Total Posts:93|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

A war with Iran

Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 2:34:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Would people here think that the war is justified? Why/Why Not?
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 3:27:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 2:34:26 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
Would people here think that the war is justified? Why/Why Not?:

How the hell can one nation dictate to another sovereign nation that they can't go nuclear? On what basis? And how is having nuclear power tantamount to an act of war?

Should we bomb North Korea because they have nukes? China? Russia?

War with Iran is not justified. The only justification would be if it attacked the U.S., but as of now, the U.S. is provoking Iran. These idiots in Washington are making us all unsafe because of their policies.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 3:28:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Yes it is justified. The American people have asserted that they want to consume more luxuries, and that can only be attained by continuing to wage war on other countries that would resist us consuming resources at a disproportionate rate from the rest of the world. It is nonsensical to think that the American Dream can exist independent of war. So let's draft some more heros and get this shit done because daddy needs a new pair of shoes.
Rob
blackhawk1331
Posts: 4,932
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 3:31:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Depends on who attacks who first. If we attack them, no. If they attack Israel, no. If they attack us, yes.
Because you said it was a waste, numb nuts. - Drafter

So fvck you. :) - TV

Use prima facie correctly or not at all. - Noumena
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 5:29:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Seems fun. We're technically only in one war right now which is too boring for my tastes.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 5:31:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 3:31:56 PM, blackhawk1331 wrote:
Depends on who attacks who first. If we attack them, no. If they attack Israel, no. If they attack us, yes.

If they develop (or obtain the knowledge to develop) nuclear weapons would you say war is justified with them?
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 9:06:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 5:31:07 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 3/6/2012 3:31:56 PM, blackhawk1331 wrote:
Depends on who attacks who first. If we attack them, no. If they attack Israel, no. If they attack us, yes.

If they develop (or obtain the knowledge to develop) nuclear weapons would you say war is justified with them?

Yes. Why?

Better safe, than millions dead, I always say.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 11:24:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 9:06:31 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 3/6/2012 5:31:07 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 3/6/2012 3:31:56 PM, blackhawk1331 wrote:
Depends on who attacks who first. If we attack them, no. If they attack Israel, no. If they attack us, yes.

If they develop (or obtain the knowledge to develop) nuclear weapons would you say war is justified with them?

Yes. Why?

Better safe, than millions dead, I always say.

That's very dangerous reasoning. By "safe" you mean "go to war" and by "millions dead" you mean "they will attack us." That's the type of reasoning that has pretty much destroyed this planet from day one. Congratulations to your Hitler and Stalin-esque disposition!
Rob
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 2:00:20 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Fool: Obviously the idea is not to wait to get attacked or wait untill they makes nukes to fire at you first. If Washington wants to go war its obviously to prevent that possibity in the first place. It is in your best interest to attack on thier soil so they don't even get a chance to start attacking directly on your soil.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 12:14:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
So let's draft some more heros and get this sh*t done because daddy needs a new pair of shoes.:

I literally lol'd...

Sigged.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 12:15:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Yes. Why?

Better safe, than millions dead, I always say.:

Yeah, because as we all know provoking nations always makes us "safer."
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 12:22:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Seriously. As an emperor (in the future, my time machine broke and I'm stuck here while I fix it) I can say that quite simply war works. Sure you kill a few thousand of those other f*ckers, but people back home don't care so much.
War is exciting and profitable!
And it certainly does not make you in any way more like to be attacked. In fact the total opposite! The more nations you invade the more the rest bend over and let you spank them like the naughty girls they are.
Deathbeforedishonour
Posts: 1,058
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 12:25:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Yes, they are a oppressive regime that has violated the human rights of it's people and has been proven to have nuclear power. They are a whole nation of terrorists, if we don't take them down now then Israel will be completely destroyed.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." ~ John 1:1

Matthew 10:22- "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved."
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 1:02:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
@Thad, right until other countries develop a backbone (which most 3rd world countries have) or there's a massive alliance to combat gratuitous war (such as NATO, EU, UN, etc.).

http://debateorg.blogspot.com...

