BMW i
Forum for the BMW i3, i4 and i8
BMW i3 BMW i8
BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

  BMW i Forums > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > Off-Topic Discussions Board > Politics/Religion

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      03-26-2015, 08:12 PM   #23
Cdubb
Second Lieutenant
Cdubb's Avatar
United_States
9
Rep
212
Posts

Drives: E90 335i
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: San Diego, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2007 BMW 335i  [0.00]
2006 BMW 650i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by KlausPA View Post
Yeah because the Holy Bible is full of peace and flying little ponies shooting rainbows and glitter out of their asses. There is no stoning to death, burning, raping and slavery.
islam is the only one of the 3 main religions (christianity, islam, judaism) that hasn't gone through a reformation.
__________________
2007 335i SEDAN || MONACO BLUE || JB4 || CATLESS DPS || DCI || CHARGE PIPE || TIAL BOV || E90 PERF. SPOILER LIP || JOSH AVERY DIFFUSER ||
Appreciate 0
      03-26-2015, 08:17 PM   #24
Cdubb
Second Lieutenant
Cdubb's Avatar
United_States
9
Rep
212
Posts

Drives: E90 335i
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: San Diego, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2007 BMW 335i  [0.00]
2006 BMW 650i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by KlausPA View Post
If you need religion to have morals then I'm petrified of people like you....
dont twist my words, i didn't say that. i am saying however there would be a huge negative impact on people's morals without religion. religious people (84% of the world population) do the right thing so they can be rewarded in the afterlife. still waiting on a persuasive argument.
__________________
2007 335i SEDAN || MONACO BLUE || JB4 || CATLESS DPS || DCI || CHARGE PIPE || TIAL BOV || E90 PERF. SPOILER LIP || JOSH AVERY DIFFUSER ||
Appreciate 0
      03-27-2015, 06:18 AM   #25
KlausPA
Lieutenant
KlausPA's Avatar
194
Rep
443
Posts

Drives: Blue overpriced POS
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: York, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalko43 View Post
The Bible, especially the old testament, does contain a lot of the violence that you mentioned; most Christians won't dispute that. But Christianity (ie belief in the teachings of Christ) does not espouse any of those things, and I'd hope that you are smart enough to understand that.
Right... I forgot about that. I guess the Old Testament doesn't really count. At least that is what Matthew 5:17 says "Don't think that I came to destroy the law of the prophets. I didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill".

I could sit here and point a bunch of excerpts from the New Testament that would make anyone facepalm.
Appreciate 0
      03-27-2015, 06:21 AM   #26
KlausPA
Lieutenant
KlausPA's Avatar
194
Rep
443
Posts

Drives: Blue overpriced POS
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: York, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cdubb View Post
islam is the only one of the 3 main religions (christianity, islam, judaism) that hasn't gone through a reformation.
This is pretty much what I get from your statement: "Islam is horrible because is to old and antiquated, it has to change"

So I guess that Islam need to be less religious to be less atrocious? Wouldn't that make a Muslim less religious?
Appreciate 0
      03-27-2015, 06:24 AM   #27
KlausPA
Lieutenant
KlausPA's Avatar
194
Rep
443
Posts

Drives: Blue overpriced POS
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: York, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cdubb View Post
dont twist my words, i didn't say that. i am saying however there would be a huge negative impact on people's morals without religion. religious people (84% of the world population) do the right thing so they can be rewarded in the afterlife. still waiting on a persuasive argument.
That's exactly what I got from your original statement... 84% of the world population is doing the right thing because they fear Good and hell and want to go to heaven, not because it feels like it is the right thing to do without any kind of reward.

