Iran seizes 15 British troops in Persian Gulf

[Fenris Wolf]

Some, Spidergit, don't understand how Sam has as much of an audience as she does, given that her "arguments" are often nothing more than "the USA started it" or some variation thereof, and when directly challenged she produces little more than yet another internet article with no serious accreditation. Either that, or she takes the path of a coward and pretends it never existed.

Others understand exactly why she has that audience. And how a incompetent twit like you ever made moderator status.

 

[S.A.M.]

Some, Spidergit, don't understand how Sam has as much of an audience as she does, given that her "arguments" are often nothing more than "the USA started it" or some variation thereof, and when directly challenged she produces little more than yet another internet article with no serious accreditation. Either that, or she takes the path of a coward and pretends it never existed.

Its also interesting that you have no response other than to attack my credibility. You could, for example, give "accredited" evidence to disabuse my uncredited "arguments".

But then demonising people is so much easier than addressing issues, its actually a pattern I've come to expect from those with no answers/rebuttals.

Others understand exactly why she has that audience. And how a incompetent twit like you ever made moderator status.

vs "competent" gits like you? awwwww...

 

[chuuush]

But what about the Sistani-Balochis, Sam? They're being oppressed by an oppressive oppression of oppressive non-Sistani, non-Balochi troops: a paid clique of mercenaries that are squatting on their territory to ensure an oil pipeline gets rammed through Baluchistan so that Iran can sell oil to Pakistan (who apparently is attacking them? not sure where you were going with that bit before) and India! Your country. Can't you see that this is wrong?

So you call it terrorism, eh? Well, maybe I'd resist too if my nation were under the imperial jackboot of a totalitarian regime...and I mean a real one, too. Iran should get out of Baluchistan.

Free Baluchistan!

Geoff

Geoff, I hardly believe you are a person from Sistan or even know anything about the people there. You are most probably one of those stupid puppets who try to turn a possible tragedy into an acceptable daily theory and make people used to it. Baluchi people do not only live in Iran; They live in Pakistan and Afghanistan as well, and an independent country with that name means another Palestine or even worse.

The Kurds are already dreaming of an independent state with the encouragements they receive from the U.S. and Europe, and they can't understand or don't care what a new tragedy that would mean. They don't have an ideal life, that's right, but then what good will independence do to them. Except unending wars and violence... Let's not forget that there has never been an independent Baluchestan in history, just as no independent Kurdistan existed ever. These are colonial plots drafted smartly and played malignly to keep the middle east region in a state of continuous mayhem and have the fire of animosity always blazing between the people who lived side by side and in peace throughout the history.

They use such sweet words as freedom and democracy to dupe the populations and destabilize regions, not only countries, and thus secure their dominance on the natural and human resources of the regions and then claim that its the people themselves who are creating the tensions and violence; you can see the example in Iraq... The blatant liars now put every blame on the Shiite/sunni tensions in Iraq!! Was there such a degree of violence and animosity in the era of Saddam? Intelligent people should ask...

It's not good to wish bad things for other people, but we've had enough.... I fear a day will come when this violence and atrocity is taken to their own lands and they feel for themselves what they incurred on other innocent nations... A day is not far when so much violence they experience that 9/11 looks like a regular incident for them... Tyranny will not go unpunished ...

 

[GeoffP]

Geoff, I hardly believe you are a person from Sistan or even know anything about the people there. You are most probably one of those stupid puppets who try to turn a possible tragedy into an acceptable daily theory and make people used to it.

So because I care about the self-determination of a people who don't happen to live near me, I'm "stupid"? First off, you have no right to use the latter word about anyone save Happeh: I've seen your posts. Secondly, I know that the Baluchis are being denied their rights. That's enough. There seems to be a huge upswell of support for getting the evil occupying Yanks out of Iraq: but that same rule doesn't apply to Baluchistan because it's an islamic nation occupying other muslims? You're a hypocrite and a conservative fascist.

Baluchi people do not only live in Iran; They live in Pakistan and Afghanistan as well, and an independent country with that name means another Palestine or even worse.

So it's ok for Baluchistanis to be denied their independence and culture because it would interfere with the plans of the occupying nations. That's a very informed view. Not.

The Kurds are already dreaming of an independent state with the encouragements they receive from the U.S. and Europe, and they can't understand or don't care what a new tragedy that would mean. They don't have an ideal life, that's right, but then what good will independence do to them. Except unending wars and violence...

Because they've never had any of that as the vassals of Turkey and Iraq. Congratulations: you just affirmed my opinion of Kurdish independence too. In the positive, that is. And now explain to me: why would a free Kurdistan would have to be attacked by Iraqi - or other - nations in the ME? Why would their independence mean "unending wars and violence"? Because Iraq, Turkey and Iran couldn't just let them alone? Why not? Why in hell not?

Let's not forget that there has never been an independent Baluchestan in history, just as no independent Kurdistan existed ever.

