Stratovarius Community

Carcass wrote:Oh, I didn't say I believe Americans hate rest of the world. But we both know there are people who are ignorant enough to think like that.

Yeah, and we both know there are people ignorant enough to bash USA like crazy&not look at the faults of their own country&other countrys, too.

@Shurik, yeah, I agree. Chavez is quite the sarcastic smartass. No more no less. Freedom of speech gives him the right to say those things, and also, the right for us to criticize him.

Shurik, yeah, I agree. Chavez is quite the sarcastic smartass. No more no less. Freedom of speech gives him the right to say those things, and also, the right for us to criticize him.

There's a russian politician named Vladimir Zhirinovsky who said and did things far more outrageous than Chavez, like fights in russian parlament, fights with opponents during live TV interviews, he said that russian soldiers will one day wash their shoes in Indian Ocean, he was recorded drunk in Baghdad some time before the US invasion saying typical things a drunk person can say (like cursing George Bush with finest russian curses, saying that russian scientists can sink continents and so on) , but never had a chance to be in power. When I look at Chavez, I can perfectly see what would be if Zhirinovsky ever got a chance to be a russian president. Chavez is a clown with power ...

Shurik wrote:Chavez is a clown with power ...

That's democracy...

Carcass wrote:

Shurik wrote:Chavez is a clown with power ...

That's democracy...

Yep. They elected him, now they have to live with him---for awhile, anyway. Unless they like him.....I read that alot of the underclass thinks he's great&has actually did some beneficial things for them. So who am I to judge, I don't live there!

@BTW, Carcass, I just read on MSN that Hilary C. might consider running for Prez in 2008 if enough Dems back her!

Interestingly enough, I had dinner after work with some clients and business partners at Atlanta's "Persepolis" restaurant last night. I was the only Caucasian at the table, but fortunately, the rest of the guys spoke, for the most part, in English.

After munching on appetizers of pita, mint leaves, radishes, onions, and feta cheese, everyone in our party opted for the beef Soltani entrees, as well as the non-alcoholic Dugh, a very refreshing yogurt-based drink. This was about the best Persian food that I've ever had, and the service was outstanding. There was even a belly dancer going from table to table, but interestingly enough, the background music was Egyptian, rather than Persian.

With the cultural report now complete, let's refocus on the issue of Iranian politics. It seems that Herr Ammadboutjihad is taking a nod from the Deutsch Richter that wants to try former US Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, with this recent statement;

"You are considered as accomplices in the crimes committed in Iraq and the bloodshed under the cover of financial and military support." - Mahamood Ahmandinejad

This presents some interesting questions:

Q. I wonder if he means that the US and Britain are
also sending weapons to that lunatic cleric Muqtada al-Sadr?

Q. So Iran has nothing but benevolent intent for the region, or more specifically, Iraq?

Q. Iran is not sending weapons and fighters across the border to destabilize the situation?

Q. Iran, quite simply, would never launch a first strike (nuclear) against Israel?

Q. Iran has the American people's best interests at heart?

Q. Iran is not still stirring the pot in Lebanon, via its proxy, Hezbollah?

Many more questions could be asked, but it is the height of idiocy for Iran's president to fantasize that any US or British leaders will be brought before a Nuremberg-like war crimes tribunal.

I think the following story is conspiracy-theory Bullshit, but I did think it was interesting.

http://www.willthomas.net/Convergence/W ... n_Iran.htm

2 Pages


People believe what they want to anyway.

miditek wrote: Many more questions could be asked, but it is the height of idiocy for Iran's president to fantasize that any US or British leaders will be brought before a Nuremberg-like war crimes tribunal.

I can name numerous world leaders (western and otherwise) who deserve to be tried for war crimes, or similar crimes against humanity. Of course, its ludicrous to imagine any of them being actually tried for them. For example, the bombing of Dresden in WWII. Totally inexcusable. Whoever ordered that deserved to be put on trial as well at Nurumberg. As well as many more recent acts. Robert Mugabe is little more than a tyrant, but no one complains about that.

