Iran test fires short-range missiles
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
U.N. observers warn of Syria civil war after massacre
( 7 )
-
Obama on the defensive over spending, debt
( 18 )
-
Egypt's top candidates try to broaden support
( 1 )
-
Queen marks diamond jubilee riding wave of popularity
( 0 )
-
Thousands take part in 'Slut Walks' in Brazil
( 10 )
-
- Business Teaching Positions - Part-time - Kanto Region
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥3,000 ~ ¥5,000 / Hour
-
- National Relief/Substitute Teacher - summer start
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥275,000 ~ ¥300,000 / Month
-
- 営業パーソン
- 加治金属工業株式会社, Tochigi
- Salary: ¥240,000 ~ ¥350,000 / Month Negotiable
Order by Time Order by Popularity
53 Comments
Login to comment
0
rajakumar
Iranian going to unnecessary defensive mode,by testing bullets/missiles. Better to pump out more oil and get richer.
Iranians administration woes can be solved via more dialogues,constant never ending improvements and via openess with Obama administration.
Today's world of advancement in communications electronic hardware/software offers unlimited opportunity of peaceful, prosperous and constantly improving Iranian state,if Iranians work harder ,on all these quantum leap IT communications fields more.
0
Sarge
This is great news. Iran has proven they have some sort of defense against the evil Israelis and the evil Americans.
0
Beelzebub
What Iran badly needs is a defence against stupidity.
0
LIBERTAS
It is subject to the terms of the NNPT, and both inspection and control by the IAEA. Unlike Dimona.
0
LIBERTAS
Iran having the bomb is not the same as Iran using the bomb. It would be called a balance of power in the region. That would be a good thing.
Have a look at Israel's non NNPT compliant nuke plant here, from Israeli TV: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbjgDERSuiI That should scare you, given their propensity to attack their neighbors on a whim.
0
kinniku
Ummm...Israel having a nuclear reactor at Dimona is definitely not the same as them using a nuclear bomb. You know, the nuclear bomb they have not used all these years.
Also, responding to attacks is hardly 'attacking neighbors on a "whim"'.
The news report was, as you noted, from Israeli TV. It is refreshing to see that all sides can be heard there. You know, as opposed to what has been going on in Iran. Wow, the way President Ahmadinejad reacts to differing opinions, for example during and after the last election, should give anyone pause about him having any access to nuclear weapons. Thanks for pointing us in that direction, Libertas.
0
LIBERTAS
Firstly, the reports on the most recent election results were 100% lopsided. The incumbent guy won fair and square. Media manipulation sought to distort that, even after significant recounts. The violence was not of his making, and he was not holding the reins while it happened. That was the Supreme Council of the Mullahs, or whatever its official title is.
I don't care for President Ahmadinejad one way or the other. He's an academic, a member of a minority sect of Islam, and some would say a bit otherwordly. But he's not suicidal, nor is Iran. It tends to be an isolationist country anyway, and has its own rich heritage of culture. Mostly, they just want to be left alone.
But, when you have external forces actively seeking regime change, by force if necessary, then you have to give them credit for learning from Iraq's mistakes, the same way that India, Pakistan and the DPRK have. Only those countries not strong enough to push back at the bully (Israel and the USA) get invaded.
As long as the IAEA says they're compliant, leave them A L O N E! They can verbally bluster about holocausts and anti-zionism all they want. There is not a shred of evidence to suggest Iran is going to attack anyone, anytime soon, especially with 3% enriched Uranium.
They are not the nuclear armed hotheads of the region. Israel is. Iran has a right to defend against that very real threat. And even if they're stupid enough to waste resources on a bomb, it would be suicidal to use it. The converse is also true. If Israel bombs the Iranian facilities, you can bet your bottom dollar that both China and Russia (heavily invested in both operating plants at Natanz and Bushere (sp?)) will respond in kind. It's these kinds of laws of unintended consequences that pose a real threat of a global nuclear war. President Ahmadinejad is not the threat here. Bibi, Barak and Obama are.
The pre-emptive strike doctrine so favoured by the Bush & Obama administrations works both ways. Just imagine if Iran adopted it too. They'd be more than justified!
0
moonbeams
Were they real missiles this time or photoshopped?
0
kinniku
Umm...he certainly sought and has sought to continue it since being reelected or haven't you been keeping up. My point is not whether his election was valid or not. It probably was, although maybe not to the degree that was reported. The point is his reaction to it during the election and after.