That to me is plain wrong.
Appreciate 0
      03-27-2015, 06:24 AM   #28
Efthreeoh
Lieutenant General
United_States
6300
Rep
13,874
Posts

Drives: E90 & Z4 Coupe
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MARLAND

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TS135i View Post
I was unfortunate enough to hear approx 80% of his speech, I can only imagine most networks would have had to edit out some of it for news clips. Obama was diplomatic in his response regarding the speech, the look on his face told the story.
LOL. Dude, a few weeks ago O'Bama released classified information regarding Israel's nuclear capabilities from a 1987 classified report on the nuclear capabilities of the NATO nations, just because O'Bama is a baby-child who doesn't like playing with the other kids.
__________________
A manual transmission can be set to "comfort", "sport", and "track" modes simply by the technique and speed at which you shift it; it doesn't need "modes", modes are for manumatics that try to behave like a real 3-pedal manual transmission. If you can money-shift it, it's a manual transmission.
Appreciate 0
      03-27-2015, 10:18 AM   #29
Dalko43
Captain
166
Rep
894
Posts

Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by KlausPA View Post
Right... I forgot about that. I guess the Old Testament doesn't really count. At least that is what Matthew 5:17 says "Don't think that I came to destroy the law of the prophets. I didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill".

I could sit here and point a bunch of excerpts from the New Testament that would make anyone facepalm.
Prophets like Jesus and Moses, among others.

Laws like the Ten Commandments and Judaic customs.

There is a lot of ambiguity in the bible, which many would argue was intentional. But the emphasis by Christ and the Christians who followed him was not on dogmatic adherence to archaic rituals, including some of those that were outlined in the old Testament, but rather on creating an open and accepting community.

Forgiving those who killed him, washing the feet of beggars and lepers, saving prostitutes from mob justice...these were the among the main principles taught by Christ and were novel concepts during his time.

The Old Testament provides a context for the New Testament..Christianity has its roots in Judaism. I've never had a literal interpretation of many stories in the Bible (Noah's ark, Jonah and the Whale, ect.) and I treat some of the older, more outdated proclamations and laws of the old testament in a similar fashion...these laws are more a reflection of Judaic and global customs than anything else.

Most Christians have a similar view of the Bible. Jesus didn't preach to his followers that they should "burn witches, persecute homosexuals, wage religious war." And as a result, most Christians don't believe in such practices.

So if you want to make the amateurish assessment that the entirety of modern Christianity must literally interpret and adhere to every single archaic passage in the Bible...fine go ahead...just know that your assessment has nothing to do with reality.
__________________
Current: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Sold: 2013 BMW 335is Coupe
Appreciate 1
      03-27-2015, 04:07 PM   #30
TS135i
piggy in the mirror
Australia
40
Rep
596
Posts

Drives: 2013 6MT 135i
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia

iTrader: (0)

To add to the above post, the Indian scriptures like the Vedas, Gita etc predate the Old testament. The priest class was originally from India known as Brahmans. You will find similar stories in the Vedas, as in Moses put in a basket floating down the Nile... in the Indian scriptures, "Krishna floating down the Ganges on a pipal leaf", the story is almost identical to Moses's except with an Indian content, do we just put it down to a coincidence?
__________________
135i Coupe N55 PPK+JB4
X3 30d LCI
Appreciate 0
      03-28-2015, 08:45 AM   #31
KlausPA
Lieutenant
KlausPA's Avatar
194
Rep
443
Posts

Drives: Blue overpriced POS
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: York, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalko43
Quote:
Originally Posted by KlausPA View Post
Right... I forgot about that. I guess the Old Testament doesn't really count. At least that is what Matthew 5:17 says "Don't think that I came to destroy the law of the prophets. I didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill".

I could sit here and point a bunch of excerpts from the New Testament that would make anyone facepalm.
Prophets like Jesus and Moses, among others.

Laws like the Ten Commandments and Judaic customs.

There is a lot of ambiguity in the bible, which many would argue was intentional. But the emphasis by Christ and the Christians who followed him was not on dogmatic adherence to archaic rituals, including some of those that were outlined in the old Testament, but rather on creating an open and accepting community.

Forgiving those who killed him, washing the feet of beggars and lepers, saving prostitutes from mob justice...these were the among the main principles taught by Christ and were novel concepts during his time.

The Old Testament provides a context for the New Testament..Christianity has its roots in Judaism. I've never had a literal interpretation of many stories in the Bible (Noah's ark, Jonah and the Whale, ect.) and I treat some of the older, more outdated proclamations and laws of the old testament in a similar fashion...these laws are more a reflection of Judaic and global customs than anything else.