Look at the about page, by the way. Message me to get in on the action.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 1:56:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 12:25:38 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
Yes, they are a oppressive regime that has violated the human rights of it's people and has been proven to have nuclear power. They are a whole nation of terrorists, if we don't take them down now then Israel will be completely destroyed.

The United States is seriously considering military action against Iran for simply the threat that they COULD develop nuclear weapons. Anyone with half a mind knows that Iran would be pretty much obliterated if they dared actually USE nuclear weapons and their leaders realize this.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 2:55:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 1:56:17 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 3/7/2012 12:25:38 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
Yes, they are a oppressive regime that has violated the human rights of it's people and has been proven to have nuclear power. They are a whole nation of terrorists, if we don't take them down now then Israel will be completely destroyed.

The United States is seriously considering military action against Iran for simply the threat that they COULD develop nuclear weapons. Anyone with half a mind knows that Iran would be pretty much obliterated if they dared actually USE nuclear weapons and their leaders realize this.

So, I see, we should ALLOW them to use nukes and kill thousands/millions, and then stop them.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 2:58:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 2:55:36 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 3/7/2012 1:56:17 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 3/7/2012 12:25:38 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
Yes, they are a oppressive regime that has violated the human rights of it's people and has been proven to have nuclear power. They are a whole nation of terrorists, if we don't take them down now then Israel will be completely destroyed.

The United States is seriously considering military action against Iran for simply the threat that they COULD develop nuclear weapons. Anyone with half a mind knows that Iran would be pretty much obliterated if they dared actually USE nuclear weapons and their leaders realize this.

So, I see, we should ALLOW them to use nukes and kill thousands/millions, and then stop them.

*facepalm*
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 4:41:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The problem with Iran having nuclear weapons is that they have a history of giving weapons to terrorist groups, which brings us to the question of why they wouldn't give a nuclear bomb. It's possible, and with Ron Paul's policies I think it would be quite probable too. (I think he wanted to shrink the CIA; not a good idea.)

On the other hand, attacking it with the mere assumption that it not only builds a bomb, but will actually smuggle it, is very risky, and would cost millions of lives either directly or indirectly.

Countries that have had nukes prior to the 90's cannot be compared to Iran. Especially when we are talking about Russia.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 6:11:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 1:02:09 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
@Thad, right until other countries develop a backbone (which most 3rd world countries have) or there's a massive alliance to combat gratuitous war (such as NATO, EU, UN, etc.).

http://debateorg.blogspot.com...

Look at the about page, by the way. Message me to get in on the action.

You sir, are British. Have you no shame? Have you been visiting the French?
How the devil could you not recognize sarcasm?
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 6:21:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
If Iran wasn't so anti-Israel then no...

However, with all of their talk they've made Israel feel unsafe. It's like if your neighbor continuously told you they were going to kill you in their sleep and you knew they were trying to build a gun, you'd feel much better if you stopped them.

I think this is Israel's action to take but I think we also have to back them up if they decide to take it.

Iran with nukes would also be bad because it would provoke nations such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey to seek their own nukes.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 6:25:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 4:41:06 PM, Mirza wrote:
The problem with Iran having nuclear weapons is that they have a history of giving weapons to terrorist groups, which brings us to the question of why they wouldn't give a nuclear bomb. It's possible, and with Ron Paul's policies I think it would be quite probable too. (I think he wanted to shrink the CIA; not a good idea.)

On the other hand, attacking it with the mere assumption that it not only builds a bomb, but will actually smuggle it, is very risky, and would cost millions of lives either directly or indirectly.

Countries that have had nukes prior to the 90's cannot be compared to Iran. Especially when we are talking about Russia.

They wouldn't even have to give them a bomb; a few old uranium pellets would be enough.