I see Ahmedinijad as an attention whore. Similar to Hugo Chavez (who actually spends more of his time travelling than in his own country, running it). Does he want to produce nuclear weapons? Perhaps, it's possible. Would he ever use them in a first strike? Incredibly doubtful. Iran's major cities would be obliterated, and for what? Proving a point? You might see these people as super-uber-hardline-extremists who don't care about a thing, but they're not stupid. The damage they'd cause would be miniscule to the fire rained upon them. And besides, the President of Iran doesn't hold that much power. It's the Ayatollas who hold the key, even the Supreme Leader is kept in check by the rest of the council. When you have several people in charge of a nation, ridiculous things are less likely to happen.

Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities... well, it worked in Iraq. But I think Iran would be expecting it, and Israel knows it. Perhaps they'll try some other method...

I wonder how she feels about all this?

It is just early 2007&people are announcing their candidacy. I wonder their views on this issue?

OMG! The return of the pervert to the White House!

If she is elected president, what will Bill be? The First Mister?

Carcass wrote:OMG! The return of the pervert to the White House!

If she is elected president, what will Bill be? The First Mister?

Just in case let's hope no goodlooking MALE interns are hired---we don't want her to get caught with HER pants down&ruin it all again!

I think Bill's libido is more than enough for her.

browneyedgirl wrote:
Just in case let's hope no goodlooking MALE interns are hired---we don't want her to get caught with HER pants down&ruin it all again!

And get another of this kind of sentence:

I did not have sexual relations with that men, Mister XXXXXXX.

?

Carcass wrote:I think Bill's libido is more than enough for her.

Well, once it was reported she told Bill,"Bill I need to be ****ed more than twice a year!" But, anyway. Maybe she can keep her mind on the business at hand(no pun intended)and get the job done(no pun there either).

Oh, another Iran link--this issue is getting hotter every minute!

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007- ... 615540.htm

browneyedgirl wrote:Oh, another Iran link--this issue is getting hotter every minute!

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007- ... 615540.htm

Not to mention Ahmandinejad's recent adventures in Venezuela, and his allies in Bolivia, Ecuador, and our old friend Daniel Ortega in Nicarauga. Chavez has openly pledged the blood of his countrymen in the event of war with America. So be it. Congress is stupid for allowing Ahmandinejad to so blatantly violate the Monroe Doctrine. It is interesting to see this temporal and unnatural alliance of Persian Shi'ites, along with the "cultural Catholics" and Marxist atheists in Central America.

I'm fairly certain that at least some Revolutionary Guard officers have infiltrated not only into Iraq, but are also coming across the southern borders of the US, with linguistic and logistical support from the Venezuelan intelligence agency. The ultimate goal I believe is for OPEC to completely devalue the US dollar and to destroy the economy of the US. If we are bankrupt, then Iran and others will be able to proceed with virtual impunity.

Did you happen to see the episode on "24" where a small scale nuclear device was detonated in California? The aftermath was not a pretty picture, as all seven million Muslims in the US were rounded and marched into detention camps- much like the Japanese camps from WWII.

However, I do strongly suspect that Iran will be hit, hard, within the next few months. I believe that Washington and/or Tel Aviv realize that the hour is at hand. Europe's bribes, "incentives" and toothless UN resolutions would not have stopped Hitler, a secular fanatic, so why do they believe that such actions would stop a religious lunatic such as Ahmandinejad?

Israel's survival is at stake, and Ahmandinejad himself has been quick to point this out. His speeches are almost like an oral version of "Mein Kampf." He truly believes that he can hasten the appearance of the Mahdi via a nuclear war. He doesn't need to "win" such an exchange, in the tactical sense, since the Mahdi will then come and clean house on the rest of the infidels in the West.

(Note: Europe, this also includes you, and not just the US or Israel. Atheists are also considered infidels as much, if not more so, than Christians or Jews.)

Chavez is a real smartass. NEVER trust ANYONE who brags publicly how mean they are.

Yep, it is fruitless to repeat saying it but, Muslims lump Europe in with USA when it comes to being labeled infidels because everyone knows the materialism, rampant sexual openness, "do as you please as long as you don't harm" etc. that goes on in Europe as much as USA. And, I'm not stereotyping, and I'm not saying everybody does it, but people knows what REALLY goes on--why try to pretend?

