WOOOT BARRACK OBAMA

Originally Posted by Nova_C

No, see, I know the history very well. I'm asking for proof that nuclear war between these two countries is inevitable, hell, even likely without a strong US leader standing between the two of them. I say again, the cold war represents the most hateful and paranoid two nuclear states have ever been to each other and no nuclear holocaust occurred.

Even to this day Americans remain astonishingly distrustful of anything remotely construed as communist to the point that socialism is commonly mistaken for it.

1) My statements were not in any military language. Nor did I even allude to an "inevitable" anything.
2) I never expressed a thought or word on the Cold War either.
3) I did "imply" that a stable peacemaker between Iran and Israel would insure peace.
Knowing history is one thing, remembering it is another. Logic and relationships is another. Don't fall into the trap of tying unrelated things and your own inferences together to perpetuate an imagined or desired disagreement.

Originally Posted by vetusvates

1) My statements were not in any military language. Nor did I even allude to an "inevitable" anything.
2) I never expressed a thought or word on the Cold War either.
3) I did "imply" that a stable peacemaker between Iran and Israel would insure peace.
Knowing history is one thing, remembering it is another. Logic and relationships is another. Don't fall into the trap of tying unrelated things and your own inferences together to perpetuate an imagined or desired disagreement.

You said this:

Iran is dying to nuke Israel, and Israel is dying to nuke Iran before it gets nuked.

And I asked for evidence that it was at all true. You have yet to provide any. I was using the cold war as an example of two nations with similar animosity for each other as Iran and Israel have and yet were not dying to nuke each other, even though both sides were terrified of the other's nuclear arsenal.

Basically, I called you on an assumption that you made to characterize a conflict that is vastly more complicated than you expressed and you skirted my challenge. And now you tell me than I'm imagining things? Just retract what you said since you seem to have no interest in defending it.

The US vs USSR compared to Iran vs Israel doesn't seem like a good analogy. That is because the people of the US and USSR, for the most part, didn't hate each other. They both feared the governments of the other country, and had very different political ideologies. But the core culture of the populations doesn't seem as divisive between our two countries as between the two middle eastern countries.

Israel and Iran's difficulties seem to stem from more core issues, such as religion, and the way that Israel was created. I am not saying that all Iranians hate all Israelis, or vice versa. But that the average person in those countries may feel more animosity towards each other than Americans and Russians.

I have spoken to many Russians and have visited there (and have a Russian sister in law and niece). But I have not had the same exposure to Iranians and Israelis - I am only guessing from what I have read over the past few years. The leader of Iran stated that Israel has no right to exist. Those differences seem to me much more difficult to bridge than those between the US and USSR, either during the cold war or now.

I do have to agree that our new President - elect is a smooth speaker - that will be a refreshing change from the last 8 years. I didn't vote for him. But now that we have him, I sure hope he is able to accomplish at least some of the progress he has promised. I can't imagine wanting that job, especially right now. He is inheriting a big mess - sure hope he is up to the huge job before him!

Originally Posted by kathylove

The US vs USSR compared to Iran vs Israel doesn't seem like a good analogy. That is because the people of the US and USSR, for the most part, didn't hate each other. They both feared the governments of the other country, and had very different political ideologies. But the core culture of the populations doesn't seem as divisive between our two countries as between the two middle eastern countries.

Israel and Iran's difficulties seem to stem from more core issues, such as religion, and the way that Israel was created. I am not saying that all Iranians hate all Israelis, or vice versa. But that the average person in those countries may feel more animosity towards each other than Americans and Russians.

I have spoken to many Russians and have visited there (and have a Russian sister in law and niece). But I have not had the same exposure to Iranians and Israelis - I am only guessing from what I have read over the past few years. The leader of Iran stated that Israel has no right to exist. Those differences seem to me much more difficult to bridge than those between the US and USSR, either during the cold war or now.

I do have to agree that our new President - elect is a smooth speaker - that will be a refreshing change from the last 8 years. I didn't vote for him. But now that we have him, I sure hope he is able to accomplish at least some of the progress he has promised. I can't imagine wanting that job, especially right now. He is inheriting a big mess - sure hope he is up to the huge job before him!