Can you imagine a terrorist stuffing a stick of dynamite full of old uranium pellets from a nuclear plant and blowing himself up in a subway or city street? I can. It's not that hard. Dirty bombs would come out of Iran.
MrBrooks
Posts: 831
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 11:16:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I don't think Iran would give nuclear weapons to terrorist groups, especially since not all terrorist groups are pro-Iran. We have to remember that Iran is a Shiite nation, and that many terrorist groups are Sunni fundamentalists. Why would Iran want to cause the proliferation of nuclear weapons among fundamentalist groups? Groups that may view Shiite Persians as infidels worthy of annihilation.

Also we should ask ourselves why Iran would want to take that risk to launch a nuclear attack against the United States. We've been interfering in Iran's affairs since the 50's, and the West has been interfering with Persia/Iran for hundreds of years. We've overthrown their government, coaxed Iraq into starting the devastating Iran-Iraq War, and we've encircled them with US troops and allies. Furthermore we've threatened to invade them if they pursue nuclear power.

Perhaps if we tried to reconcile with Iran, stopped intervening in the Middle East, and didn't make our support for Israel so unconditional we'd be able to make progress with diplomatic talks with Iran. Hardliners run Iran right now, but that's only because of the pressure we're putting on them. If Iran invaded Mexico and Canada, overthrew our government in the 50's, and then threatened to invade us if we didn't give up our nuclear power programs we'd probably flock to hardline neoconservatives to protect us too.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2012 3:12:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 12:25:38 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
Yes, they are a oppressive regime that has violated the human rights of it's people and has been proven to have nuclear power. They are a whole nation of terrorists, if we don't take them down now then Israel will be completely destroyed.

I don't think they signed a human right aggreement, I think its just being forced on them. You do realize this is all religion based.. The blood and death are all on the hands of religion again.

I am sure they have at least 1 person who is not a terrorist.

It very possible that they might not get "completly" destroyed, I am they have to worry about a world reaction.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2012 3:13:21 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 4:41:06 PM, Mirza wrote:
The problem with Iran having nuclear weapons is that they have a history of giving weapons to terrorist groups, which brings us to the question of why they wouldn't give a nuclear bomb. It's possible, and with Ron Paul's policies I think it would be quite probable too. (I think he wanted to shrink the CIA; not a good idea.)

On the other hand, attacking it with the mere assumption that it not only builds a bomb, but will actually smuggle it, is very risky, and would cost millions of lives either directly or indirectly.

Countries that have had nukes prior to the 90's cannot be compared to Iran. Especially when we are talking about Russia.

ITs the RELIGION..
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2012 3:17:59 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
India has nukes but no one cares, because there not so religious.. its fundementast religions that are they problem. They hate america and Israel because of thier monothiest Religions.. Everybody avoids the real problem with every other excuse when it is clear and obvious of what the problem is. YOU don't Fundementalist Muslims having Nukes.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2012 3:22:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
edit. 1.1
India has nukes but no one cares, because there not so religious. Its fundementist religions that are the problem. They hate America and Israel because of their monotheist Fundemtalist Religions.. Everybody avoids the real problem with every other excuse when it is clear and obvious of what the problem is. YOU don't want Fundamentalist Muslims having Nukes.
e.g
"Iran with nukes would also be bad because it would provoke nations such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey to seek their own nukes."
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2012 11:10:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 11:16:21 PM, MrBrooks wrote:
I don't think Iran would give nuclear weapons to terrorist groups, especially since not all terrorist groups are pro-Iran. We have to remember that Iran is a Shiite nation, and that many terrorist groups are Sunni fundamentalists. Why would Iran want to cause the proliferation of nuclear weapons among fundamentalist groups? Groups that may view Shiite Persians as infidels worthy of annihilation.

Also we should ask ourselves why Iran would want to take that risk to launch a nuclear attack against the United States. We've been interfering in Iran's affairs since the 50's, and the West has been interfering with Persia/Iran for hundreds of years. We've overthrown their government, coaxed Iraq into starting the devastating Iran-Iraq War, and we've encircled them with US troops and allies. Furthermore we've threatened to invade them if they pursue nuclear power.