Just as people can react to it all they want.
They yes, if you mean the Iranian people. Not Ahmadinejad, though. He very much wants to be in the spotlight and he has approval from the Supreme Council to do so. So, it seems they dont to be 'left alone' as much as poke and pick at Israel. I think they should find better ways to use their time and resources.
Umm...there was plenty of high-level internal opposition to Ahmadinejad this time around. Please do know assume everything has to do with the US and Israel.
If they will leave the rest of the world alone and stop making threats, I see no reason whatsoever not to leave the alone.
Again, in all this time, how many times has Israel used a nuclear device? The answer is: zero. So, please stop with the false claims of nuclear hotheadedness on the part of Israel.
That would be a bad bet. They would do no such thing. Just as no one did in 1981. Remember?
Yes, I think he is...he can't manage to keep his mouth shut and no one seems to be willing or able in Iran to help him keep it shut. There is no reason for the animosity between Iran and Israel or Iran and the US.
Now THERE a bet for your bottom dollar on what would happen...
Hopefully cooler heads will prevail on all sides and they will decide not to listen to the extremists amongst them. Unfortunately, you seem to be in an extremist camp yourself. You just haven't been able to realize it yet.
0
sharky1
If Salami runs the air force, baloney must run the army
0
rajakumar
Beelzebub-When will good times come to Iran like in Dubai,Kuwait,Oatar,Saudi Arabia and other oil rich nations.
1915 shift from coal to oil,has become big factor in global scenario.
British/French/Germany/japan and many others were involved in Middle east/elsewhere,because sucess needs oil energy/energy and other raw materials.
From 1910s to 1940s,oil fields of middle east were vital for energy source for wars fought in europe/japan/asia.
Now it is about nuclear weapons/nuclear energy issues in Middle east/Iran and Israel/Palestine.
What the middle east needs is a superior empowered people among middle east people,who will protect them from ignorance and half wit solution policies of their governments.
0
sabiwabi
He is only in the spotlight because the usual crowd makes a big deal about his opinions, this does not make him an attention seeker. It seems we have a bunch of shills who don't want him to say things how they truly are,
He never threatened, he only predicts (as do I) that the zionist regime will disappear. The zionist shills (eg., kinniku) become enraged and whine about being pushed in the sea, and employ deception to convince others that he has vowed to wipe hem off the map, but its all BS. Compare this with your friend Israel, it does not leave the world alone, it makes military threats, it continuously commits war crimes, it ignores UN resolutions more than any nation.
There is no need to use nuclear weapons against an imprisoned civilian population of stone-throwers. The question we should ask is how often has Israel committed war crimes, ignored UN resolutions, and how does this stack up against Iran's record.
I'm surprised you continue to defend this evil regime.
0
adaydream
kinniku
Besides the US who has ever used a nuclear bomb as weapon?
Whether Iran or Israel or India, I'm concerned about countries that have nuclear weapons. It makes them all dangerous. Hell we're dangerous to other countries, because we have nukes.
Iran firing these tests is just like snapping a whip at the world. They are trying to be the smaller dog barking at the bigger dogs. < :-)
0
SuperLib
Sure, they just mostly want to be left alone while they kill Israelis, Iraqis, Americans, and Lebanese. It seems that their position is that they want protection from outside threats. The best way to do that, obviously, would be to stop using terrorism to kill innocents in other nations. They want protection so they can continue to do that. It's like me opening fire in a shopping mall then saying I want heavier weapons to protect me from the threat of others trying to stop me.
0
kinniku
adaydream,
Yes, and it seems you have no problem with how much they bark. Small dogs can be just as annoying as the big ones.
President Ahmadinejad has no reason to bark. He should be working to help his country instead of constantly attempting to start more trouble.
Yet, the case is constantly given about how dangerous Israel supposedly is because it has nuclear weapons. These same people (including yourself) barely raise a peep about Iran's program.
0
kinniku
SuperLib,
Excellent points.
0
kinniku
Heh, I'd love to see a quote on this one...Anyway, all I 'shill' is that all sides should be allowed to live in peace. It is you that consistently suggests someone should attack Israel, and yes I can easily provide quotes if necessary. (But you really know what you say, so why don't we save time.)
Yes, according to his very own news agency, the IRNA, he did. IIRC, he never specifically denied he said it either.