Most Christians have a similar view of the Bible. Jesus didn't preach to his followers that they should "burn witches, persecute homosexuals, wage religious war." And as a result, most Christians don't believe in such practices.

So if you want to make the amateurish assessment that the entirety of modern Christianity must literally interpret and adhere to every single archaic passage in the Bible...fine go ahead...just know that your assessment has nothing to do with reality.
do you believe in God?
Appreciate 0
      03-28-2015, 02:18 PM   #32
Cdubb
Second Lieutenant
Cdubb's Avatar
United_States
9
Rep
212
Posts

Drives: E90 335i
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: San Diego, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2007 BMW 335i  [0.00]
2006 BMW 650i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by KlausPA View Post
This is pretty much what I get from your statement: "Islam is horrible because is to old and antiquated, it has to change"

So I guess that Islam need to be less religious to be less atrocious? Wouldn't that make a Muslim less religious?
once again you are misinterpreting what i'm saying. christianity and judaism were not less religious after reformation. they just didn't take the bible's text literally. if you are too simple-minded to understand what i'm trying to say, read "heretic" by Ayaan Hirsi Ali. she was born in Somalia as a muslim and she knows the religion has to change.
__________________
2007 335i SEDAN || MONACO BLUE || JB4 || CATLESS DPS || DCI || CHARGE PIPE || TIAL BOV || E90 PERF. SPOILER LIP || JOSH AVERY DIFFUSER ||
Appreciate 0
      03-28-2015, 08:21 PM   #33
KlausPA
Lieutenant
KlausPA's Avatar
194
Rep
443
Posts

Drives: Blue overpriced POS
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: York, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cdubb
Quote:
Originally Posted by KlausPA View Post
This is pretty much what I get from your statement: "Islam is horrible because is to old and antiquated, it has to change"

So I guess that Islam need to be less religious to be less atrocious? Wouldn't that make a Muslim less religious?
once again you are misinterpreting what i'm saying. christianity and judaism were not less religious after reformation. they just didn't take the bible's text literally. if you are too simple-minded to understand what i'm trying to say, read "heretic" by Ayaan Hirsi Ali. she was born in Somalia as a muslim and she knows the religion has to change.
so why did your religion get reformed?
Appreciate 0
      03-29-2015, 12:02 PM   #34
kmarei
Major General
kmarei's Avatar
Egypt
365
Rep
6,740
Posts

Drives: 2015 Alfa Romeo 4C LE
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA

iTrader: (33)

Garage List
I honestly would not mind iran getting nukes
I think it would bring much needed balance to the Middle East
The fact is Israel disregards most international runs and laws, because they know their sugar daddy (USA) will veto anything remotely critical of them
And they know that militarily then can out watch any country around the
When iran gets nukes, that advantage is no longer there

You'd be surprised how people or countries, become much more likely to compromise when they don't have a power advantage

And let's be realistic
Iran won't nuke Israel if they know that Israel will fire back before the Iranian missiles have even arrived in Israel

For the older readers here, you wil think of MAD
Mutually assured destruction
Worked in the Cold War, so I see no reason why it won't work between Israel and Iran
__________________
Appreciate 0
      03-29-2015, 04:41 PM   #35
Holshot
Private First Class
United_States
24
Rep
130
Posts

Drives: '11 BMW 335is
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Baltimore, MD

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post
I honestly would not mind iran getting nukes
I think it would bring much needed balance to the Middle East
The fact is Israel disregards most international runs and laws, because they know their sugar daddy (USA) will veto anything remotely critical of them
And they know that militarily then can out watch any country around the
When iran gets nukes, that advantage is no longer there

You'd be surprised how people or countries, become much more likely to compromise when they don't have a power advantage

And let's be realistic
Iran won't nuke Israel if they know that Israel will fire back before the Iranian missiles have even arrived in Israel

For the older readers here, you wil think of MAD
Mutually assured destruction
Worked in the Cold War, so I see no reason why it won't work between Israel and Iran

This statement must be a joke... It has to be, because anyone with even the slightest bit of intelligence could not possibly think that Iran of all Mid East countries would be a good thing to aquire nuclear arms. You are either a far left progressive loon or a terror sympathizer. Then again aren't both of them one in the same...? you do see how Iran just helped the Houthi de-stabilize Yemen, the so called foreign policy achievement of what big O touts as his crowning foreign policy and what we should be proud of with him at the helm. Iran wants control and if they act the way they do now without nukes how do you suppose they will act when they now have real balls to back up their rhetoric?

