You keep saying Iran has not been involved in terrorism with the U. S. Are you aware that Iran was supplying training, munitions, and full support to the terrorists fighting in Iraq?.............
I know what the Iranian Regime has done and have said so in this thread, and many times in the past on FR.
Hmm, and yet you thought it wise to discount Iran's terrorist activity in your post to me. Why was that? How did you put it? Oh yes...
You seem to be dismissive of the difference between Arab nationals, and people, who have carried out terrorist attacks against USA and the West, versus Iranian nationals and people, who have not. Am I correct?
In a word, NO. Iran has clearly carried out terrorist activity against Western interests in Iraq. DUH! And unlike most of the Arabs behind terrorist activity against the West, this was done with clear government support and approval in Iran.
Iran was also the major supplier of Hezballah in Southern Lebanon. Hezbollah is a major enemy of Israel. Iran supported the threat against Israel as much as it could.
As it relates to nationals only, you could say that Iran is much more dangerous, because it's government actually sanctioned and supported terrorist activity against us. In most instances these actions are carried out by Arabs who are not sponsored by national level governments.
You seem to be trying to move this into a discussion on the people of a nation, when the topic is Iran. We are not dealing with the actions of the people of Iran here. You do know that right?
Equally, I've also said the U.S. ally Saudi Arabia and its extensions are just as much of terrorists as the Iranian regime.
Well, you can say whatever you like. It is untrue, but you can dream on at will. I have no problem with it.
Iran allowed al Qaeda training camps on it's soil. It saw that they were trained. It armed them. It then sent them into Iraq.
If you're are discarding that, then you obviously support terrorism when you think it's officially ok to do so. But, don't post rubbish about what I've said and out of context. I shall repeat further below.
Out of context? Rubish? LOL. My aren't we a bit touchy for being called on idiotic untrue comments.
Yes, you are correct. You see, Iran is not ruled by it's people. It is ruled with an iron fisted government...
Fully agree. Shame govts do as they want, even if elected in a 'true democracy' such as the USA.
Weren't we talking about how unfair we have been to poor little Iran? Now the governments are being compared as if Iran's is equally as sound as our own.
Look, I disaprove of our government right now. There are plenty of problems with it. I do however realize that Obama will be gone in a couple of years, and policies will change. Is that going to happen in Iran? No.
As for your opinion why you think Iran during the Shah even never needed to go nuclear, because "you don't believe in nuclear proliferation" that's fair enough for your opinion. Nonetheless, at that time, even India was going nuclear, why not Iran? Even today, the U.S. has been ok with a nuclear Pakistan, who produces more terrorists per its people.
The subject was the United States supporting giving the Shah the bomb. I stated why I didn't think we should. You have stated that other nations got the bomb. First of all, we didn't supply them with it. As it relates to our discussion regarding the Shah and the bomb, that's the only fact that would be pertinant.
The Pakistani and Indian governments had not spent decades declaring the United States to be the great satan. They had not been specifically anti-Western. India has a government that remains structured by their Colonial overlords the English. Surprisingly they still remain friendly with Britain and the West. Pakistan hasn't been overtly anti-Western.
It's very safe to say the U.S. has been selective and still has double standards in its foreign policy. The U.S. appears to like turning a blind eye to those countries, which have terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, so long as their govts toe the line with U.S. admins, and the U.S. thinks can control them.
Pakistan does not control all it's people. It's not a super strong government. Saying that it allows terrorists on it's soil, is a misrepresentation. The government of Pakistan doesn't control all of it's territory. You didn't know this? You obviously didn't know the difference between Iran vs Pakistan and India regarding the bomb either. Those governments haven't been hostile to the U. S. Iran's has been.
As it relates to this topic, the U. S. has not had a double standard. We did not support giving the bomb to the Shah. We didn't give the bomb to Pakistan or India. We have objected to a nation developing the bomb, who is vehemently anti-Western and in particular the United States. And evidently this doesn't seem rational to you. Well, it is.
Finally, the playing of different factions of Islamists against one another will not bode well for anyone. It'll be increasingly a disaster of a larger magnitude, as we have already, somewhat, witnessed the chaos and murders in the M.E. and North Africa. Neither You nor I can only blame the Iranian regime for that. The U.S. as the so-called responsible 'beacon of light' needs to act responsibly too.
.In so far as the U. S. has helped destabalize regimes in the Middle-East in this Obama comedy of errors, I agree. No we can't blame Iran for that. We can only blame Iran for what it is responsible for, and that is plenty enough.
I haven't defended our current president's polices at all. I'm not sure why that is pertinant to the discussion of Iran and the bomb, but I guess you are.
Read my posts to your here and elsewhere. If you have difficulty comprehending, I can’t help you. See you later.