Israel has not been left alone yet, so maybe that should happen first. Of course, you have stated often that you don't want that to happen.
Great, that means we will no longer have to read you rambling on and on about them then, huh?
Please, you still haven't decided whether the Nazis were good or bad, I hardly think you are in a position to decide which 'regimes' are 'evil'.
0
RomeoRamenII
Iran is so intimidated by 0bama that they test-fired short-range missiles.
Keep on giving speeches, Barack. The Mullahs will keep laughing at you.
0
sabiwabi
kinniku,
Most are saying Israel is in no position to complain about Iran developing nuclear POWER when Israel itself has long had nuclear power and WEAPONS. Plus, Israel has not joined the NPT, another reason it should stop whining.
Others (myself included) are ALSO saying that IF there is one regime on earth that should not have nuclear weapons, it is Israel. They have a history of committing war crimes and attacking their neighbors. They always say the others started, and it seems a few naïve people believe their BS. And considering they also have a history of attacking their allies (Lavon Affair, USS Liberty, 9/11, and many more), the world should be most fearful of Israel possessing nukes.
And one reason that I don't peep about the Iranian nuclear power plant is that: (1) Iran is member of the NPT (2) Iran allows inspections (3) Iran does not have a history of attacking other countries and committing false flags, (4) the NPT permits Iran to do what it is doing, (4) there is no evidence Iran is planning to build nuclear weapons.
The Israelis are saying Iran is planning to build nukes, but lets remember that it was Israeli intelligence that claimed that Atta received an anthrax sample from an Iraqi agent in Prague? We now know the anthrax came from a US lab. When will the world learn that Israel is not our friend?
You know very well that I wrote: “There is no need to use nuclear weapons against an imprisoned civilian population of stone-throwers.” I see you continue to deceive, you wouldn’t need to do so if you’re views were defensible, huh?
0
kinniku
sabiwabi,
It is a strange basis for argument. Just because a nation has weapons does not mean they cannot voice concern over another nation having them.
Well, in your case, you still haven't decided whether the Nazis were good or bad, I hardly think you are in a position to decide which 'regimes' should or shouldn't have anything.
This is probably your one and only logical point. Unfortunately for you, it gets readily canceled out by your constant wish for Israel to disappear and your obsession with almost anything Israel and/or Jewish. However, let's address your point shall we? While this is an extremely valid question, I believe the answer lies with responses like yours on JT. Israel knows there are many people that would LOVE to assist it on the path to disappearing from the face of the earth. Why even you and Ahmadinejad have voiced this particular wish over and over again. So, I can understand Israeli concerns with their security details being made public.
I am always curious and amazed that you can write accusations of deception so skillfully while sinisterly rolling your handlebar mustache between your thumb and forefinger. Anyway, what you wrote is right above here and in addition I typed ... after what I quoted. There was absolutely no intent to deceive. Now on to your 'point'. First you claim Israel is so dangerous they should not have nuclear weapons. When it is correctly pointed out that they have never in their history used them, you answer that they don't need to. So, then there is no concern about them using them. That is and was my point. No deception.
As to your cut and paste from a propaganda site about anthrax, you have no idea what particle anthrax was used, so why do you insist on even commenting about it?
Lastly, as has been correctly pointed out above, Iran does have a history of attacking others by proxy in Israel, Palestine, Iraq, and Lebanon. You would claim otherwise, but then again, you have also claimed Hitler probably was not such a bad guy. So, I don't think it necessary to take your claims with even a grain of salt.
0
Helter_Skelter
sabiwabi
Why is that? Israel has had nuclear weapons for a half a century now and despite attempt after attempt by the Muslim Arabs to eliminate the "Infidel" state, the Israelis have never used them. Israel has proven itself to be a responsible nuclear power. The reality is that it's terrorist-supporting Islamic nations that should NEVER be allowed nuclear weapons. Look at the mess in nuclear-armed Pakistan, with Islamic terrorists attempting to overthrow the government and take control. And now Iran, which funnels weapons to Islamic terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, possibly getting nukes.
Israel needs to take out Iran's nuclear program. Just like they did with Iraq in 1981 and Syria in 2007. And forget about getting support from Obama. He's too busy destroying the US healthcare system to be worried about Islamic terrorist regimes obtaining WMD's. How frustrating for sabiwabi knowing that a country that threatens to wipe Israel off the map won't be getting any nukes. Must sting.