It's foolish people like you who actually are running things in DC which is terrifying. How could it be benificial for the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world to get their hands on nukes? What it will do is cause a nuclear arms race throughout the entire Mid East. So let me get this straight, let's give everyone nukes so they feel better about themselves and feel like they're exceptional. Got to love the liberal mentality that everyone deserves a trophy ideology and lets apply that to foreign policy now. My god I feel like I'm living in the twilight zone.

And we all know how stable those governments are so please tell me what happens when one of those governments falls and then say one of those reasonable groups like say ISIS, AL Queda, Boko Haram, Hezbollah, Hammas, ect... Get their hands on them? Do you think you can actually have a conversation like normal human beings do? No, because they are not human. It would be an insult to call them animals, so I won't do that either or PETA might get offended.

And if you think that M.A.D is a deterrent from actually using them you're also living in a dream world. The big difference between them having nukes and the Russians during the Cold War is the Russians nor the western powers wanted to die. That meant with all the pea-cocking that both powers did in the end we both wanted to survive and calmer heads prevailed. With those maniacs over there, they welcome death. The want that as to fulfill the "prophecy" and want to go to heaven where Allah is waiting for them and 72 virgins, lol... How stupid can people be...
Appreciate 0
      03-30-2015, 10:57 AM   #36
Dalko43
Captain
166
Rep
894
Posts

Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post
I honestly would not mind iran getting nukes
I think it would bring much needed balance to the Middle East
It would bring a nuclear arms race to the Middle East. It is no secret that Saudia Arabia, among others, has intentions to build their own nuclear weapons program if Iran gets nukes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post
The fact is Israel disregards most international runs and laws, because they know their sugar daddy (USA) will veto anything remotely critical of them
And they know that militarily then can out watch any country around the
When iran gets nukes, that advantage is no longer there
You'd be surprised how people or countries, become much more likely to compromise when they don't have a power advantage
How does Israel violate most international rules?

And how does Iran having nukes make Israel more willing to compromise and on what issues?

The problem with your argument is that Israel has never threatened to destroy another country, despite its many conflicts with its Arab neighbors. Iran's religious leadership and its Shia proxies in other countries (like Hezbollah), on the other hand, have literally said they want Israel to be destroyed

http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/23/ir...s-destruction/

So it's perfectly logical to have some skepticism of a nuclear-armed Iran.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post
And let's be realistic
Iran won't nuke Israel if they know that Israel will fire back before the Iranian missiles have even arrived in Israel

For the older readers here, you wil think of MAD
Mutually assured destruction
Okay, let's be realistic. When Iran got involved in previous conflicts, it didn't engage in direct combat (with the exception of Iran-Iraq war); rather it trained and led proxy fighting forces (Hezbollah, religious militias in Iraq and Yemen, ect.). Iran has a history of sponsoring terrorist groups across the globe.

So I agree Iran is very unlikely to launch a nuclear-armed missile at a rival nation, but I'm have no such confidence with the actions of its' numerous proxies and terrorist groups across the world.

Mutually Assured Destruction only works if there rival nation to respond against...how do you respond against a terrorist or non-state actor?

