Is this what we have come to?

[F91]

Boy, I'm sure glad I don't live next to you scary bad asses!!! ...quiver...

[SLedford]

Actually my ass isn't bad, it's just big. That is scary, however.

[junehhan]

Originally Posted by SLedford

Actually my ass isn't bad, it's just big. That is scary, however.

You are now driving a Honda Fit subcompact, so it couldn't be too big. Mine fits nice and snug into my Focus, although I prefer the roomier seat in my SUV.

[Ntruder]

Originally Posted by SLedford

Ntruder,

I don't think anyone has called for the arrest of the pathetic kid running the website. He has a right to express his opinion, and we have the right to rip his face for his opinion.

True, you have the right to metaphorically rip his face for his opinion, but you don't have the right to kill him.

Nor should this man be "killed by some vigilante" because he was expressing his opinions.

You can't just kill off anyone whom you don't like. Thats not what Americans stand for.

[Ntruder]

Originally Posted by junehhan

That sums it up, as Freedom of speech is a two way street. Besides, the problem with Iran is that they are a serious security risk to the entire developed world. Apparantly some nutjob dictator seems to think that the apocalypse is coming very soon and wishes to act on it.

The freedom of speech is a freedom; end of story. Protecting it is what makes us who we are.

Iran is a security risk to the world because we want them to be. The "nutjob dictator" that you refer to has no military power at all. (But you wouldn't know that on an all Fox Noise diet) The Ayatollah controls the military in Iran. Ahmadinejad does not, and if you'd do your homework, you'd probably know how incredibly unpopular Ahmadinejad is in his own country. He's like the President Bush of Iran; The vast majority of Americans can't be represented by Bush's outlandish views, nor can most Iranians be represented by Ahmadinejad's outlandish views.

[junehhan]

Originally Posted by Ntruder

The freedom of speech is a freedom; end of story. Protecting it is what makes us who we are.

Iran is a security risk to the world because we want them to be. The "nutjob dictator" that you refer to has no military power at all. (But you wouldn't know that on an all Fox Noise diet) The Ayatollah controls the military in Iran. Ahmadinejad does not, and if you'd do your homework, you'd probably know how incredibly unpopular Ahmadinejad is in his own country. He's like the President Bush of Iran; The vast majority of Americans can't be represented by Bush's outlandish views, nor can most Iranians be represented by Ahmadinejad's outlandish views.

Does that make them any less of a security threat? You do realize that this coming apocalypse is why they are believed to be desiring something with a little more boom to it, right? This nutjob believes that he is the element who will carry out the this end to the world, and that doesn't mean we shouldn't pay attention. Anytime you start paying attention, is when you get your ass caught by surprise and get ambushed. If he were to actually suceed acquiring something that makes a big boom, it doesn't matter that it is the minority that actually support and follow him. When you have a region as unstable as that one, why should you become comfortable and stop paying attention to what they are trying to do?

[SLedford]

Ntruder,

your assessment of Iran seems pretty accurate from what I have read and seen (including Fox news). Other than weeding out candidates that are not "Islamic enough", the elections in Iran are probably fair. Ahmadinejad is a joke and not representative of most Iranians, who are surprisingly pro-American, considering the diet of news they are fed. And the his position is mainly ceremonial, the true power is held by the Ayatollah and his council.

IMO, Iran has the best potential to become a stable, progressive democracy in that part of the world, once the people chose to take the power back from the Ayatollah.

I am concerned with a nuclear Iran, however. The government itself is probably not a direct threat, but the weapons can be stolen or given to terrorists by sympathetic government officials / military. I have the same concerns regarding Pakistan, and to a lesser degree, Russia. I seem to remember Ben Laden or one of his lieutenants saying point blank that if they ever got hold of a nuclear device, they would not have a problem using on an American target.

The best way to prevent one of Iran's nuclear weapons from falling into the wrong hands is to stop them from being produced in the first place. So why is Ahmadinejad held up as a poster boy by those trying to stop Iran's weapon production? Because he makes their job easy.

[junehhan]

That is very well said! Exactly what I wanted to say, but I just couldn't find the right words. 10 hours of playing GTAIV in the last several days has slowly turned my brain temporarily into slush.

What you said sums up exactly why we cannot just ignore Iran at the moment. The problem right now is that we are currently deeply involved in Iraq, which could prove to be very useful in stabilizing this region when it is finally successful(failure is likely not an option no matter who the next president is). Should a stable democracy finally be established in Iraq, it could be all that is needed to bring about the process of stablizing that region. We know that despite what we hear, we do have many great "friends" in that region. Some like the Saudi's are now very interested in bringing about reform, and the institution of basic human rights that have never existed before.

We know that despite some recent setbacks, terrorist groups like Al-Quada and the Taliban are at the weakest they have ever been in their history. It has cost many dear American and native civilian lives, but our forces and the brave men and women have been relentless despite some bad strategies. Iran could be the last standing peg of despotism in that region that could literally fall all on it's own, especially since the country is in such horrible shape. Yes much of that region is ruled despotically, but some of them can be ignored especially if they can be considered our "friends" and arn't in the pursuit of any technology that might be in contrast to the interests of the rest of the world.

We know that Bush labeled Iran, Iraq, and North Korea as the axis of evil in the world and I am certain that he was indeed correct on that statement. Once this axis falls, I am confident that peace could indeed be possible.

Originally Posted by SLedford

Ntruder,

your assessment of Iran seems pretty accurate from what I have read and seen (including Fox news). Other than weeding out candidates that are not "Islamic enough", the elections in Iran are probably fair. Ahmadinejad is a joke and not representative of most Iranians, who are surprisingly pro-American, considering the diet of news they are fed. And the his position is mainly ceremonial, the true power is held by the Ayatollah and his council.

IMO, Iran has the best potential to become a stable, progressive democracy in that part of the world, once the people chose to take the power back from the Ayatollah.

I am concerned with a nuclear Iran, however. The government itself is probably not a direct threat, but the weapons can be stolen or given to terrorists by sympathetic government officials / military. I have the same concerns regarding Pakistan, and to a lesser degree, Russia. I seem to remember Ben Laden or one of his lieutenants saying point blank that if they ever got hold of a nuclear device, they would not have a problem using on an American target.

The best way to prevent one of Iran's nuclear weapons from falling into the wrong hands is to stop them from being produced in the first place. So why is Ahmadinejad held up as a poster boy by those trying to stop Iran's weapon production? Because he makes their job easy.

[kamspy]

Originally Posted by Ntruder

True, you have the right to metaphorically rip his face for his opinion, but you don't have the right to kill him.

Nor should this man be "killed by some vigilante" because he was expressing his opinions.

You can't just kill off anyone whom you don't like. Thats not what Americans stand for.

Coming from the guy who loves Rambo?

Blasphemy! Let god sort'em out!

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by tcarcio

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,363821,00.html

I'm sorry but if this country was not so worried about this assholes right to do this bullshit from here in the U.S. he would be arrested as a traitor. I tell you one thing if he lived next door to me there would be some hell for him to pay. This is complete BULLSHIT.........

Promoting terrorism should be a treasonous offense. We are at war any any action to help the enemy of America during war time is the very definition of treason. During World War II if someone was passing out pro-Nazi propraganda I assure you FDR would have had no mercy on him and rightfully so.