Realisticly, this issue is bound to explode some time or other&its best to wake up&realize that fact instead of hiding ones head in the sand. And, saying that is not spreading negative energy as Pagans are so fond of parroting but, being prepared in a sense.

browneyedgirl wrote:

I wonder how she feels about all this?

It is just early 2007&people are announcing their candidacy. I wonder their views on this issue?

Oh great. Lady Macbeth running for president.

Ever since she got involved in that stupid thing involving GTA, I've lost all conviction in her.

Who are the Republicans going to run? Any clues?

NeonVomit wrote:

browneyedgirl wrote:

I wonder how she feels about all this?

It is just early 2007&people are announcing their candidacy. I wonder their views on this issue?

Oh great. Lady Macbeth running for president.

Ever since she got involved in that stupid thing involving GTA, I've lost all conviction in her.

Who are the Republicans going to run? Any clues?

John Mccain will probably run. I'd also be willing to bet that Rudy (Guiliani) will also run. Gingrich mentioned that he would run, as a last resort.

We may get a democrat for president in 2008, although I don't think that Hillary will get the nomination. She has too many enemies, both on the left, as well as the right. She claims to be a centrist, but we know better.

miditek wrote:

NeonVomit wrote:

browneyedgirl wrote:

I wonder how she feels about all this?

It is just early 2007&people are announcing their candidacy. I wonder their views on this issue?

Oh great. Lady Macbeth running for president.

Ever since she got involved in that stupid thing involving GTA, I've lost all conviction in her.

Who are the Republicans going to run? Any clues?

John Mccain will probably run. I'd also be willing to bet that Rudy (Guiliani) will also run. Gingrich mentioned that he would run, as a last resort.

We may get a democrat for president in 2008, although I don't think that Hillary will get the nomination. She has too many enemies, both on the left, as well as the right. She claims to be a centrist, but we know better.

I honestly don't know what I would do if I was a voter in the US. Both parties are as corrupt and morally bankrupt as each other, popultated by crooks. The few who are actually capable of doing any good are drowned out. Voting for an independant candidate, you may as well toss your ballot out the window for all the good it would do.

Then again, that's the case in most western democracies... *sigh*

BEG wrote:Yep, it is fruitless to repeat saying it but, Muslims lump Europe in with USA

One thing that should kept in mind is that the Muslim world is not a united front. For a lot of westerners each and every Muslim fall into one category: someone who thinks the West is a faul, degenrate place, ridden with infidels and sodomites.

The Muslim World is divided in many ethnicities such as Kurds, Arabs (which by the way is a very heterogeneous group), Indonesians, Persians, Pakistanis and Turks. Not all of them share the same world view. Moreover, the Muslim World is divided in two main religious groups: Shia Islam and Sunni Islam.

In addition, there are more or less 10 million Muslims in Western Europe alone and a lot more in the Balkans (Albania, Macedonia, Bulgaria etc.). And let's not forget the 7 million living in America.

From this perspective every generalization and the theory of a clash between civilizations are laughable.

miditek wrote:

browneyedgirl wrote:Oh, another Iran link--this issue is getting hotter every minute!

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007- ... 615540.htm

Not to mention Ahmandinejad's recent adventures in Venezuela, and his allies in Bolivia, Ecuador, and our old friend Daniel Ortega in Nicarauga. Chavez has openly pledged the blood of his countrymen in the event of war with America. So be it. Congress is stupid for allowing Ahmandinejad to so blatantly violate the Monroe Doctrine. It is interesting to see this temporal and unnatural alliance of Persian Shi'ites, along with the "cultural Catholics" and Marxist atheists in Central America.

Do you honestly think it is not even vaguely hypocritical to claim the monroe doctrine is even valid anymore in the 21st century? And Chavez pledged the blood of his countrymen in a war, yes, if Venezuela were to be attacked by the US. Little detail there that was forgotten.

I'm fairly certain that at least some Revolutionary Guard officers have infiltrated not only into Iraq, but are also coming across the southern borders of the US, with linguistic and logistical support from the Venezuelan intelligence agency. The ultimate goal I believe is for OPEC to completely devalue the US dollar and to destroy the economy of the US. If we are bankrupt, then Iran and others will be able to proceed with virtual impunity.