If New York city or Tel Aviv were to be nuked by Iranian missiles, Tehran or some Iranian installation could be nuked in return. How do you go about nuking Hezbollah when they set off a dirty bomb in Jerusalem or Beruit?
__________________
Current: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Sold: 2013 BMW 335is Coupe

Last edited by Dalko43; 03-30-2015 at 11:15 AM..
Appreciate 0
      03-30-2015, 11:44 AM   #37
bkM3
Captain
34
Rep
641
Posts

Drives: 2013 BMW 528xi Black/Black
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Brooklyn

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holshot View Post




And if you think that M.A.D is a deterrent from actually using them you're also living in a dream world. The big difference between them having nukes and the Russians during the Cold War is the Russians nor the western powers wanted to die. That meant with all the pea-cocking that both powers did in the end we both wanted to survive and calmer heads prevailed. With those maniacs over there, they welcome death. The want that as to fulfill the "prophecy" and want to go to heaven where Allah is waiting for them and 72 virgins, lol... How stupid can people be...

nailed it right on the head. was going to post the same same exact thing.

how can you trust somebody with nukes when they dont care if their own people die?
Appreciate 0
      03-30-2015, 02:57 PM   #38
kmarei
Major General
kmarei's Avatar
Egypt
365
Rep
6,740
Posts

Drives: 2015 Alfa Romeo 4C LE
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA

iTrader: (33)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalko43 View Post
It would bring a nuclear arms race to the Middle East. It is no secret that Saudia Arabia, among others, has intentions to build their own nuclear weapons program if Iran gets nukes.



How does Israel violate most international rules?

And how does Iran having nukes make Israel more willing to compromise and on what issues?

The problem with your argument is that Israel has never threatened to destroy another country, despite its many conflicts with its Arab neighbors. Iran's religious leadership and its Shia proxies in other countries (like Hezbollah), on the other hand, have literally said they want Israel to be destroyed

http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/23/ir...s-destruction/

So it's perfectly logical to have some skepticism of a nuclear-armed Iran.



Okay, let's be realistic. When Iran got involved in previous conflicts, it didn't engage in direct combat (with the exception of Iran-Iraq war); rather it trained and led proxy fighting forces (Hezbollah, religious militias in Iraq and Yemen, ect.). Iran has a history of sponsoring terrorist groups across the globe.

So I agree Iran is very unlikely to launch a nuclear-armed missile at a rival nation, but I'm have no such confidence with the actions of its' numerous proxies and terrorist groups across the world.

Mutually Assured Destruction only works if there rival nation to respond against...how do you respond against a terrorist or non-state actor?

If New York city or Tel Aviv were to be nuked by Iranian missiles, Tehran or some Iranian installation could be nuked in return. How do you go about nuking Hezbollah when they set off a dirty bomb in Jerusalem or Beruit?
the nuclear arms race began the day Israel got nukes
when it comes to the middle east, you have to learn to distinguish what the leaders say
sometimes they say things for foreign ears
and sometimes they say things for their own people
the minute that guy talks badly about Israel, his ratings improve nationally

I do not think iran would fire a nuclear missile at Israel
the only real issue is most Americans have been spoon fed that iran having nuclear missiles is a threat to world peace
when the reality is it's a threat to Israel

fighting proxy battles has nothing to do with having nuclear weapons
because proxy battles by their nature are NOT fought by iran.

people said the same thing when Pakistan got nuclear weapons
"the end of civilization as we know it..." etc etc etc
"now that one Islamic country has it. they will all have it soon..."
when the reality is, nothing has changed
__________________
Appreciate 0
      03-30-2015, 02:58 PM   #39
kmarei
Major General
kmarei's Avatar
Egypt
365
Rep
6,740
Posts

Drives: 2015 Alfa Romeo 4C LE
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA

iTrader: (33)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holshot View Post
This statement must be a joke... It has to be, because anyone with even the slightest bit of intelligence could not possibly think that Iran of all Mid East countries would be a good thing to aquire nuclear arms. You are either a far left progressive loon or a terror sympathizer. Then again aren't both of them one in the same...? you do see how Iran just helped the Houthi de-stabilize Yemen, the so called foreign policy achievement of what big O touts as his crowning foreign policy and what we should be proud of with him at the helm. Iran wants control and if they act the way they do now without nukes how do you suppose they will act when they now have real balls to back up their rhetoric?

It's foolish people like you who actually are running things in DC which is terrifying. How could it be benificial for the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world to get their hands on nukes? What it will do is cause a nuclear arms race throughout the entire Mid East. So let me get this straight, let's give everyone nukes so they feel better about themselves and feel like they're exceptional. Got to love the liberal mentality that everyone deserves a trophy ideology and lets apply that to foreign policy now. My god I feel like I'm living in the twilight zone.

