|
Post by ndrthl on Dec 14, 2005 21:42:31 GMT -5
Israel is like a tiny island in an ocean of arab filth. Even though, Israel defended itself each time and won. Stop watching your favourite islamic Channel Aljazeera, and read some real history books. Arabs despite, their oil, their population that's 50 times greater than Israel, the support of Russia, weren't able to defeat this tiny country. That proves a lot of things. This map is quite telling. But it lacks Iran, Pakistan and Indonesia, major muslim countries. If it were not for the nuclear weaponry and massive foreign support, Israel would not have had any conditions to survive. Even if does have (due to the nuclear weapons and foreign aid) Israel still is the weakest side (by far). Israel cannot lose a war. Israel cannot let the growing native arab population (I mean Arab israelis) to become larger than the jewish one. Israel cannot be hit by a major terrorist attack, and so forth.
|
|
|
Post by nordicyouth on Dec 14, 2005 21:56:06 GMT -5
Israel will NOT tolerate nuclear weapons in Iran. It dealt with Iraq once before...
If a nuclear weapon is ever detonated on Israeli soil, the IDF's 3 German-built diesel submarines are capable of launching nuclear missiles (1 each) in retaliation at Tehran, Damascus, and another lucky city. Israel will retaliate against all of its perceived enemies...
Don't forget that the IDF is larger and more sophisticated than the Iranian military, despite the latter's ability to conscript tens of millions if need be.
|
|
|
Post by MC anunnaki on Dec 15, 2005 2:06:34 GMT -5
It was the same in the 60's, Israel against, egypt, Jordan, Syria, and other islamic countries. The armies of these muhammadian countries, were at least 10 times bigger than the Israeli army, but even though, the latter humiliated the sand bastards. Shit! maybe I should convert to judaism and go to Israel, just to be sure, my secret fantasy will come true someday, and thus I'll have the pleasure and the joy to shoot at some sand monkeys , as the governement of my country is too coward and too brainwashed, to nuke the muhammadians. Who are you calling a sand monkey, f*cktard? Why don't you try calling us that to our faces, oh brave internut warrior? You want to shoot a couple of sand monkeys, huh? You're a f*cking retard with shit for brains. You may have the desire to murder people but you certainly don't have the balls for it. Pathetic clown. You don't know shit about the Middle East. Sand, camels and filth? All the usual stereotypes? After the oil?... They'll .. and suicide bombers. hopefully one of them would be able to plant a c4 between your ass cheeks Hear, hear, although I feel for the poor bastard who's given that dirty assignment.
|
|
|
Post by DeLacroix on Dec 15, 2005 7:25:13 GMT -5
Gee, are you a case of double personality or what? You wrote the following statement just some days ago: Read my previous post, and you'll see that I don't put all ME in the same bag, I'm just talking about muslims, what I said has nothing to do with race. As for shooting the muzs, for the time being, I settle for slaughtering some virtual ones, to cool down the intensity of my fantasy. ;D-------->
|
|
|
Post by ndrthl on Dec 15, 2005 7:55:12 GMT -5
img231.imageshack.us/my.php?image=iranian4xx.jpgwww.opinion.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/16/wiran16.xmlRussians help Iran with missile threat to Europe By Con Coughlin (Filed: 16/10/2005) Former members of the Russian military have been secretly helping Iran to acquire technology needed to produce missiles capable of striking European capitals. The Russians are acting as go-betweens with North Korea as part of a multi-million pound deal they negotiated between Teheran and Pyongyang in 2003. It has enabled Teheran to receive regular clandestine shipments of top secret missile technology, believed to be channelled through Russia.Western intelligence officials believe that the technology will enable Iran to complete development of a missile with a range of 2,200 miles, capable of hitting much of Europe. It is designed to carry a 1.2-ton payload, sufficient for a basic nuclear device.The revelation raises the stakes in the confrontation between Iran's Islamic regime and the West - led by the United States and European countries including Britain.Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, clashed with Russian officials over Iran's nuclear programme during a visit to Moscow yesterday, saying that Teheran must fulfil its obligations under the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty.She was later expected to urge President Vladimir Putin to back a referral of Iran to the United Nations Security Council. A senior American official said Iran's programme was "sophisticated and getting larger and more accurate. They have had very much in mind the payload needed to carry a nuclear weapon."I think Putin knows what the Iranians are doing."Iran is believed to be hiding its weapons development behind its nuclear power programme, for which it receives Russian support, and has refused to suspend uranium enrichment or to allow full UN inspections.John Bolton, the US ambassador to the UN, told BBC2's Newsnight that Iran was "determined to get nuclear weapons deliverable on ballistic missiles it can then use to intimidate not only its own region but possibly to supply to terrorists".Iran's longest-range missile is the Shahab 3, which, with an 800-mile range, could hit Israel. The North Korean deal will allow the Iranian missile to reach targets far into Europe - including Rome, Berlin, and much of France. North Korea has developed a missile, the Taepo Dong 2, that could reach America's west coast, based on the submarine-launched Soviet SSN6. Modifications allow it to be fired from a land-based transporter and this technology is being smuggled to Teheran with Russian help.Russians have provided production facilities, diagrams and operating instruction so the missile can be built in Iran. Liquid propellant has been shipped to Iran. Russian specialists have also been sent to Iran to help development of its Shahab 5 missile project, which the Iranians hope to have operational by the end of the decade.
