Iran behind attacks on Israeli diplomats

Nodin

Freddie59 wrote: »

Ah, did I touch (........)stage. look how that worked out.

And yet more blow hard provocative guff.

Back here
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=77106761&postcount=80
you came out with

Ah Nod. Nothing better than that to offer? You disappoint me. Just a realistic post. They are scumbags of the highest order, and cowards into the bargain. When they do develop a bomb it will be given to some terrorist to deliver. And they'll deny it. Wonderful bunch of lads. And some people try to defend them. Lovely.

Given that Iranians, due to that states actions, merits the titles "scumbags" and "cowards", how would you title Israel and Israelis, given that they are ostensibly at the same thing, save that they target scientists as oppossed to diplomats?

KeithAFC

Freddie59 wrote: »

Ah, did I touch a widdle nerve there Richie?:) The truth is indeed bitter. Hitler+appeasement didn't work. It never can with bully boys like him and Ahmedinejad. It IS very naive to think that the Iranians will not, at some stage, pass on this technology to their terrorist brethren.

Iran's almost a mirror image of Nazi Germany, except they haven't burnt the books yet. And they don't have the Jews as fall guys (but they're trying very hard). But give them time. I'm sure a few lads in the 30s thought Hitler was a grand chap too. Wasn't it the UK Foreign Secretary that gave the Hitler salute whilst in Berlin at one stage. look how that worked out.

Iran has the same objective as Nazi Germany had. No doubt about that. The difference is they would not get away with it. Now that our Jewish friends can defend themselves and aren't going to bend over to radical Islamic or fascist aggression. The days of Banu Qurayza or Treblinka are over and I think countries like Iran should accept this.


And I fully support the Jewish people in the right to their own country.

wendell borton

I think Israel as the only stable democratic state in the middle east plays the same role to west as Byzantine once did,

As the only stable long-term state in Europe during the Middle Ages, Byzantium isolated Western Europe from newly emerging forces to the East. Constantly under attack, it distanced Western Europe from Persians, Arabs, Seljuk Turks, and for a time, the Ottomans. The Byzantine-Arab Wars, for example, are recognised by some historians as being a key factor behind the rise of Charlemagne,[158] and a stimulus to feudalism and economic self-sufficiency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire

Israel now takes the heat from eastern threats such as Iran, while europe tries to sort itself out.

RichieC

wendell borton wrote: »

I think Israel as the only stable democratic state in the middle east plays the same role to west as Byzantine once did, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire

Israel now takes the heat from eastern threats such as Iran, while europe tries to sort itself out.

A bit like what England was for the US during the cold war.

Nodin

wendell borton wrote: »

I think Israel as the only stable democratic state in the middle east plays the same role to west as Byzantine once did,.

I'd say you were wrong. I would say that the West, by aligning itself with (or not distancing itself sufficiently from) an aggressively expansionist state, attracts enmity.

RichieC

Nodin wrote: »

I'd say you were wrong. I would say that the West, by aligning itself with (or not distancing itself sufficiently from) an aggressively expansionist state, attracts enmity.

You're talking to posters who actually buy the "they hate our freedumz" crap that the US government put out to avoid awkward questions...

Toby Take a Bow

Chuck Stone wrote: »

You could say that about millions of people all over the world. The Israelis are there and that is a fact the world has to work with.

Not if you disagree with the idea of a state for a particular group or religion, which Israel is (ie, a 'Jewish' state). You can work against that, either peacefully or violently. This also applies to the idea of an 'Islamic' state. Both of which I would fundamentally disagree with. I would say a large portion of the Iranian population also disagree with the idea of an 'Islamic' republic, although it's difficult to tell with the way the state organises against dissent. A good indication would be the relatively small support in the run up to the Shah getting ousted for an Islamic republic. In the confusion and bickering amongst a disunited opposition, the Ayatolleh jumped in and filled the void.

Freddie59

Morlar wrote: »

What absolute nonsense.

Like appeasement?:rolleyes:

Freddie59

Nodin wrote: »

And yet more blow hard provocative guff.

Back here
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=77106761&postcount=80
you came out with


Given that Iranians, due to that states actions, merits the titles "scumbags" and "cowards", how would you title Israel and Israelis, given that they are ostensibly at the same thing, save that they target scientists as oppossed to diplomats?

Israel does not equal Iran. Thankfully. Iran - that bastion of democracy and equality. And then people try to defend it. It's a funny ole world, innit?

Nodin

Freddie59 wrote: »

Israel does not equal Iran. Thankfully. Iran - that bastion of democracy and equality. And then people try to defend it. It's a funny ole world, innit?

Just to clarify here - Israel are currently running an assasination campaign against Iranian scientists. In retaliation Iran has decided to run a series of operations against Israeli diplomats. These actions are broadly similar. Both countries have assasinated opponents abroad before. Therefore why do you label one group "scumbags" and "cowards" for doing so and not the other?