And we all know how stable those governments are so please tell me what happens when one of those governments falls and then say one of those reasonable groups like say ISIS, AL Queda, Boko Haram, Hezbollah, Hammas, ect... Get their hands on them? Do you think you can actually have a conversation like normal human beings do? No, because they are not human. It would be an insult to call them animals, so I won't do that either or PETA might get offended.

And if you think that M.A.D is a deterrent from actually using them you're also living in a dream world. The big difference between them having nukes and the Russians during the Cold War is the Russians nor the western powers wanted to die. That meant with all the pea-cocking that both powers did in the end we both wanted to survive and calmer heads prevailed. With those maniacs over there, they welcome death. The want that as to fulfill the "prophecy" and want to go to heaven where Allah is waiting for them and 72 virgins, lol... How stupid can people be...
fox news viewer I assume?
__________________
Appreciate 1
      03-30-2015, 03:01 PM   #40
kmarei
Major General
kmarei's Avatar
Egypt
365
Rep
6,740
Posts

Drives: 2015 Alfa Romeo 4C LE
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA

iTrader: (33)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkM3 View Post
nailed it right on the head. was going to post the same same exact thing.

how can you trust somebody with nukes when they dont care if their own people die?
and do you think the Russians, Chinese, Indian, and Pakistani governments take care of their own people?
__________________
Appreciate 1
      03-30-2015, 05:11 PM   #41
Dalko43
Captain
166
Rep
894
Posts

Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post
the nuclear arms race began the day Israel got nukes
Well evidently that is not the case. Israel has had nukes for some time now, and no countries in the Middle East, with the exception of Iran and Iraq, have made serious attempts to develop nuclear arms. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, ect. have been perfectly willing to co-exist with a nuclear Israel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post
when it comes to the middle east, you have to learn to distinguish what the leaders say
sometimes they say things for foreign ears
and sometimes they say things for their own people
the minute that guy talks badly about Israel, his ratings improve nationally
I partially agree with the part in bold... yes there is a lot of that going on in the Middle East. But there are some entities (states and non-state actors) that have displayed serious intentions of destroying Israel; and in one instance (Yom Kippur War of 1973), Syria and Egypt very nearly succeeded in doing so. From Israel's perspective, there is no such thing as an idle threat, and given their struggle for survival, can you blame them for having such an attitude?


Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post
I do not think iran would fire a nuclear missile at Israel
the only real issue is most Americans have been spoon fed that iran having nuclear missiles is a threat to world peace
when the reality is it's a threat to Israel
Whether or not Iran would launch nuclear missiles at Israel is not the issue at hand...I agree its unlikely. Whether or not Iran would hand off nuclear materials,weapons, research to non-state actors is the threat...Iran has documented history of supporting religious revolutions and proxy terrorist groups abroad, something you refuse to acknowledge or even discuss. This is not at all far-fetched scenario.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post
fighting proxy battles has nothing to do with having nuclear weapons
because proxy battles by their nature are NOT fought by iran .
You really haven't read a lot about the post-shah Iran, the Revolutionary Guard and Ayatollahs, have you? Iran's foreign policy since the overthrow of the shah has been conducted almost entirely through proxy groups and battles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post
people said the same thing when Pakistan got nuclear weapons
"the end of civilization as we know it..." etc etc etc
"now that one Islamic country has it. they will all have it soon..."
when the reality is, nothing has changed
Pakistan's military has also maintained tight control over who leads the country, and who has access to those nukes, a military/government which by the way receives financial aid from the US (over $10 Billion in the last decade alone) which ensures there is continuity of policy and stability.

http://www.cgdev.org/page/aid-pakistan-numbers

I don't see any such guarantee with Iran and it's foreign policy.
__________________
Current: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Sold: 2013 BMW 335is Coupe
Appreciate 0
      03-30-2015, 08:44 PM   #42
Holshot
Private First Class
United_States
24
Rep
130
Posts

Drives: '11 BMW 335is
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Baltimore, MD