Wow... that's some pretty paranoid thinking. You honestly think everyone's out to get the US... um... wouldn't OPEC lose their number one consumer if that happened? Does cash fall out of the sky? Sure China and India are booming, but the US still consumes more oil than anyone else. And who does China and India sell most of their stuff to? Think about it for a while.

Hugo Chavez is little more than a loudmouthed clown. Just chill out already, not everyone in the entire world is trying to annihilate the US.

Did you happen to see the episode on "24" where a small scale nuclear device was detonated in California? The aftermath was not a pretty picture, as all seven million Muslims in the US were rounded and marched into detention camps- much like the Japanese camps from WWII.

You'd probably love to see all the muslims in the US get rounded up. Admit it.

However, I do strongly suspect that Iran will be hit, hard, within the next few months. I believe that Washington and/or Tel Aviv realize that the hour is at hand. Europe's bribes, "incentives" and toothless UN resolutions would not have stopped Hitler, a secular fanatic, so why do they believe that such actions would stop a religious lunatic such as Ahmandinejad?

You continue to think Europe loves Islamic extremists because they thought "invading Iraq.. bad idea" and have been saying "told you so" for the last 4 years, even though it's been attacked on numerous occasions... selective memory you seem to have.

He truly believes that he can hasten the appearance of the Mahdi via a nuclear war. He doesn't need to "win" such an exchange, in the tactical sense, since the Mahdi will then come and clean house on the rest of the infidels in the West.

Interesting how you can tell what a person truly believes without having ever spoken to them or met them. And I severely doubt the council would allow him to do this, since it would mean the deaths of millions of Iranians who would much rather get along with their buisiness. They're a lot more politically shrewd than you might imagine. You're really seeing him and them as far too two-dimensional. I think there's a lot more to this sabre-rattling than one might see on the surface... perhaps try to dig deeper and find some more motives than simple religious fanaticism. Remember, religion doesn't actually cause wars, politics does. Religion is just a handy little tool to get the people to go along with it.

(Note: Europe, this also includes you, and not just the US or Israel. Atheists are also considered infidels as much, if not more so, than Christians or Jews.)

Well, that's nothing new. According to pretty much every religion I'm going to hell anyway, so whatever.

Carcass wrote:

BEG wrote:Yep, it is fruitless to repeat saying it but, Muslims lump Europe in with USA

One thing that should kept in mind is that the Muslim world is not a united front. For a lot of westerners each and every Muslim fall into one category: someone who thinks the West is a foul, degenrate place, ridden with infidels and sodomites.

The Muslim World is divided in many ethnicities such as Kurds, Arabs (which by the way is a very heterogeneous group), Indonesians, Persians, Pakistanis and Turks. Not all of them share the same world view. Moreover, the Muslim World is divided in two main religious groups: Shia Islam and Sunni Islam.

In addition, there are more or less 10 million Muslims in Western Europe alone and a lot more in the Balkans (Albania, Macedonia, Bulgaria etc.). And let's not forget the 7 million living in America.

From this perspective every generalization and the theory of a clash between civilizations are laughable.

I completely agree. miditek, the world is not black-and-white, or nearly as simple or 2D as you seem to want it to be. And yes, the extremists see USA and Europe as one and the same. It's just USA is an easier target to blame.

miditek wrote:

NeonVomit wrote:

browneyedgirl wrote:

I wonder how she feels about all this?

It is just early 2007&people are announcing their candidacy. I wonder their views on this issue?

Oh great. Lady Macbeth running for president.

Ever since she got involved in that stupid thing involving GTA, I've lost all conviction in her.

Who are the Republicans going to run? Any clues?

John Mccain will probably run. I'd also be willing to bet that Rudy (Guiliani) will also run. Gingrich mentioned that he would run, as a last resort.

We may get a democrat for president in 2008, although I don't think that Hillary will get the nomination. She has too many enemies, both on the left, as well as the right. She claims to be a centrist, but we know better.