|
|
|
Post by DeLacroix on Dec 15, 2005 8:30:45 GMT -5
The west should wake up and deal with the real threat: Iran and the evil regimes of the middle east. At the time being, europe, as usual, can't anticipate the danger of a nuclear arsenal, in the hands of a thug state like Iran, just like they did, in the thirties, when ,despite the warnings of the experts about the rearmament of the Nazi regime, were too coward, or too doped, to see the danger coming, and the outcome was, the WW2 and dozens of millions of victims. Europe now, is in a position similar to that of the 30's, doped by its dellusions, pacifism, cowardice, and immaturity, instead of choosing the right side, that is, their historical allies, and those who sacrificed their men and their goods, to liberate them and democratize them (germans forget easily), they're licking the turkish slippers of the barbaric oil lords. Keep sleeping, and you'll wake up in a real nightmare. The west should also stop its economic support to Russia, and compel them to quit supplying thug states with heavy weaponry and nuclear technology, if they want to regain their place in the international panorama. Russia without the western investemnt, and their economic aid, will starve.
|
|
|
Post by ndrthl on Dec 15, 2005 8:34:37 GMT -5
The Russians' complaint about Russia's portrayal by the British press: "British press gets anti-Russian 10/25/2005 10:06 One look at Western news websites gives a clear view of the continuing Russophobic stance of the Western pressLooking for an objective news story in the western press without a slant against or a jibe at Russia is like looking for the Holy Grail. It would be easier to find a needle in a haystack.The BBC website today, Monday 24th October, has three stories about Russia. What would these stories be? The growing standard of living of Russians and the increasing prosperity in the cities and countryside? Increasing productivity and better control by the Russian authorities over Russia's resources? What about the free democratic electoral process in Chechnya, the increasing climate of transparency and accountability in Russian business circles or the optimism about settling the conflict in South Ossetia? No, today as usual we have gloom and doom stories, complete with references to an autocratic Kremlin and an allusion to the Soviet era.The story about Bird Flu in Russia was predictable, and it deserved a special box, on the left (creating more impact) under the main headline for world news. No mention of Croatia or Sweden, of course.The second story is about Chelsea's billionaire Chairman, Roman Abramovic, appointed for his second term as Governor of Chukotka. The story starts well but becomes ever more manic, ending up with the strangest of conclusions to be read anywhere in the news in the recent past:Abramovich's appointment was "The price for staying in favour with the Kremlin when the Government has used a variety of means to strip other wealthy businessmen of their riches."Oh, so the Kremlin just decides to steal people's money, is that it? Nothing about why and the simple matter of breaking the law or forgetting to pay billions in taxes, of course?The third story is precisely about one of these figures that the Kremlin stripped of his riches, the one whose YUKOS only owed some tens of billions in taxation, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and his prison.We learn that he has been sent to a "Soviet-era prison in Siberia". A GULAG perhaps? And obviously he will be chained to a gang of men, forced to do hard labour, all singing Yo-o heave-ho? And worse still, we learn, the temperature in winter is between minus 18 and minus 33 degrees Celsius.Poor Khodorkovsky, freezing outside in the snow dressed in his underpants with nothing to eat and only a shovel for company.How many British prisons were built during the Soviet period (1917-1991), or even before it? It is interesting to see that this news corporation continues to harp back to imagery when dealing with Russia. Just as when Britain drew lines on maps, saying "this is ours" and "that is yours", the world is a comfy, cosy place where Africa is dark, full of disease, wars and corruption, the Middle East is full of brown people with moustaches (how horrid!), so they must be untrustworthy, Australia is full of beer-swilling macho men who always beat England at cricket (well, usually), and Russia or course, freezing cold, with Soviet-era prisons and Soviet-style nightmares of cities, with a defeated, sullen and sad people cowering under an autocratic Kremlin.That nonsense was never the truth in Soviet times. To perpetrate this lie today proves that the BBC is an unprofessional organism which has as much credibility as the drunken village guttersnipe". english.pravda.ru/mailbox/22/101/399/16358_western.html
|
|
|
Post by ikilledjesus on Dec 15, 2005 8:35:16 GMT -5
You dont have to be a genius to see that the west are russophobes.
