So Iran doesn't have a nuclear program either...

[Zippa D Doodah]

The Iranians are people. They are not all represented by their leadership anymore then we are. You can mistrust the leadership and watch their every move. When you threaten and even make jokes about bombing Iran you are speaking of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, men, women and children.. Put a face on them please. Maybe then it will be harder for you to want to attack them without any conscience at all. To terrorize a population is to be a terrorist. Is that what we have become?

I may be mistaken, but I don't think anyone on either side if the Iran issue is de-personalizing the Iranian people.

Long-winded anecdote alert: I learned a life long lesson in this when I was in high school. I went to HS here in the US from 1980-1982 with a girl who was Iranian. Family had just emigrated during the regime change, but none of us at the HS bothered to learn that (or care) at the time. As you can imagine, she got treated like crap by just about everyone at the school. My own reaction to her during those years was to ignore her instead of trying to befriend her. In retrospect she was one of the strongest, most courageous young women I ever met. I just didn't know it back then.

The next year we both went to the same college. We had the chance to have some long conversations over meals and drinks. I found her to be charming and her story to be fascinating. Sadly, she was murdered over Thanksgiving break of that freshman year. I remember being just numb for days after I heard that. Just as I was beginning to understand her, she was gone. I had regrets for not getting to know her all those years in HS, and then a deep sense of loss when her life ended so tragically.

That episode in my life taught me a huge lesson about not de-personalizing people.

 

[salmoneous]

Ariel has. She's calling US terrorists while insisting that Iran has no plans to wipe out the Jews or kill off Americans.

Which isn't the same thing as saying Iranians aren't bad guys, is it?

 

[Mr Man]

The Iranians are people. They are not all represented by their leadership anymore then we are. You can mistrust the leadership and watch their every move. When you threaten and even make jokes about bombing Iran you are speaking of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, men, women and children.. Put a face on them please. Maybe then it will be harder for you to want to attack them without any conscience at all. To terrorize a population is to be a terrorist. Is that what we have become?

Yes indeed, let us put a face on them

Wait a second.....is this Iran or Berkely?

I do appreciate your point about a moral conscience. I submit that I hope Pres Ahmadinajad (actually the theocracy that vets his every move) finds his (theirs).....and that soon. Iran has much more to lose in this than the West does.

JMO

 

[Cool-Beans]

Which isn't the same thing as saying Iranians aren't bad guys, is it?

Yes, it is. If they hadn't said and done the things they have, then they would be good guys. If you pretend the bad stuff isn't true, then what else could you be left with?

And pretending that we're the terrorist nation is a little over the top, IMO.

 

[Charade]

The Iranians are people. They are not all represented by their leadership anymore then we are. You can mistrust the leadership and watch their every move. When you threaten and even make jokes about bombing Iran you are speaking of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, men, women and children.. Put a face on them please. Maybe then it will be harder for you to want to attack them without any conscience at all. To terrorize a population is to be a terrorist. Is that what we have become?

Hmm... so when we talk about bombing Iran, do we mean the people, or the facilities that we are talking about here on this thread?

You can't have it both ways. You can't say that Iran says "regime change in Israel" it means only it's leadership and say bombing Iran means bombing it's population.

I bet a lot of the German population that was bombed during WWII thought the Allies were "terrorists" too. It's all a matter of perception. But in the end, there's a clear right and wrong in the conflict. Germany was wrong whether or not they felt the Allies were terrorizing them.

 

[LakeAriel]

Hmm... so when we talk about bombing Iran, do we mean the people, or the facilities that we are talking about here on this thread?

You can't have it both ways. You can't say that Iran says "regime change in Israel" it means only it's leadership and say bombing Iran means bombing it's population.

I bet a lot of the German population that was bombed during WWII thought the Allies were "terrorists" too. It's all a matter of perception. But in the end, there's a clear right and wrong in the conflict. Germany was wrong whether or not they felt the Allies were terrorizing them.

I don't know what Iran means when they say regime change. I do know what Bush means when he says it and it meant the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's. So, yes, it is in the perception.

 

[LakeAriel]

I may be mistaken, but I don't think anyone on either side if the Iran issue is de-personalizing the Iranian people.

Long-winded anecdote alert: I learned a life long lesson in this when I was in high school. I went to HS here in the US from 1980-1982 with a girl who was Iranian. Family had just emigrated during the regime change, but none of us at the HS bothered to learn that (or care) at the time. As you can imagine, she got treated like crap by just about everyone at the school. My own reaction to her during those years was to ignore her instead of trying to befriend her. In retrospect she was one of the strongest, most courageous young women I ever met. I just didn't know it back then.

The next year we both went to the same college. We had the chance to have some long conversations over meals and drinks. I found her to be charming and her story to be fascinating. Sadly, she was murdered over Thanksgiving break of that freshman year. I remember being just numb for days after I heard that. Just as I was beginning to understand her, she was gone. I had regrets for not getting to know her all those years in HS, and then a deep sense of loss when her life ended so tragically.

That episode in my life taught me a huge lesson about not de-personalizing people.

I am sorry to hear that, it is very sad..and certainly life changing for you. Reminds me of "All Quiet on the Western Front" When push comes to shove we are all just humans trying to live and love. Our leadership starts the wars and the common man (woman) suffers. It is our duty to stop that from happening over and over.