There is a black guy(Obama)running on the Democrat ticket---I need to do some research on him.
Biden&Brownback are running, too. There is a guy named Ron Paul who is like a Ralph Nader-type character, who is running, I think.
As for Ralph Nader throwing his hat into the ring, I have not heard anything along that line yet.
Yeah, if a person votes on the independent ticket you are thowing your vote away, but, I don't know----some folks have said in 2000 enough people voted for Nader just enough votes to keep Al Gore out, so maybe these independent candidates are smarter than we think!

browneyedgirl wrote:

miditek wrote:

NeonVomit wrote:

browneyedgirl wrote:

I wonder how she feels about all this?

It is just early 2007&people are announcing their candidacy. I wonder their views on this issue?

Oh great. Lady Macbeth running for president.

Ever since she got involved in that stupid thing involving GTA, I've lost all conviction in her.

Who are the Republicans going to run? Any clues?

John Mccain will probably run. I'd also be willing to bet that Rudy (Guiliani) will also run. Gingrich mentioned that he would run, as a last resort.

We may get a democrat for president in 2008, although I don't think that Hillary will get the nomination. She has too many enemies, both on the left, as well as the right. She claims to be a centrist, but we know better.

There is a black guy(Obama)running on the Democrat ticket---I need to do some research on him.
Biden&Brownback are running, too. There is a guy named Ron Paul who is like a Ralph Nader-type character, who is running, I think.
As for Ralph Nader throwing his hat into the ring, I have not heard anything along that line yet.
Yeah, if a person votes on the independent ticket you are thowing your vote away, but, I don't know----some folks have said in 2000 enough people voted for Nader just enough votes to keep Al Gore out, so maybe these independent candidates are smarter than we think!

I've read that Ron Paul is an honest and decent guy, while having some rather interesting policies (he's a libretarian or librarian or whatever ) to do with reducing government and stuff, he seems to want to do some good.

Of course, he doesn't stand a chance of being chosen.

It seems to be deja vu all over again?
Could this be history repeating itself?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11682871

browneyedgirl wrote: It seems to be deja vu all over again?
Could this be history repeating itself?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11682871

They are simply testing the world powers - how long can they piss on everyone and threaten half the world until someone comes and kicks them in the head. So far the world powers seem to be enjoying the golden shower ...

The right course of action is not to attack them but to openly support an opposition to the mad dwarf (this is Ahmadinejad's nickname in Iran, BTW) so that Iranian people will feel secure enough to overthrow the insane ayatollahs and their regime. The whole ayatollahs regime is not that popular in Iran nowadays because they like to spend more on weapons, nuclear program, help to Hezbollah and such than on Iranian people ...

I takes some character to think that way, Shurik! To resort to violence is very easy and tempting in your situation, I can imagine.

Shurik wrote:

browneyedgirl wrote: It seems to be deja vu all over again?
Could this be history repeating itself?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11682871

They are simply testing the world powers - how long can they piss on everyone and threaten half the world until someone comes and kicks them in the head. So far the world powers seem to be enjoying the golden shower ...

The right course of action is not to attack them but to openly support an opposition to the mad dwarf (this is Ahmadinejad's nickname in Iran, BTW) so that Iranian people will feel secure enough to overthrow the insane ayatollahs and their regime. The whole ayatollahs regime is not that popular in Iran nowadays because they like to spend more on weapons, nuclear program, help to Hezbollah and such than on Iranian people ...

Recently, hardline newspapers in Iran have started to criticize Ahmadinejad's tactics and question the need to spend so much foreign reserve on defence when they'd rather see it spent on infrastructure and education.

The Iranian people are not sheep, far from brainwashed.

And Carcass, your country doesn't have its right to exist questioned by anyone. Perhaps if it was, you'd understand Shurik's position a bit more...

Yes, since Shurik lives more or less in the hot zone I think he is the only forum member who can give a totally real view of what's happening in that region.
We can speculate&give our opinions, but Shurik knows the score/whats going on.

NeonVomit wrote:And Carcass, your country doesn't have its right to exist questioned by anyone. Perhaps if it was, you'd understand Shurik's position a bit more...

Is this an accusation... I wasn't being sarcastic, if that's what you thought...

Carcass wrote:

NeonVomit wrote:And Carcass, your country doesn't have its right to exist questioned by anyone. Perhaps if it was, you'd understand Shurik's position a bit more...

Is this an accusation... I wasn't being sarcastic, if that's what you thought...

Oh... I thought you were! Never mind then, sorry about that