[QatzelOk]

the majority of those kids were Muslim.. and they were radical (i.e. shooting at cops).

To call the suburban Maghrebans of Paris "Muslim" is to find fault in Islam anywhere you can dig it up.

It's like calling OJ Simpson "Christian" and his murder-non-murder of his wife "Christian violence."

Stop looking at Islam as the reason for any criticism of consumer society and corporatism.

[Oxymoron]

So the bombings in Madrid, London were not done by Muslim radicals?

What about the murder of Van Gogh?

[Rancid]

well played...

OJ was Christian?

[Noelnada]

What about the murder of Van Gogh?

Animal rights activist, mentally disturbed(no joke here).

About London and Madrid, well i don't have a clue, but probably that the involvement of these two nations in imperialistic operations in Iraq have something to do with the terrorist acts more than any God knows what fundamentalist ideology.

OJ was Christian?

Adolf Hitler was Christian and proud.

[dasnd12]

It's funny - when a country is in trouble, who the first country they call for help is? Oh that's right, the murdering government of the U.S.A.

I really feel we should just stop helping - in any way. We send billions of dollars to countires in need - nobody cares - the next time a country is invaded - and we are asked to help - nope - let them eat it - cause if we did help i.e Fance / Europe, South Korea, Kuwait, Bosnia...etc. we are just out there murdering innocent people - so i say F that - let someone else do it.

[Rancid]

I really feel we should just stop helping - in any way.

i agree 100%

[Noelnada]

I really feel we should just stop helping - in any way. We send billions of dollars to countires in need - nobody cares - the next time a country is invaded - and we are asked to help - nope - let them eat it - cause if we did help i.e Fance / Europe, South Korea, Kuwait, Bosnia...etc. we are just out there murdering innocent people - so i say F that - let someone else do it.

Yeah just go F off somewhere else with your GI joes and your navy ships and let the sovereign nations mind their own business.

[Oxymoron]

really feel we should just stop helping - in any way. We send billions of dollars to countires in need - nobody cares - the next time a country is invaded - and we are asked to help - nope - let them eat it - cause if we did help i.e Fance / Europe, South Korea, Kuwait, Bosnia...etc. we are just out there murdering innocent people - so i say F that - let someone else do it.

Greatest first post ever!

[Beren]

By the fall of the British Empire the American Empire naturally inherited its right and duty to ensure the safety of the international waters in the interest of smooth trade at the world-sea. If Iran has a problem with it in the case of the Strait of Hormuz, then Iran must be blamed, because if you look at the map, then you can easily see, that it's obviously obvious, that the Persians have actually nothing to do with the Strait of Hormuz. It is the natural right and duty of the American Empire and its navy to ensure the safety of the Persian Gulf, the Persians can be happy if they are tolerated in the Persian Gulf at all. As a matter of fact it should be renamed and called American Gulf.

[dasnd12]

Yeah just go F off somewhere else with your GI joes and your navy ships and let the sovereign nations mind their own business

Exactly - so when - god forbid - your nation was ever attacked and was unable to hold it's own against the aggressor - dont come calling - because for once the U.S wouldnt answer the plea's for help.

Oh but wait - we would be your best friends then right...sorry i forgot how it works

[Oxymoron]

that the Persians have actually nothing to do with the Strait of Hormuz

No they do not, they are lucky to have an independent nation which was given to them by the British.

[Beren]

You must mix up Iran and State Israel somehow.

[Oxymoron]

Iran was given independence by Britain.

[Beren]

What you say is true only in the case of State Israel: it must be grateful to the UN and the US for its existance and survival. Iran has been a real country since the ancient times and the Iranian Revolution has made it a really independent nation, not the British.

[dasnd12]

Qajar dynasty (1795-1925) and colonial era

By the 17th century, European countries, including Great Britain, Imperial Russia, and France, had already started establishing colonial footholds in the region. Iran as a result lost sovereignty over many of its provinces to these countries via the Treaty of Turkmenchay, the Treaty of Gulistan, and others.

A new era in the History of Persia dawned with the
Constitutional Revolution of Iran against the Shah in the late 19th and early 20th century. The Shah managed to remain in power, granting a limited constitution in 1906 (making the country a constitutional monarchy). The first Majlis (parliament) was convened on October 7, 1906.

The discovery of oil in 1908 by the British in Khuzestan spawned intense renewed interest in Persia by the British Empire (see William Knox D'Arcy and Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, now BP). Control of Persia remained contested between the United Kingdom and Russia, in what became known as The Great Game, and codified in the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, which divided Persia into spheres of influence, regardless of her national sovereignty.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Iran

[Beren]

As far as I can judge the Russians seem to win The Great Game.

[Oxymoron]

which divided Persia into spheres of influence, regardless of her national sovereignty.

Thus controlling it and by the grace of Britian they got their independence back.

[Beren]

In this case India should be grateful to the British for their independence either. Iranians are actually independent since they have made their own revolution and overthrew the Shah. Independence is not only a matter of bald sovereignty. However, the fact that some parts of the country were declared as British or Russian spheres of influence doesn't mean Iran lost its sovereignty.

[Piano Red]

It doesn't matter where they are, Iran is a regional power and has an interest in the region.

Uh...yes it does, very much so. The term international waters means that American ships have every right to be in them as Iranian ships do.

No ifs, ands, buts, or Strawmen is going to change that i'm afraid.

Not a wise move on the Iranians' part.

Unless they think the can actually win.

Which isn't completely out of the realm of fantasy.

Please. Find something better than the wargame where the OPFOR under Van Ripen basically cheated just he could prove his point.

Iran would stand no chance against the USN. That was a fact 20 years ago and it's still one today.

By the fall of the British Empire the American Empire naturally inherited its right and duty to ensure the safety of the international waters in the interest of smooth trade at the world-sea. If Iran has a problem with it in the case of the Strait of Hormuz, then Iran must be blamed, because if you look at the map, then you can easily see, that it's obviously obvious, that the Persians have actually nothing to do with the Strait of Hormuz. It is the natural right and duty of the American Empire and its navy to ensure the safety of the Persian Gulf, the Persians can be happy if they are tolerated in the Persian Gulf at all. As a matter of fact it should be renamed and called American Gulf.

I weep for your brain.

It's rather obvious that you don't know much about international maritime rights. Or how to read maps...

[Beren]

I truly hope President Obama will stop or at least hold in American imperialism.