Liberals, answer this, or go away forever?

Question

If you had Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sitting at a table with you, what would you say to him that would ensure you that he would not use nuclear weapons on those that he threatened?

Tell me what nice things you would tell him to change his views.

when I do generalize 'liberals', I get, "don't generalize", when I say "some liberals", I get "some liberals doesn't mean everyone"

So at your next antiamerican liberal meeting, agree on which you would preffer

His threats to Israel were not misquoted. He threatened them, and the U.S. on several occasions.


NOW ANSWER THE QUESTION, and quit ignoring it like a typical liberal.

Iran was offered uranium enriched to the point for power for less than they could make it themselves, however refused.

Answer 1

Well first of all who has he threatened?

Israel? I think not. The quote regarding Israel was a misquote and mistranslation. I work with several Iranians (they are against the iranian regime) and they all speak Persian and have all stated that Iran has never said that the want to wipe Israel off the map. The West believe the propaganda because it suits their imperialist policies! Irans only crime against the US is selling its oil in Euros which they have a right to do. I hope Venezuela follow suit and eventually the rest of OPEC. The US can't invade them all!

I would say to Ahmadinejad, "Keep developing your nuclear power. Make sure you can give electricity to the people of your country as is your right! Nobody needs to say anything about him using Nuclear Weapons. Nobody says anything to the US about it and Gods knows they have threatened to use them often enough. Nobody likes a bully and the only way to deal with a bully is to hit him back and stand up to him!"

In addition, it was a misquote! How many US citizens speak Persin, not Arabic? That's right probably only a handful. Who broadcast the threat... the US media. A translated version!!!! Translated by who? That's right, the US govt! I have heard the translation from native speakers who are against the Iranian regime and they state that this is a mistranslation. You on the other hand simply believe the propaganda your govt feeds you. I bet you still think there are WMDs in Iraq and that Saddam helped plan 9/11!!!!

I've already stated what I would say to the Iranians. I am all for them having nuclear power. If they develop nukes so be it. They need to defend themselves against US aggression and Israeli threats - both nuclear states! A case of do as I say and not as I do is in play here. A nuclearIran would simply balance the power in the Middle East. It would encourage negotiation with Israel much as it encouraged the political end to the cold war. Nuclear war is to big a disaster to contemplate. Nukes force negotiation. Nukes in Iran would mean Israel could no longer dictate in the Middle East but would have to realise the views of the other nations that exist there.

I certainly remember the hostage situation in Iran. So what if the 52 hostages were taken? How many Iranians have been taken by US forces in Iraq? Diplomats included? How long did the CIA operate in Iran? The US has continually conspired against Iran and Iran fight back any way they can. The US has no rights in Iran and no right to their oil resources and no right to dictate to them how to run their country.

Answer 2

Maybe something like this: We both know that you say the things that you say to pander to the right wing radicals but its time to make a choice. What do you want rewards or repercussions?? Relaxed trade sanctions, trade partnership, technology for fuels such as solar and wind, aid and assistance where applicable or things of such nature.
Otherwise either a slow economical death or a military offensive.
Such a conversation would be called diplomacy or negotiations. I guess you forget that the neo-Cons were celebrating a diplomatic agreement with the biggest lunatic in the world Kim Zon some weeks ago. This guy should be easier he doesn't even have nukes yet.

Answer 3

"If we study the recent propaganda war waged by Iran's enemies, we will see that it demonstrates their renewed use of old tricks that America has used for the past 25 years. Iran is very familiar with these tricks. However, as to why such accusations are raised at this time, it must be clearly connected with America's defeat in Iraq and the failure of the White House to force Iran to accept the unconditional surrender of its nuclear program."

Liberal, Democrat, it does not matter. Once exposed to depleted uranium your genetics are wrecked forever. Some things are just common sense. No one can guarantee anything at all when dealing with a potential wild card. America insists upon waving a red flag at a very dangerous bull.

Remember the media shapes how we look at everything. Does no one remember how wars are begun. Build up the guy whose oil you want. Make the people see him as the devil. Then go in and blast the heck of of the place.

America has meddled terribly in Iranian politics over the decades.
Perhaps you should view things from the Iranian perspective...It has been a history of nothing but interference from the West in their domestic politics. There are a few links below from different nations around the globe.

U.S. actions are clearly pushing Iran’s national-interest in the wrong direction. If Iran believes the United States will behave towards it as it has in the past, then it is in its interests to try to weaken the United States in Iraq and get ready for war. If war with America seems inevitable, then Iran would be better off facing a U.S. adversary now, while it is weakened by the Iraq imbroglio.

If, on the other hand, Iran believes that Washington wants to change direction, abandon interference in internal Iranian affairs and promote freedom and self-determination, then it is in Iran’s interests to work toward stability in Iraq and pursue collaboration with the United States. It is President Bush’s choice. His actions have indicated that he wants war.

The United States is walking at the edge of a cliff. If it bombs Iran to stem Iranian development of nuclear weapons, it fatally poisons U.S. relationships with the entire world of Islam. If it uses nuclear weapons in the assault, it further seals the fate of future generations of Americans.

Besides bloody relations, it seriously poisons the world WE ALL live in. Depleted Uranium is airborne and winds are no respecters of national boundaries. Go here to see the physical results of such a thing. Take time to read about it. See what it does to SOLDIERS, not just innocent civilians and unborn babies.

http://www.thewe.cc/weplanet/news/depleted_uranium_iraq_afghanistan_balkans.html
WARNING: Do NOT go here if there are children in the vicinity. Do NOT go there if your stomach is weak. Not a joke folks.