Not a single person, including yourself, believes this so just give it a rest. It's downright embarassing.
0
4thEstateDotCom
-- "IF there is one regime on earth that should not have nuclear weapons, it is Israel."
Cos it's not like most of the scientists on the Manhattan Project,which saved countless lives, were Jewish or anything, is it?
0
sabiwabi
More baseless accusations given to provide an excuse to attack Iran. Most people (I hope) have caught on to these deceptive sources of intelligence.
Strange bit of logic. Because some people express a wish or prediction that an evil murderous regime will disappear, this regime is entitled to possessing numerous nuclear weapons. Predicting or even wishing something does not equal vowing to do it or assist in doing it, only deceptive people would make that extrapolation.
It is not so much Israel's whining that bothers me, its more the attention their complaints get from western LEADERS. IF there is one regime on earth that these leaders should unite against, it is Israel. They have a history of committing war crimes and attacking their neighbors and imprisoned civilian populations. And considering they also have a history of attacking their allies (Lavon Affair, USS Liberty, 9/11, and many more), the world should be most fearful of Israel possessing nukes, not Iran. These leaders are simply further exposing themselves as zionist shills when they pretend to me worried of Iran's nuclear program and remain COMPLETELY silent of Israel's numerous nuclear bombs.
0
sabiwabi
First of all, the Manhattan Project did not save lives, it killed many. Second, most of the scientists being Jewish, whether true or not, is irrelevant. What does being Jewish have to do with it?
Notice that I did not write "the Jews" or "the Jewish regime".
0
sabiwabi
Considering that Iran: has a very long history as a peaceful nation, is completely within their NPT rights to do what they are doing, and allows inspections, there is no reason to suspect they are building nuclear bombs. And there is no evidence to suggest otherwise.
0
kinniku
The accusations are based in fact. Baseless accusations would be like when you falsely claimed Hitler and top Nazis were Jewish...In addition, if you would read my statements again, you will see that I was not attempting to provide an excuse for attacking Iran. I was explaining why Israel would not want their security details made public.
Ummm...my logic is not strange at all. (Thanks for again copying my writing, flattery is the best form of praise!)We are not talking about 'some people'. We are talking about the leader of a country openly suggesting that another country should be wiped from the face of the earth. It certainly can easily extrapolated that this is a threat and that said threat could be followed up with action either directly on the part of the country (which I would highly doubt, BTW) or by proxy. However, be careful not to pull your mustache off with all that sinister 'deception' talk, okay?
Rest assured, President Ahadinejad gets equal attention by western leaders.In fact, he might want to consider trying to receive a bit less attention.
Yes, I saw what you wrote. However, as I correctly indicated earlier, since you still haven't decided whether the Nazis were good or bad, I hardly think you are in a position to decide which countries world leaders should or should not unite against.
Yes, after they have been attacked. Funny that, huh? Maybe people should consider not attacking them anymore.
Sorry, I still have your claim that Hitler probably was not such a bad guy ringing in my ears. So, I doubt very many civilized people would want to take your claims seriously.
Ummm...again, in all these years Israel has never used nuclear weapons, even when it looked as though they would be run over in the Yom Kippur War. So, again, I doubt many logical people would take your claims seriously. After all, you also claimed the moonwalk was faked...
Yes, EVERYONE you disagree with is a 'shill'. Is that your new word for the day? Today's sabiwabi post is brought to us by the word 'shill'. Anyway, since you have express continuing 'worry' (obsession) with 'Jews controlling Western leaders and media' again, it is hard to take you seriously. Maybe if Iran and Israel would just tone down their rhetoric and take part in a real attempt at Middle East peace, none of them would need to think about having nuclear weapons. Then again, when they both have extremist cheerleaders (like yourself) why should they?
0
sabiwabi
kinniku,
That post was not directed at you, it was a reply to 4thestatedotcom, or is that another ID you're using.
Although you bring this up all the time, that is not what I claimed. Making stuff up again? I (and probably others too) noticed that you continue to bring up Hitler and the Nazis when you have nothing intelligent to counteract my points, it ain't working.
