country.

Want I do not understand is how the public can accept such a declaration of suicide.

(even if you win you lose).

Ah, the war propaganda techniques haven't really changed in 200 years, have they?

The Military Industrial Complex is profiting (just as Eisenhower predicted). It's almost surprising that the misinformation about Iranians wanting to destroy other countries is still going around the webbernets. I guess propaganda is more fun to believe in that the truth.

Tell a lie big enough, long enough, and people will begin to believe it.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2007/260107offthemap.htm
The "Wipe Israel Off The Map" Hoax
What Ahmadinejad really said and why this broken record is just another ad slogan for war

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Friday, January 26, 2007

Barely a day goes by that one can avoid reading or hearing yet another Israeli, American or British warhawk regurgitate the broken record that Iran's President Ahmadinejad threatened to "wipe Israel off the map," framed in the ridiculous context that Israelis are being targeted for a second holocaust. This baseless rallying call for conflict holds about as much credibility as Dick Cheney's assertion that Saddam Hussein was planning to light up American skies with mushroom clouds.

Today it's the turn of would-be future British Prime Minister David Cameron, leader of the Conservative Party, who repeated the "wipe Israel off he map" fraud in a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, using it to qualify his refusal to rule out a military strike on Iran under a Tory government.

Did Ahmadinejad really threaten to "wipe Israel off the map" or is this phrase just another jingoistic brand slogan for selling the next war in the Middle East?

The devil is in the detail, wiping Israel off the map suggests a physical genocidal assault, a literal population relocation or elimination akin to what the Nazis did. According to numerous different translations, Ahmadinejad never used the word "map," instead his statement was in the context of time and applied to the Zionist regime occupying Jerusalem. Ahmadinejad was expressing his future hope that the Zionist regime in Israel would fall, not that Iran was going to physically annex the country and its population.

To claim Ahmadinejad has issued a rallying cry to ethnically cleanse Israel is akin to saying that Churchill wanted to murder all Germans when he stated his desire to crush the Nazis. This is about the demise of a corrupt occupying power, not the deaths of millions of innocent people.

The Guardian's Jonathan Steele cites four different translations, from professors to the BBC to the New York Times and even pro-Israel news outlets, in none of those translations is the word "map" used. The closest translation to what the Iranian President actually said is, "The regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time," or a narrow relative thereof. In no version is the word "map" used or a context of mass genocide or hostile military action even hinted at.

The acceptance of the word "map" seemingly originated with the New York Times, who later had to back away from this false translation. The BBC also wrongly used the word and, in comments to Steele, later accepted their mistake but refused to issue a retraction.

"The fact that he compared his desired option - the elimination of "the regime occupying Jerusalem" - with the fall of the Shah's regime in Iran makes it crystal clear that he is talking about regime change, not the end of Israel. As a schoolboy opponent of the Shah in the 1970's he surely did not favor Iran's removal from the page of time. He just wanted the Shah out," writes Steele.

"It's important to note that the "quote" in question was itself a quote, writes Arash Norouzi, "they are the words of the late Ayatollah Khomeini, the father of the Islamic Revolution. Although he quoted Khomeini to affirm his own position on Zionism, the actual words belong to Khomeini and not Ahmadinejad. Thus, Ahmadinejad has essentially been credited (or blamed) for a quote that is not only unoriginal, but represents a viewpoint already in place well before he ever took office."

Professor Juan Cole concurs, arguing, "Now, some might say, "So he didn't say, 'wipe off the map,' he said 'erase from the page.' What's the difference? Anyway he's saying he wants to get rid of Israel. Ahmadinejad was not making a threat, he was quoting a saying of Khomeini and urging that pro-Palestinian activists in Iran not give up hope -- that the occupation of Jerusalem was no more a continued inevitability than had been the hegemony of the Shah's government. Whatever this quotation from a decades-old speech of Khomeini may have meant, Ahmadinejad did not say that 'Israel must be wiped off the map' with the implication that phrase has of Nazi-style extermination of a people. He said that the occupation regime over Jerusalem must be erased from the page of time."

What an outright lie...

"The Military Industrial Complex is profiting (just as Eisenhower predicted). It's almost surprising that the misinformation about Iranians wanting to destroy other countries is still going around the webbernets. I guess propaganda is more fun to believe in that the truth."...

I have watched the man who claims to be the President of Iran speak.

He spoke at the United Nations.

I read news from all over the world.(some ligt some 'other' sources)

Not a single interpration of his speach agrees with what you posted.

His stated goal was to use a nuclear weapon to wipe out Israel.

Perhaps you should try other than conspericy nets. (there is a wealth of REAL information out there)

Yep,Jones,Chomsky and all the others!
And don't forget The Body!
They'll see a Conspiracy if their Steak isn't done the way they ordered!

Just because the military industrial complex is profiting that
does not mean that the threat from terrorist countries like Iran
is not real.

The threat of Iran is real.

It is important to take it seriously when religious fanatics who
have said they want to destroy the United States are going crazy
trying to stockpile weapons grade uranium and are concealing their
vigorous nuclear bomb research.

There is genuinely cause for concern since Iran also supplies arms
to Islamic radicals attacking US troops in Afghanistan and Iraq,
calls for genocide against Jews and Israel, oppresses their own
citizens with public violence, hosts conferences denying the
Holocaust, takes our citizens hostage, and ignores signed peace
agreements while lying to the IAEA about their nuclear activities
while promoting "Holy War".

Not a good idea for Iranian religious fanatics who say that Allah
is with them and against all others who have differing views
to have a nuclear weapons stockpile. "Allahu Akbar" - y'know?

It's quite within their capability to cobble together a Crude Nuclear Device!
Doesn't need to be a sophisticated Implosion-Type Bomb!
A "Gunbarreltype" one like some of the early US-Devices would be quite effective!
They also do have the means to "Deliver" one or more!

Smedley Butler on Interventionism

Excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933, by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC.

War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.

I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.

I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.

There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism.

It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.

I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.

I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.

During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.

U.N. Agency Says Iran Data Points to A-Bomb Work
By DAVID E. SANGER and WILLIAM J. BROAD
Published: November 8, 2011

United Nations weapons inspectors have amassed a trove of new evidence that they say makes a “credible” case that “Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear device,” and that the project may still be under way.


Document: The I.A.E.A. Report on Iran (pdf)

Related

Report on Nuclear Efforts Draws a Muted Response From the White House (November 9, 2011)
Report Undercuts Iran’s Defense on Nuclear Effort (November 9, 2011)

Related in Opinion

Op-Ed Contributor: To Stop Iran, Lean On China (November 9, 2011)

The long-awaited report, released by the International Atomic Energy Agency on Tuesday, represents the strongest judgment the agency has issued in its decade-long struggle to pierce the secrecy surrounding the Iranian program. The findings, drawn from evidence of far greater scope and depth than the agency has previously made public, have already rekindled a debate among the Western allies and Israel about whether increased diplomatic pressure, sanctions, sabotage or military action could stop Iran’s program.

Knowing that their findings would be compared with the flawed Iraq intelligence that preceded the 2003 invasion — and has complicated American moves on Iran — the inspectors devoted a section of the report to “credibility of information.” The information was from more than 10 countries and from independent sources, they said; some was backed up by interviews with foreigners who had helped Iran.

The report laid out the case that Iran had moved far beyond the blackboard to create computer models of nuclear explosions in 2008 and 2009 and conducted experiments on nuclear triggers. It said the simulations focused on how shock waves from conventional explosives could compress the spherical fuel at the core of a nuclear device, which starts the chain reaction that ends in nuclear explosion.

The report also said Iran went beyond such theoretical studies to build a large containment vessel at its Parchin military base, starting in 2000, for testing the feasibility of such explosive compression. It called such tests “strong indicators of possible weapon development.”

Read the full article here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/world/un-details-case-that-iran-is-at-work-on-nuclear-device.html?_r=1&ref=global-home

U.N. Agency Says Iran Data Points to A-Bomb Work
By DAVID E. SANGER and WILLIAM J. BROAD
Published: November 8, 2011

United Nations weapons inspectors have amassed a trove of new evidence that they say makes a “credible” case that “Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear device,” and that the project may still be under way.


Document: The I.A.E.A. Report on Iran (pdf)

Related

Report on Nuclear Efforts Draws a Muted Response From the White House (November 9, 2011)
Report Undercuts Iran’s Defense on Nuclear Effort (November 9, 2011)

Related in Opinion

Op-Ed Contributor: To Stop Iran, Lean On China (November 9, 2011)

The long-awaited report, released by the International Atomic Energy Agency on Tuesday, represents the strongest judgment the agency has issued in its decade-long struggle to pierce the secrecy surrounding the Iranian program. The findings, drawn from evidence of far greater scope and depth than the agency has previously made public, have already rekindled a debate among the Western allies and Israel about whether increased diplomatic pressure, sanctions, sabotage or military action could stop Iran’s program.

Knowing that their findings would be compared with the flawed Iraq intelligence that preceded the 2003 invasion — and has complicated American moves on Iran — the inspectors devoted a section of the report to “credibility of information.” The information was from more than 10 countries and from independent sources, they said; some was backed up by interviews with foreigners who had helped Iran.

The report laid out the case that Iran had moved far beyond the blackboard to create computer models of nuclear explosions in 2008 and 2009 and conducted experiments on nuclear triggers. It said the simulations focused on how shock waves from conventional explosives could compress the spherical fuel at the core of a nuclear device, which starts the chain reaction that ends in nuclear explosion.

The report also said Iran went beyond such theoretical studies to build a large containment vessel at its Parchin military base, starting in 2000, for testing the feasibility of such explosive compression. It called such tests “strong indicators of possible weapon development.”

Read the full article here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/world/un-details-case-that-iran-is-at-work-on-nuclear-device.html?_r=1&ref=global-home

Wasn't there 'credible' evidence that iraq had weapons of mass destruction?