Ugh. Pathetic semantics. They are a distinct culture and have been recognized in the past as a distinct entity - as they are today:

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

But, of course, you feel it's better for the rest of Iraq to control them. Why? Resources, probably. Fascism, certainly.

These are colonial plots drafted smartly and played malignly to keep the middle east region in a state of continuous mayhem and have the fire of animosity always blazing between the people who lived side by side and in peace throughout the history.

They're only colonial plots to those who have some vested mental or supremacist interest in keeping one group or another at the top of some ethnic chain of supremacy. The borders drawn in the early 20th century were wrong-headed and you know it. Your support for the continued suppression of the Kurds and Baluchis indicates in no uncertain terms your oppressive, colonial-fascist mentality.

They use such sweet words as freedom and democracy

:yawn: More fascist propaganda.

The blatant liars now put every blame on the Shiite/sunni tensions in Iraq!! Was there such a degree of violence and animosity in the era of Saddam?

Right, because the fight is not down sectarian lines. And so a fascist dictatorship is preferable, where individual rights are completely circumvented at the will of the diktat? Great plan.

A day is not far when so much violence they experience that 9/11 looks like a regular incident for them... Tyranny will not go unpunished ...

And you end with the call for more fascist violence. Great. Consider yourself a dolt.

Geoff

 

[Zakariya04]

Dear Geoff,

i hope all is well with you.

I have read the above with great interest.

In summary and in light of your other posts therefore depending on who you are occupied by depends on whether you should have independence or not

Interesting stuff indeed!!!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~

Take it ez
zak

 

[Fenris Wolf]

Its also interesting that you have no response other than to attack my credibility. You could, for example, give "accredited" evidence to disabuse my uncredited "arguments".

But then demonising people is so much easier than addressing issues, its actually a pattern I've come to expect from those with no answers/rebuttals.

That was a masterpiece of hypocrisy, Sam... even for you.
There is only one thing interesting about you... trying to figure out if you're truly so blind to yourself or whether it's merely an act. I'm beginning to lean toward the former, but until I decide one way or another you can rest assured I'll stay around.

vs "competent" gits like you? awwwww...

Presiding over idiots is not my cup of tea. I'm here for other reasons.

Find yourself an ants nest, and then find the trail they follow to their food supply. Place an obstruction, a stick or a rock, on that trail. Observe how the ants react to the obstruction, and, more importantly, how they finally deal with it.

 

[S.A.M.]

That was a masterpiece of hypocrisy, Sam... even for you.
There is only one thing interesting about you... trying to figure out if you're truly so blind to yourself or whether it's merely an act. I'm beginning to lean toward the former, but until I decide one way or another you can rest assured I'll stay around.

Yeah right!

Presiding over idiots is not my cup of tea. I'm here for other reasons.

Find yourself an ants nest, and then find the trail they follow to their food supply. Place an obstruction, a stick or a rock, on that trail. Observe how the ants react to the obstruction, and, more importantly, how they finally deal with it.

Its interesting the things people inadvertently reveal about themselves.

 

[Fenris Wolf]

..."Inadvertently"?

Good lord.

 

[spidergoat]

Any further personal attacks and off-topic posts will be deleted.

 

[GeoffP]

Dear Geoff,

...

In summary and in light of your other posts therefore depending on who you are occupied by depends on whether you should have independence or not

No. I have repeatedly said that I think the Americans should leave Iraq - immediately. I believe they initially did some good (getting rid of Saddam, who was looking to purchase or develop nukes), and that they could have done more good, but that ultimately it is pointless. The Iraqi people don't want them there (or rather they do, but they want them to be attacked , which is the most pathetic attempt of societal doublethink I've ever seen). It's time to go. I do think the American troops have been pretty well behaved - far better than any other army, and better than any Iraqi one might be - but that there isn't any point.

So: it seems you haven't been reading my posts after all, which is rather a shame.

On the other hand, it is exorbitantly clear from the posts of the apologists on the board that they do believe in exactly your comment above: that "depending on who you are occupied by depends on whether you should have independence or not". The American occupiers of Iraq must leave, they say: oh, but not the Iranian occupiers of Baluchistan, or the Iranian/Turkish/Iraqi occupiers of Kurdistan. No, no, those are internal matters, you see. Never mind that these places have resources and tax monies that Turkey and Iran and Iraq and Pakistan want to exploit, or that these people have a desire for self-government along ethnic lines. No, the Iranians need to control Baluchistan so they can drive an oil pipeline through it. No, no, this is about muslims controlling other muslims and, therefore, acceptable. It's classic islamofascism: throw off the Crusaders, keep the Ayatollahs.

Talk about a double standard.

Interesting stuff indeed!!!!!

Yes. I think they are quite interesting - indeed.