Yes, I know you still pretend to believe that Israel always attacks in self defense, like when they tried to sink the USS Liberty. Or in January, when they intentionally bombed a UN school that was known to be used as a civilian shelter; and they deceptively provided a 2-year old video (prior to it being UN-occupied) showing some rocket-firing from the area. The list goes on and on, and you continue to defend this regime. You're constantly repeating the excuses the Israelis provide as if they were facts, stop pretending to be so naive, we all know you don't really believe what you're writing.
0
kinniku
sabiwabi,
Now, I am confused...why would you post something to someone else in response to something I wrote that you quoted from my post directly? I was paraphrasing SuperLib, I believe. However what you quoted was from my post. I wrote 'Iran does have a history of attacking others by proxy in Israel' and you quoted it. You also wrote other quotes of mine in the same post of yours. So, of course, I assumed you were directing your response to me. Maybe you should dedicate a post to one person instead of mixing them up.
Umm...yes, did and and have done several times...check for yourself.
LOL! Nah, making stuff up would be something like when you claimed Fox News owned Aljazeera or that Ari Fleicher was an ordained rabbi. Now, that is making stuff up. I only deal in facts thanks.
I am sorry your confusion and your still having trouble deciding whether the Nazis were good or bad is inconvenient for you. However, it does show that you really do not have the ability to accurately assertain what kind of 'regime' would be 'evil'. It is as simple as that.
I will never say Israel always acts correctly and I will admit there are many blemishes on Israel even during the heat of battle. However, as far as the wars Israel has been involved in, yes, they were on the defensive regardless of your attempts to say otherwise.
Sorry, given your ability and willingness to bend the truth as you see fit, I will say that I do not believe you at this point.
I believe what I am writing. Don't you? What a strange thing to write.
Awww. Do you want a cookie for writing like a 'big boy' for a change? Please, you have continuously complained about the religion (Jewish) of various people in various news stories as recently as the one about UNESCO. You have been open in your complaint of what you claim is Jews controlling Western governments and media and have gone so far as to say their are too many Jews in certain parts of countries governments, ie Federal Reserve.
Iran and Israel need to step away from the brink and both work towards peace. It will be difficult to ignore the voices of extremism both it would be worth it.
0
kinniku
Actually, as to my first paragraph, maybe I am also confused...Rechecking the above discussion I see you wrote, 'IF there is one regime on earth that should not have nuclear weapons' to me and then repeated it a coupleof time to me and to someone else. Although, you might have been directing that post to someone else, I was indicating that I and probably anyone reading had already saw what you wrote already. I hope that clears up my part of the confusion.
0
SuperLib
Only a handful of people in the entire world think Iran isn't doing this all for nuclear weapons. Just like only a handful of people in the world think the holocaust was fabricated. Just like only a handful of people in the world think the US government is behind 9/11.
Come to think of it, just about all of your arguments seem to shoot for "me and a handful of people on earth agree..." position. Obviously you crave the attention that absurd positions get you.
0
SuperLib
And away we go...
And as such they have certain obligations to fulfill, which they are not doing.
The reason for the sanctions is Iran's non-cooperation with the IAEA. They've stated on more than several occasions that Iran has been and is withholding information about their nuclear program.
Iran is currently, through proxies, killing people in Lebabon, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Israel. The only group with more open fronts with terrorism is Al Queda.
The NPT permits Iran to not cooperate and withhold information?
Which evidence would that be? The evidence that the IAEA has been allowed to see, or the evidence that Iran has been hiding? I'm guessing you're going to go with the former.
Sabi, you're a man driven by emotion, not logic. Even when cornered with facts that contradict your emotional opinions you still keep swinging. I guess as long as you can say the words no one can open your mind and prove that you know you're lying. My guess is that that's the final layer of protection that you work under.
0
Madverts
sabi,
It's bad enough you taking one of them on - but Super and Kinnuku...
...heh, this 'aint going to be pretty.
0
sabiwabi
Why? What's the big deal? You make it sound like its such a great feat. All they're doing is regurgitating the usual Israeli talking points. Just because so many parrot the same disinfo does not make it true.
It ain't ugly, its just a nuisance.
0
sabiwabi
Them must be big hands desu ne!
You forgot about the handful that don't care whether Iran develops nuclear weapons because the realize Iran is not the problem. Oh, and the handful who want Iran to get nuclear weapons as a counter to the "NWO". And how about the handful who KNOW that 9/11 was carried out by the Mossad, FBI, and neocon zionists enbedded in the US government.
0
kinniku
It must be 'such a feat' as you have not responded to the questions and comments put forth to you. Respond first, then tell everyone easy it was.