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post
fox news viewer I assume?
Among many, many others... I'm guessing you live and breathe by the word of Al Jazeera, MSNBC and The New York a times. A paper I wouldn't wipe my ass with because my shit has more substance then any of those rags do.
Appreciate 0
      04-02-2015, 10:20 AM   #43
kmarei
Major General
kmarei's Avatar
Egypt
365
Rep
6,740
Posts

Drives: 2015 Alfa Romeo 4C LE
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA

iTrader: (33)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holshot View Post
Among many, many others... I'm guessing you live and breathe by the word of Al Jazeera, MSNBC and The New York a times. A paper I wouldn't wipe my ass with because my shit has more substance then any of those rags do.
not really
first of all I don't trust any news sources coming from the US
because there are NO objective news sources in this country
they are crazy right wingers, or crazy left wingers
nothing in the middle.
I trust the BBC, France 24, and other European news sources.
And I am from Egypt, so I know the culture of the middle east pretty well.


And Al Jazeera US is not that bad, if you only saw the Middle east version
it's much, much worse.

But no I don't trust news sources owned by someone with strong viewpoints that is using the news channel to further his own gains
which rules our fox and Aljazeera

I studied journalism back in college
and I remember one of the key things we learnt was that you had to write the article, and totally detach your own viewpoint.
it's sad that I rarely see that in todays journalism
it's basically write my own viewpoint with a sprinkle of facts
sad
__________________
Appreciate 0
      04-02-2015, 10:36 AM   #44
kmarei
Major General
kmarei's Avatar
Egypt
365
Rep
6,740
Posts

Drives: 2015 Alfa Romeo 4C LE
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA

iTrader: (33)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalko43 View Post
Well evidently that is not the case. Israel has had nukes for some time now, and no countries in the Middle East, with the exception of Iran and Iraq, have made serious attempts to develop nuclear arms. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, ect. have been perfectly willing to co-exist with a nuclear Israel.
Yes and in that time frame Israel has acted like the spoilt brat of the middle east.
avoiding any peace negotiations, meanwhile they are building apartments on land the entire world (except the US probably) agrees does NOT belong to them.
Israel is confident that no country around them is a threat, BECAUSE of their nuclear weapons.
If you're the only one around with a gun, you will very likely be cocky and arrogant, which is what Israel is today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalko43 View Post
I partially agree with the part in bold... yes there is a lot of that going on in the Middle East. But there are some entities (states and non-state actors) that have displayed serious intentions of destroying Israel; and in one instance (Yom Kippur War of 1973), Syria and Egypt very nearly succeeded in doing so. From Israel's perspective, there is no such thing as an idle threat, and given their struggle for survival, can you blame them for having such an attitude?
If Israel had agreed to a 2 state solution a long time ago, they would not be in the situation they are in now.
There is no longer a struggle for survival
there was in the 60's and 70s
but now with the full backing of the US (irrespective of if it's a democrat or republican in power) there is no threat to Israel.
their biggest threats were Egypt and Iraq
Egypt has a peace treaty with them now
and Iraq has been totally destroyed by the US


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalko43 View Post
Whether or not Iran would launch nuclear missiles at Israel is not the issue at hand...I agree its unlikely. Whether or not Iran would hand off nuclear materials,weapons, research to non-state actors is the threat...Iran has documented history of supporting religious revolutions and proxy terrorist groups abroad, something you refuse to acknowledge or even discuss. This is not at all far-fetched scenario.
I personally don't think Iran would pass off info related to nuclear weapons to hammas or any such entity.
I guess we agree to disagree on this one
People said the same thing about north korea
and no info has been passed so far, as far we all know

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalko43 View Post
You really haven't read a lot about the post-shah Iran, the Revolutionary Guard and Ayatollahs, have you? Iran's foreign policy since the overthrow of the shah has been conducted almost entirely through proxy groups and battles.
I haven't read a lot, but I know a little bit about that area of the world
there is a huge difference between arming rebels or trying to overthrow governments, and arming these rebels with nuclear weapons.
giving them funding and rifles
__________________
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:22 AM.




bmw
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST