Please, Try to Make a Lovely Peaceful World

[Diogenes]

Yes, police anywhere can behave out of hand. However, correct or not, the impression is that police in Iran are far from fair.
Show us it is wrong. Canyour sister walk down the street in Tehran in Levi jeans and with no hat or scarve over her hair? Can she do this with her friend who is in her college class who is male and not related? Can she do this without any fear or concern from the moral police or others?
Show us how this impression is wrong if you do not agree.

I do not think it is fair to judge another culture by our latest standards. It was not so long ago that the "Western" part of the world was burning witches, holding slaves, Oppressing Blacks, and Favoring a Gender.

I have never understood why some people feel that others must learn faster than we did.

On the rest of your comments, the only quibble I have is that it would be better said with more diplomacy.

[Diogenes]

GIThruster,,,,

Please do not forget that:

1- Only US government has used nuclear bombs and has killed rather than 100,000...................................................................................

Now that is unfair and completely untrue. We killed over 200,000 with those two nuclear bombs!

But to put it into perspective, we killed between 80,000-200,00 with our firebombing of Tokyo and we were of a mind to kill tens of millions of Japanese with a full scale invasion.

2- Only Israeli government kills women.

Nonsense. All governments kill women.

3- Only Israeali government kills childeren.

All governments kill children.

4- Only US government has killed more than 1,000,000 people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Vietnam and 20 other conturies in the world.

Maybe in those places, and i'm not sure the numbers are correct, but The Soviets, the Chinese, the Nazis, etc. have killed far more than that in other places. I think Mao Tse Tung alone killed something like 68 million by himself. The Socialists body count is well over 100 million, and possibly approaching 200 million.

In terms of killing people, the United States is pretty tame. It's not something we want to do, but it is something we WILL do when we feel we must.

Finally, what do you think about international terrorism in all over the world?

It's not good, and we shouldn't put up with it.

[Diogenes]

Giargio, there are some flaws here and we can and should revise them.
And please accept that there are there too.

Aslan, I never stated that there are no flaws in our society. I am just pointing to the fact that at least we live in a "generally" free society where we do not have to be afraid to express our opinions.

Once Iran will reach our standard of freedom I will be happy to discuss with you the steps to correct the flaws that will be still present in both of our societies so, please, try to correct your flaws quickly to reach our level.

Again, I always wonder why there are people who feel that another culture should learn faster than their own. It was not so long ago that il Duce was making the trains run on time, and the Cosa Nostra is even today pulling strings. The Financial Morality of Rome is completely undefendable.

As I understand it, Iran is already picking up the habits of the Western World. Drugs and prostitution are supposedly growing exponentially. Can not more indulgence and tolerance be far behind?

[MSimon]

William Halsey said; "when this war is over the only place the Japanese language will be spoken is in Hell. "

[ladajo]

If US ambassador did not show green light to Saddam, Saddam never attack Kuwait, then US soldiers, for 12 years, had no excuse for the presence in the Iraq and MD.

You completely do not understand why Saddam attacked Kuwait then. He did it because he truly felt that it belonged to Iraq and was a "renegade province". In fact, the US ambassador told him not to attack, but did so in a really amateur way. She was not our sharpest knife. Plus, he was already pre-disposed. Not his first error, nor his last. For example, he did not believe that we would invade in 2003. He truly thought it all a bluff.

The French kept telling him we would never invade.

The French themselves sent a General to the Pentagon in December of 2002 to offer combat forces to the effort in Iraq.
http://www.iraqinquirydigest.org/?p=6767
And, so it seems did the Germans...
http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2010/11/ ... ally-said/

For the record, both French and German military forces operated in support of the Iraq campaign in 2002 and 2003. A large bit for them was providing warships to perform war cargo security escorts in the Red Sea, Gulf of Aden and Gulf of Oman.

[Diogenes]

In defence of the Japanese, one has to say that WW2 could have been over (on all fronts) much earlier, had the allies not insisted on "unconditional surrender". You only do that if you want a war to drag out for a long time, or you are a real idiot.

It is easy to have 20\20 hindsight. Why should the United States want to use a different Standard for Surrender on it's Foreign enemies than it did on it's own countrymen?

The United States has had a habit (till the last 60 years) of Complete Victory. That we should ask for it in World War II was completely reasonable and consistent with our past practices. It simply never occurred to us that there was a reasonable alternative, nor did our leadership have a good understanding of the Japanese attitude regarding their Emperor and the nearly religious devotion they had to him.

If the right people could have talked to the right people early enough, the Japanese concerns for their Emperor might have been addressed, and we could have "winked" at our demand for unconditional surrender. (Which we did anyway, but not officially. )

[Diogenes]

Is that why you bring up the past, to rationalize support of Iran using nuclear weapons in the future? Are you saying ,"you did it so we can do it too"? That's what it sounds like.

I said it before. Iran never need nuclear bomb.
But US makes and improves Nuclear bombs now. Why?????????

Unless you know something I don't, we haven't been making significant improvements to nuclear bombs for perhaps 20 years or so. Sure, we are still doing research, but I have heard of no great improvements in either yield or material use since the 1980s.

In fact, we've been working very hard to take apart some of our more nasty bombs. Read here for the details.

http://blogs.knoxnews.com/munger/

[MSimon]

As you well know cultures in decline take up those bad habits. Laws or no laws. It all depends on people's estimate of their future.

Russia has similar problems re:prostitution. Their drug of choice is alcohol. Mostly. But heroin is used too.