 

[Cool-Beans]

I don't know what Iran means when they say regime change. I do know what Bush means when he says it and it meant the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's. So, yes, it is in the perception.

You see that, salmoneous?

 

[Charade]

I don't know what Iran means when they say regime change. I do know what Bush means when he says it and it meant the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's. So, yes, it is in the perception.

But WE didn't kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's. Still stuck on that 655 (it's gotta be higher than that by now),000 number I see.

I refuse to believe (and I'm saddened that you do) that Bush went into Iraq hell bent on killing 100's of thousands of Iraqis.

 

[LakeAriel]

You see that, salmoneous?

Sorry, but Bush destroyed our reputation when he engaged in a preemptive war against Iraq...Take that up with him.

Ahmadinejad may or may not be a bag of wind. He denies the Holocaust. The absurdity of that is shared by many Hasidic Jews here in from NY and I suspect elsewhere. They attended his conference in Iran and don't believe it happened either. What should we do with them? It goes on and on.

Edited to add they does not include ALL...AS the article points out some just believe the tragedy is being exploited, others that it never happened or at least to the degree it did.

 

[LakeAriel]

But WE didn't kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's. Still stuck on that 655 (it's gotta be higher than that by now),000 number I see.

I refuse to believe (and I'm saddened that you do) that Bush went into Iraq hell bent on killing 100's of thousands of Iraqis.

Yes, I'm still stuck on that John Hopkins report on the Iraqi dead. 650,000. Bush went to Iraq not giving a damn how many he killed. He planned it before 9/11 and he plans on sucking oil off that land all the days of his life.

Read the agreements he wants to sign with Iraq.

 

[Cool-Beans]

Sorry, but Bush destroyed our reputation when he engaged in a preemptive war against Iraq...Take that up with him.

Ahmadinejad may or may not be a bag of wind. He denies the Holocaust. The absurdity of that is shared by many Hassidic Jews here in from NY and I suspect elsewhere. They attended his conference in Iran and don't believe it happened either. What should we do with them? It goes on and on.

What?

 

[LakeAriel]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/15/nyregion/15rabbi.html?fta=y

 

[Mr Man]

Yes, I'm still stuck on that John Hopkins report on the Iraqi dead. 650,000. Bush went to Iraq not giving a damn how many he killed. He planned it before 9/11 and he plans on sucking oil off that land all the days of his life.

Read the agreements he wants to sign with Iraq.

I read this report. I am not a fan of "cluster sampling" used for this report, as this is what marketers use to give us TV commercials like "He went to Jarod's" (ack barf).

The JH sponsored survey was conducted in under 2 months by only 8 (that's right) Iraqi physicians.......such an extremely small sample (effectively 1000 people) extrapolated over a large population (24 million+)......leaves a huge margin of error.

I think the 655,000 "excess" deaths is extremely high (and by that I mean no way in HE double hockey sticks). Critics of the current administration like it because it is so high and for that reason only. Logic, data & facts be darned.

Further, at the same time the JH survey was conducted, an independent group of researchers and biostatisticians based in England who produce "the Iraq Body Count", estimate there have been 44,000 to 49,000 civilian deaths since the invasion. An Iraqi nongovernmental organization estimated 128,000 deaths between the invasion and July 2005 (same time-frame as the JH survey).

Regarding the oil......would you feel better if we just went in and took it? I personally prefer making a financial agreement and sticking to it. The Iraqi's deserve to be paid for their oil after all.

JMO and Regards,

 

[Charade]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/15/nyregion/15rabbi.html?fta=y

More crazies.

 

[Charade]

I read this report. I am not a fan of "cluster sampling" used for this report, as this is what marketers use to give us TV commercials like "He went to Jarod's" (ack barf).

The JH sponsored survey was conducted in under 2 months by only 8 (that's right) Iraqi physicians.......such an extremely small sample (effectively 1000 people) extrapolated over a large population (24 million+)......leaves a huge margin of error.

I think the 655,000 "excess" deaths is extremely high (and by that I mean no way in HE double hockey sticks). Critics of the current administration like it because it is so high and for that reason only. Logic, data & facts be darned.

Further, at the same time the JH survey was conducted, an independent group of researchers and biostatisticians based in England who produce "the Iraq Body Count", estimate there have been 44,000 to 49,000 civilian deaths since the invasion. An Iraqi nongovernmental organization estimated 128,000 deaths between the invasion and July 2005 (same time-frame as the JH survey).

Regarding the oil......would you feel better if we just went in and took it? I personally prefer making a financial agreement and sticking to it. The Iraqi's deserve to be paid for their oil after all.

JMO and Regards,

Oh come on now, stop using facts and logic.

 

[Mr Man]

Oh come on now, stop using facts and logic.

Ok Ok......but can I still use Data?

Ladies, apparently he has recently entered the "relationship market".

 

[Charade]

Ok Ok......but can I still use Data?

Ladies, apparently he has recently entered the "relationship market".

Who will Data endorse for Prez in '08, that's much more important.

 

[Mr Man]

Who will Data endorse for Prez in '08, that's much more important.

Latest Opposition Research from the Clinton Campaign suggest Sen. Obama attended numerous "play-dates" with Data (not that there's anything wrooong with playdates with "sentient synthetic beings" of course).

 

[LuvDuke]

Nobody here has pretended or said the Iranians (at least their leaders) aren't bad guys.

You had to go and kill a talking point that had them on a roll.