Reports of such a strike in preparation go back over a year. Yet the American media are failing to warn of the catastrophic implications of such an attack.

I think I would not take a heavy hand in this situation. The stakes are too high for the entire globe. You might also find that this man might be not the man you think he is. Personally I think he is another nobody raised to power by the Illuminati who are pushing for war in this region. It is in their interest to accelerate this third world war we are now embroiled in. Not only would it lower world population significantly but it would almost guarantee their ability to establish an Illuminati headquarters in the middle east.

In a situation like this, my friend, your political stance in your own home is not at all of importance. Your humanity, however, is.

BTW my friend, I am not Liberal or Republican. I am Canadian.
(smiles. your good neighbours to the North. We too are losing our men in the Afghani arena)

Answer 4

go away forever? hahaha... like this is the end all be all question of all time... you guys are so wrapped up in your little ideas that you don't have a clue...

ANYWAY... to answer this hilarious question... first off, he doesn't have nukes yet... so it's kind of hard to use them... but I'm not so sure you could say anything...

really, the only thing you could say is... "any aggression will be met with a 10 fold retaliation and the middle east will be a big sheet of glass... if you guys want to tango"...

but I have a question? why are you Republicans so in love with negotiating with Kim in Korea? do you really think he's just "turning over a new leaf?" and he's said ALL KINDS OF CRAZY STUFF TOO.. and he, most think, ACTUALLY HAS THE BOMB NOW... and is working on delivery systems... and is closer so it's much easier for him to deliver it...

seems a bit hypocritical... I guess you just seen that special sparkle in his eye that Ahmadinejad just doesn't have... that let you know he was serious this time about not making nukes...hahaha

me, I don't trust either of them... but I trust the crazy guy with the nukes already less than the crazy guy who's working on them...

what do you propose doing about Iran... I hear a lot of "YOU CAN'T TALK TO HIM"... but no alternative solutions... maybe bombing... that's if we know for sure where the weapons are... and that's kind of iffy at best...

Answer 5

the best question to ask him is, what is it you want most?

or rephrased

I there anything we can talk about that would make you want to offer upyour nuclear weapons program? What do you need, perhaps we can reach a compromise that would instill peace between our countries and add stability to the region?

Either one will open up topics for discussion.
But since we have Rice goign everywhere and nothing ever seems to happen when she goes anywhere -- anyone realize that?

You, and people like the asker of this, dont seem to believe in diplomacy. thats what gets things done, and saves lives.
But its guys like him that get into a pissing contest trying to prove they have a bigger one, that it escalates into somethign it shouldnt be.

He really needs to grow up.
Anyone else read the contempt he has in his questions?
It really signifies someone who has a need to put themselves above the rest, because deep down he feels lower than everyone else

QUIT IGNORING -- its typically liberal .. hahaha.
Ask any republican what the punishment shoudl be if Iraq doesnt meet timelines. You wont get an answer by anyone.

Answer 6

Iran isn't trying to get nuclear weapons. And even if they were that is their right as a sovereign nation. Besides, no one is so stupid as to use them because that would mean almost instantaneous destruction on their part.

The fact is Irans chief export is oil. The revenue generated from oil sales makes up 70% of Irans budget. The Iranian government is actually a giant welfare state that has tremendous spending programs. Universal health care, education, higher education, and even gasoline is subsidized to the point where Iranians only pay 9 cents a gallon. Now the problem is that with the higher oil prices the economy of Iran is booming (so to speak). Their welfare system is high inefficient and very wasteful but they are pouring more and more money into it. They are also spending more and more on their military. But with the economic boom more and more people are driving more and using more electricity.

100% of Irans electricity is generated by burning oil, their chief export. The problem they are having is that they are beginning to use more oil for domestic use instead of selling it, which is the back bone of their economy. So Iran looking for nuclear technology really IS about finding a peaceful solution for their energy crisis. They want to use nuclear power plants to generate electricity instead of burning their chief export. France is a good example in that 80% of their electricity is generated by nuclear energy.

Iran is being asked to prove the impossible. How can you prove you're NOT doing something? What evidence can you show to support that you are NOT trying to do something? It's easy to prove that you ARE doing something but very hard to prove you aren't doing something. Which is why, in the United States, if you are charged with a crime the burden of proof isn't put on your shoulders but on the governments. They have to prove you did something wrong because it is impossible for you to prove you didn't if you never did anything.

Answer 7

Uh, on account which you seem to have time-travelled promptly from the 60s without needing experienced any of the intervening years, enable me seize you up slightly. for a minimum of the final 28 years, it particularly is Republicans who've been for greater government. First Reagan, then W. Bush broke all previous documents for putting us in deficit by skill of starting to be government's length, and function vastly (exceedingly the latter) elevated the potential of government to intervene interior the lives of standard voters. it particularly is Republicans who think of the government could make all of us's very own judgements for them, no longer the persons themselves. Pretending that right this moment's Republicans are Goldwater Republicans do no longer make it so.

Answer 8

Oh c'mon you know if we promise he'll promise too, & then there will be peace & prosperity thruout the world w no wars anywhere.

People will probably stop murdering each other too!!

OK OK I'm smoking crack again, but it sure would be nice if the world actually worked that way wouldn't it

Answer 9

I'm quite liberal, but I'd probably kill him. Not all liberals claim that "diplomacy" can soothe all the world's ills. Stop generalizing so much and the world will start making more sense to you. I promise.

Answer 10

Thank You for the question! I feel better knowing someone out there gets it too! You give me hope for the future. We will never make those psycos get along with the rest of the world.