You want to prevent that from happening in the US? Laws against it are useless. And in fact only spread it around. You can't regulate black markets. So what can be done? Make the culture attractive.

A good place to start would be to make marriage an attractive proposition for men.

http://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/ ... ubble.html

As the link shows "free love" is well advanced in America. And conservatives who are supposed to care are doing NOTHING about the problem except fighting symptoms.

I was reading Pat Buchanan the other day and he deplores the fact that those of European descent are not reproducing in America. I did my part - 4 children. But my boys tell me that marriage is a losing proposition and they have no interest in it. And they know all about being Pick Up Artists. PUAs. I did give them a few pointers. I do tell them that the greatest adventure life offers is raising a family. Maybe when/if they are ready they will remember.

[Diogenes]

Skip, I invite you to look carefully at the time before those bombs were dropped. The dispute over a single "condition" to surrender, turns out to be the definition of surrender. the condition the US was not able to accept was that the Emperor would continue to act as supreme authority over Japan, and Japan as a soverign nation. But the fact is, when you surrender, you are NOT SOVEREIGN.

The "condition" argument turns out to be a lot of slapstick nonsense rhetoric, much like Saddam used at the end of the first Gulf War--just a means to equivocate and stay in control. Had Bush 1 not fallen for such stupid stuff, think of all the suffering that would have been avoided and the millions of people saved from horrific treatment, slavery and murder.

The reality on the ground in Japan was that the Emperor was going to remain in control regardless. That he would order his people to follow our demands was the only way it was going to happen.

[MSimon]

D,

There was a significant part of the Japanese who even post two atomic bombs were unwilling to end the war. An understanding of their culture may not have helped. And in any case Americans were unwilling to wait 25 or 50 years for the Japanese culture to change. We wanted results NOW! And we got them. To the benefit of the Japanese as well as ourselves.

[Diogenes]

The "condition" argument turns out to be a lot of slapstick nonsense rhetoric

Read the Wikipedia article!
And also reread what I said. I even said that the fear of unconditional surrender was used by those in charge for war propaganda.
I dont quite know what exactly happened in Japan, but I do know that it was the US president who insisted on it, even though most of his staff and allies were against it. But as I said, you can read all this up yourself.
Of course you can also insist on your revisionist version of history.

But putting that aside for a moment. It has very little to do with the current situation in Iran.
The Iranians are in trouble, not because they are developing nuclear bombs, but because of their leadership consisting of madmen. Aslan, your leaders are getting your entire people in trouble for ideologic idiocy. Believe someone whos country has been through the same thing:
Get rid of those leaders, or they will drive your country into ruin!

Does it not occur to any of you that their leaders are not Insane Mad-men, but are instead people who have a real belief that what they are doing is right and proper by the tenets of their faith?

They are MORE DANGEROUS than mad-men. Mad-men may or may not do something as whim suits them, but fanatics will guarandamnteeyou do something if they believe deep in their hearts that it MUST be done.

The 12th Imam does not look kindly upon slackers.

[Diogenes]

Prejudice is for people who are retarded.

Well quoting something that your president actually said, is not prejudice...
The problem is that when someone talks like that in the context of nuclear weapons, he makes people nervous. You dont want to make the wrong people nervous...

I wished the freedom movement in your country had been blessed with more success.
What is your opinion about those peacefully demonstrating opposition people that were gunned down by government thugs in the streets?

In Russia we have two television channels, channel 1, and Channel 2. On Channel one is nothing but Soviet Propaganda. On Channel 2, is KGB officer saying "TURN BACK TO CHANNEL 1 !"

Geeze, skipjack, you might as well ask him to go play in front of a mullah motorcade with a green flag tied around his neck.

[MSimon]

The motivation may not be 12ers. It may be demographic collapse. It won't be the first time a country went to war in order to solve its internal problems.

In the case of the US I'm betting on a war with Mexico in the next 10 or 20 years.

All that needs to be done relative to the Muslim world is wait. They are committing national suicide. Watch Egypt. Within 12 months they will be starving.

[Diogenes]

Prejudice is for people who are retarded.

Well quoting something that your president actually said, is not prejudice...
The problem is that when someone talks like that in the context of nuclear weapons, he makes people nervous. You dont want to make the wrong people nervous...

I wished the freedom movement in your country had been blessed with more success.
What is your opinion about those peacefully demonstrating opposition people that were gunned down by government thugs in the streets?

And what about those peacefully demonstrating opposition people that are guned down now by US government thugs in the streets???

You must mean the ones that NEED to be gunned down now by the US Government, or perhaps some useful volunteers.









Sorry, nobody has stepped up to do the job, and of course the government is currently incompetent. I just don't know why we can't do this sort of thing anymore.









Most Americans at the time thought they should have shot more of them. Unfortunately, we haven't done that in a long time.

[Diogenes]

Prejudice is for people who are retarded.

Well quoting something that your president actually said, is not prejudice...
The problem is that when someone talks like that in the context of nuclear weapons, he makes people nervous. You dont want to make the wrong people nervous...

I wished the freedom movement in your country had been blessed with more success.
What is your opinion about those peacefully demonstrating opposition people that were gunned down by government thugs in the streets?

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/209087.html

That's pretty cool! A News organization that lies as much as our own News media, but who aren't being pretentious about it!

Seriously, you would laugh if you could see the difference between what is alleged and what actually occurs. The police have put up with far too much crap from these people. They OUGHT to be beaten! They are lazy Americans who will not work at any job which they think is beneath their dignity. A bunch of Wall Street workers recently dumped a box of McDonald's employment applications on their heads!






It should have been bricks.