Baloney. I have been critical of Israel and I have read SuperLib also being critical of Israel. It is hard to take you seriously in any commentary about Israel because you don't believe the country has a right to exist and your belief is based solely on your clearly shown anti-semitism.
So that why YOU don't care whether Iran develops nuclear weapons. YOU want Iran to get nuclear weapons as a counter to the "NWO" (which we who read your posts know means what you refer to as 'Jewish controlled Western countries and media). YOU falsely and ridiculously claim that 9/11 was carried out by the Mossad, FBI, and neocon zionists enbedded in the US government (you forgot to add ghost, gobblins and witches, they must have slipped your mind).
0
sabiwabi
Baloney indeed. How can any careful reader take you seriously now (not that they ever did...)
No, that is not the way I see it, but nice try.
I'm more one of the "handful that don't care whether Iran develops nuclear weapons because the realize Iran is not the problem."
0
kinniku
Umm...because I was critical of Israel in this very discussion, for one. I have also been critical many times in the past. You see, that is called the truth.
Ummm...Yes, it is the way you see it. You have stated as much too many times to deny it now. Come on, you really don't need me to paste your past comments. You must remember some of what you write.
Yup, and that is one tiiinny handful. In fact, thimble-ful would probably be more accurate.
BTW, you still have not responded to the questions and comments put forth to you. I guess it really is a great feat for you.
0
sabiwabi
Oh and I also forgot the handful who are suspicious at the exaggerated and irrational way the "world community" is reacting to Iran.
0
kinniku
That is also one tiiinnnny handful. On could even say grain of saltful.
I think there are times when Iran overreacts and there are times when others overreact. However, the government of Iran needs to dial down their rhetoric, especially when someone like President Obama seems to have reached out his hand to them and they seem to have bitten it at times.
0
sabiwabi
What is wrong with saying that a country can defend itself when others are saber rattling?
Many say that, but you don't actually believe it do you? It was more like he was reaching out his hand to give Iran a chance to submit and kiss it. President Ahmadinejad made it very clear that Iran will welcome such reaching out if it is sincere; but it seems it more of same.
0
kinniku
Nothing. However, Iran and specifically President Ahmadinejad, might want to consider lessening he 'moronic statement' rattling that has become their standard method of communication.
Sure. Why not? I have seen or read nothing to make me believe otherwise.
Based on what exactly?
President Obama's initial statements certainly seemed sincere. What did you find insincere about them specifically?
Well, I don't know about that. However, Ahmadinejad's moronic statement rattling certain has been more of the same.
0
sabiwabi
I've recently spelled it out quite clearly many times in recent days.
I still don't see what is wrong about saying or showing that you can defend yourself, while others are threatening to attack. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think you have stated that comments from Israel and friends about attacking Iran were moronic. So its fine to threaten to attack another country when they have done nothing wrong, but its moronic to say that you can defend yourself? Hmmm, very interesting desu ne..."
0
kinniku
Sorry, I haven't seen anything like that. Please state your reasons here.
Nothing wrong with it. It is the hot-headed rhetoric accompanying it that I am speaking about.
Which comment specifically are those to which you are referring?
Never said that. However, when a country postures as though they might attack, that is a different story. Maybe Iran should stop posturing.
0
sabiwabi
What exactly do you consider hot-headed. Ahmadinejad's speeches seem quite level-headed to me.
Sorry but the only ones to have postured as though they might attack is Israel, and to a lesser extent the US. Iran has only predicted the dissappearance of the zionist regime, he has never vowed to do it himself. All Iran is doing is saying that it will defend itself if attacked, that is not hot-headed.
Stop pulling my leg, you're getting extremely tiring.
0
kinniku
His statements regarding Israel. They don't help the situation in the Middle East. They are making things worse.
LOL. I am not surprised.
Nope. Iran's president has been on record suggesting another country should not exist. That is a threating posture in any book. I don't recall Israel or the US saying anything like that.
It is completely irresponsible in the least and certainly threatening to suggest that another country should disappear. It certainly is a hot-headed and rash thing to say.
In the time it took you to write that, you could have just spelled out it out again what you say you have been spelling out. Maybe I am not the only one who has seen this bit of 'wisdom'. Why do you assume President Obama was not sincere? Is it a rather simple question. Could you just answer it?
Back to top