Perhaps if we tried to reconcile with Iran, stopped intervening in the Middle East, and didn't make our support for Israel so unconditional we'd be able to make progress with diplomatic talks with Iran. Hardliners run Iran right now, but that's only because of the pressure we're putting on them. If Iran invaded Mexico and Canada, overthrew our government in the 50's, and then threatened to invade us if we didn't give up our nuclear power programs we'd probably flock to hardline neoconservatives to protect us too.

All of this. We need to try to realize why the power structure of Iran is the way it is. Why do they blame the West for so many of their problems and what has the U.S. done to justify that blame? The problem is that everyone wants to treat the symptom by contribution to what brought on the disease in the first place.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2012 11:52:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/8/2012 3:22:52 AM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
edit. 1.1
India has nukes but no one cares, because there not so religious. Its fundementist religions that are the problem.
India is highly religious, and has many religious groups. There's a lot of violence going on once in a while from all of them. Your argument is based on zero facts.

They hate America and Israel because of their monotheist Fundemtalist Religions..
Untrue. Certain Muslim countries have nothing against America or Israel, simply because American soldiers didn't do anything noticeable there.

Everybody avoids the real problem with every other excuse when it is clear and obvious of what the problem is. YOU don't want Fundamentalist Muslims having Nukes.
e.g
"Iran with nukes would also be bad because it would provoke nations such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey to seek their own nukes."
Pakistan has nuclear weapons, and it has Shari'a as the constitution (theoretically at least). They've never used it nor threatened to use it aggressively against any nation. If Pakistan wanted, it could detonate a little too many nuclear bombs on Israel, but that has never happened, and nothing says it will. The fact is, Iran has bad relations to USA and Israel, hence they threaten one another. (By the way, Ahmadinejad never claimed he would wipe Israel off the map.)

Religion isn't the problem, it's geopolitics mainly. When you vacuum your floor make sure you don't snap the fact list, sir.
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2012 12:14:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Religion isn't the problem, it's geopolitics mainly. When you vacuum your floor make sure you don't snap the fact list, sir.

How can you honestly say this? The promise of heaven and 72 virgins alters incentive schemes drastically. It's a major motivation for suicide bombers and if Iran's leaders are committed to that vision I don't see how we can dismiss Iran as a threat.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2012 12:22:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/8/2012 12:14:18 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
Religion isn't the problem, it's geopolitics mainly. When you vacuum your floor make sure you don't snap the fact list, sir.

How can you honestly say this? The promise of heaven and 72 virgins alters incentive schemes drastically. It's a major motivation for suicide bombers and if Iran's leaders are committed to that vision I don't see how we can dismiss Iran as a threat.
I can honestly say it because I am familiar with psychology, influence of geopolitics, and religion. Concerning psychology, there's a lot more than religion affecting the behaviors of the fundamentalists. If that were not the case, then we'd see all poor Muslims basically blowing themselves up. Why would they not do it rather than being poor and oppressed for their entire lives? Clearly their religion isn't the issue, and commands them not to commit suicide.

Concerning geopolitics, I come from Bosnia where Muslims lived alongside Christians (even Jews) for many ages. Most of their current hatred stems from a war. When they think of non-Muslims in Bosnia, they think of people who raped their daughters, slaughtered their sons, committed genocide, etc. If a Muslim went on a shooting rampage on Serbs, it wouldn't be because of his religion, but because of the history between his people and the Serbs.

And when it comes to religion, your logic is flawed. Sure, if they believe that they will get 72 virgins in Paradise then that's a relief for committing suicide. But that is not the reason why they even want to commit suicide and kill other people in the first place. There's an underlying cause, and that has much more to do with history and geopolitics than religion. Muslims used to be far more religious than now, and they created peaceful countries that lasted for centuries.