Geoff

 

[Zakariya04]

No. I have repeatedly said that I think the Americans should leave Iraq - immediately. I believe they initially did some good (getting rid of Saddam, who was looking to purchase or develop nukes), and that they could have done more good, but that ultimately it is pointless. The Iraqi people don't want them there (or rather they do, but they want them to be attacked , which is the most pathetic attempt of societal doublethink I've ever seen). It's time to go. I do think the American troops have been pretty well behaved - far better than any other army, and better than any Iraqi one might be - but that there isn't any point.

So: it seems you haven't been reading my posts after all, which is rather a shame.

On the other hand, it is exorbitantly clear from the posts of the apologists on the board that they do believe in exactly your comment above: that "depending on who you are occupied by depends on whether you should have independence or not". The American occupiers of Iraq must leave, they say: oh, but not the Iranian occupiers of Baluchistan, or the Iranian/Turkish/Iraqi occupiers of Kurdistan. No, no, those are internal matters, you see. Never mind that these places have resources and tax monies that Turkey and Iran and Iraq and Pakistan want to exploit, or that these people have a desire for self-government along ethnic lines. No, the Iranians need to control Baluchistan so they can drive an oil pipeline through it. No, no, this is about muslims controlling other muslims and, therefore, acceptable. It's classic islamofascism: throw off the Crusaders, keep the Ayatollahs.

Talk about a double standard.



Yes. I think they are quite interesting - indeed.

Geoff

Dear Geoff,

thANk you for your response as above.

it appears that i have misled you, i did not mean the posts in this thread but your posts in other threads too.


Also we could use the Buffalo, Baron and co argument on this one and argue that there has never been a state called Baluchistan..

Take it ez
zak

 

[Ghost_007]

No, no, this is about muslims controlling other muslims and, therefore, acceptable. It's classic islamofascism: throw off the Crusaders, keep the Ayatollahs.

Hey, why don't you yanks start funding Kurdish and Balochi freedom (including Islamist) fighters. Once they have their homelands, everything will be settled, they will lay down their arms…



Have you heard of Ansar Al-Sunnah?

 

[S.A.M.]

Have you heard of Ansar Al-Sunnah?

Hush!

 

[Ghost_007]

Hush!

Seriously Sam, this GeoffP matey talks some sh!t!

What was that thing he said, the 3ds! - demography, dominos and dhimmitude! rotfl!

 

[GeoffP]

Hey, why don't you yanks start funding Kurdish and Balochi freedom (including Islamist) fighters. Once they have their homelands, everything will be settled, they will lay down their arms…

That's wierd. That's the very same argument that gets made for the Americans to get out of Iraq. By being sarcastic, are...are you saying it isn't true?!?

BTW: I'm British, not American. I know you don't understand the difference, but there it is.

Have you heard of Ansar Al-Sunnah?

Yep. The Kurds want independence. Maybe they should have it. Ah! But of course. It's not wanted for kuffar to comment on the ol' homeland. Do as we say, not as we do. Right.

 

[S.A.M.]

Yep. The Kurds want independence. Maybe they should have it. Ah! But of course. It's not wanted for kuffar to comment on the ol' homeland. Do as we say, not as we do. Right.

You may get your wish. Thats the group with ties to the Taliban and al-Qaeda and the most virulent opposers of US troops in Iraq. Strangely, the US is funding their "brothers" in Iran. As are the Sauds. As is the Siniora government in Lebanon, which is diverting US given aid to the Syrian brotherhood. Some war on terror.

 

[Blue_UK]

I saw picture in the paper the other day. It was of a Iranian man holding a sign that read:

"The 15 British sailors must be EXECUTED"

Apprently he was a student. Well students will be students and protest at things won't they!?

But, what was he thinking? All I want now is to watch BBC News and hear that Storm Shadow missiles have decimated their military assets.

Fuck it. Release the Americans on them. (Do the yanks count as a biological WMD?!)

 

[Mr. G]

So, the US has a good university, and therefore it's foriegn policies are off-limits to criticism? I can never understand why you guys attack samcdkey's nationality in order to defend your party's actions.

Let me help you with that walker.

I'm a registered Independent. I have no Party. I do have preferences. Many of them probably don't coincide with your own.

I'm probably not likely to care about that fact, probably because I outgrew most of your preferences long ago --about the time I decided that mind-altering drugs didn't really enhance my ability to support a family by myself.

Also, I happily rag on the nationality of people who rag on mine. Let the best nationalism win.

It's apologists that I find contemptible.

 

[TW Scott]

Fuck it. Release the Americans on them. (Do the yanks count as a biological WMD?!)

Only the ones from Arkansas.

 

[GeoffP]

You may get your wish. Thats the group with ties to the Taliban and al-Qaeda and the most virulent opposers of US troops in Iraq. Strangely, the US is funding their "brothers" in Iran. As are the Sauds. As is the Siniora government in Lebanon, which is diverting US given aid to the Syrian brotherhood.

They are? Are you sure?

Some war on terror.

OK now I'm confused: even if all of what you say is true, isn't liberation still a positive thing?