Thanks Kathy, As always a common sense post that is not only tempered with knowledge but optimistic as well.

may i lighten the theme a little.......:

lol

Originally Posted by Nova_C

You said this:



And I asked for evidence that it was at all true. You have yet to provide any. I was using the cold war as an example of two nations with similar animosity for each other as Iran and Israel have and yet were not dying to nuke each other, even though both sides were terrified of the other's nuclear arsenal.

Basically, I called you on an assumption that you made to characterize a conflict that is vastly more complicated than you expressed and you skirted my challenge. And now you tell me than I'm imagining things? Just retract what you said since you seem to have no interest in defending it.

I never made, nor accepted a challenge.
I made no foolish assumptions (your word).
And I am quite aware of the complications of international politics, young man.
"Dying to nuke" is an informal euphemism.
"Inevitable" is your word.
So is "proof" and "retraction".
This is not a battle. No loser. No winner.
I don't owe you proof, a retraction, or cowpoop.
Now stop making a fool out of yourself.

No you don't owe me anything. That's very true.

Kathy, I don't see a large difference between a religious or ethnic hatred such as the one between Iran and Israel and an ideological hatred such as what existed between the US and Russia before the fall of the Soviet Union. The Cuban Missile Crisis was the closest the world has ever come to nuclear war. There is no equivalent event that I know of between Iran and Israel.

No they are not the same, but I don't think ideological hatred is any less powerful or dangerous than religious hatred.

Nova C...

I think what those "concerned" of us worry about is whether Obama can make the unpopular decisions. Granted... we're in a type of 2 front war right now... and the "popular" thing is to extricate ourselves out of this mess right now - something Barack has promised to do... which is also of concern.

Can he make the "unpopular" decisions? He has shown a "hesitation" or inability to make those decisions in the past. Take a look at his voting record in Illinois... there are so many times where he didn't vote... or just recorded "present". Not much of a voting record to go on.... "afraid" to do the unpopular?

Even pinning him down on whose taxes will go up - several numbers as high as $250,000 and as low as $75,000 were tossed up - where's the decisiveness?

A couple of BIG decisions is looming in how he handles Iran/Israel. How will our PE deal with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? How will he deal with an outbreak of hostility between Israel & Iran?

Another is how our PE will deal with Venezuela and the "tiny tyrant" over there (President Hugo Chavez)... or even the even smaller man in North Korea.

Then, there's BIG China... Whew... I'm glad I'm not in his shoes!!! LOL.

I and (I think) others believe in the "hard line"/pro-active approach. "Look, let's be civil... let's be friends. However, if you cross this line (wherever it may be), we will be forced to respond." What I think will happen (and others as well) is that our PE... who is "green" in this area... will be tested by "someone" doing something extreme first... and then have to deal from a position of weakness - being forced to be reactive as opposed to being pro-active. Even his running mate, Joe Biden predicted that Obama "will be tested in the first 6 months". I even believe he said "mark my words", but I can't find the direct quote for it, so I won't add that to the first.

I agree with all of that Thunder, although I don't think that John McCain would be any less of a gamble. Neither one has ever acted as commander in chief and so both of them are big question marks. We will know soon enough.

But I wasn't arguing with any of that. I think there's enough unknowns in the world without inventing or exaggerating the thoughts and intentions of people who have yet to add their perspectives to our debate.

Originally Posted by Nova_C

...I don't see a large difference between a religious or ethnic hatred such as the one between Iran and Israel and an ideological hatred such as what existed between the US and Russia before the fall of the Soviet Union....

Just personal opinion, I view ideological hatred as being more calculated and thought driven and religious and ethnic hatred as being more emotional driven. Not making one any deeper than the other but one may be less stable than the other.

Originally Posted by The_Thunderer

...The US is committed to Israel and Barack chooses Rahm Emanuel - a person who is very anti-Israel - as his Chief of Staff...

I thought Emanuel was Jewish?