|
|
|
Post by ndrthl on Dec 15, 2005 8:42:43 GMT -5
What I dont understand about that article by the Telegraph is why the Russians would be so willingly transferring nuclear technology to other countries, especially Iran, as Iran is such an extreme muslim country nation, and as Russia has been dealing with muslim extremism within its own borders (not to mention the obvious fact that Iran and Russia are neighbours).
|
|
|
Post by ikilledjesus on Dec 15, 2005 8:46:32 GMT -5
Because they dont want more americans in their back yeard, it is a very important position...
|
|
|
Post by DeLacroix on Dec 15, 2005 8:46:55 GMT -5
You dont have to be a genius to see that the west are russophobes. They're not russophobes, they're worried about russia's support of thug states like Iran and North Korea. They fear the spread of nuclear weapons in the world, and a possible nuclear attack, by terrorist groups. Phobia is an irrational fear, in this case, the fear is rational.
|
|
|
Post by ikilledjesus on Dec 15, 2005 8:50:01 GMT -5
You dont have to be a genius to see that the west are russophobes. They're not russophobes, they're worried about russia's support of thug states like Iran and North Korea. They fear the spread of nuclear weapons in the world, and a possible nuclear attack, by terrorist groups. Phobia is an irrational fear, in this case, the fear is rational. USA has been supporting and puting dictators int hese "thug nations" for as long as it existed, do not give me this bullshit. who do you think made bin laden? usa made these terrorists in the 80's to terrorise ussr, what goes around comes around.
|
|
|
Post by ndrthl on Dec 15, 2005 9:36:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by DeLacroix on Dec 15, 2005 9:39:06 GMT -5
They're not russophobes, they're worried about russia's support of thug states like Iran and North Korea. They fear the spread of nuclear weapons in the world, and a possible nuclear attack, by terrorist groups. Phobia is an irrational fear, in this case, the fear is rational. USA has been supporting and puting dictators int hese "thug nations" for as long as it existed, do not give me this bullshit. who do you think made bin laden? usa made these terrorists in the 80's to terrorise ussr, what goes around comes around. Yeah, I agree with you about that, but what happened has nothing to do with what's happening now. Communism was the biggest threat for the civilized world 3 decades ago, and in the time of war (even in cold wars), the enemy of your enemy is your friend. After the war, he can turn against you, and you can do the same. What matters now, is what's happening now, not the historical events. And what's happening now, is that, Russia, is supplying punk-criminal states, with nuclear technology and missiles. I can understand their economy is ruined and they're so desperate, they're supplying whoever can pay, with weapons. But believe me, they're doing something very stupid, and don't realize that an Islamic Iran with a nuclear arsenal, can provide chechenians with weapons of massive destruction. Now they're talking about Palestinians, tomorrow they'll talk about Chechenia. In Islam, it's a rule, to decieve the non-muslims.
|
|
|
Post by DeLacroix on Dec 15, 2005 9:41:46 GMT -5
Khatami was moderate and hated by the Ayatollahs, the new president, is a fundamentalist.
|
|