Home Home Home
Home
Translation Jobs
Ocultar Paneles
Ingreso de Miembros

Nombre de usuario

Contraseña
Presione para obtener ayuda
Seleccionar el idioma del sitio
ESEspañol
ENEnglish
Foros
Está usted navegando como invitado. Por favor ingrese para tener acceso a más funciones.
Moderadores
Jacek K., Nanna Mercer
Message format
Thread information
Last Activity November 21, 2009 4:02 PM

409 replies
7989 viewings

Búsqueda en el Sitio
Notification

Toggle e-mail notification

XML RSS Feed
Recommend Us
stumbleupon|digg|del.icio.us|reddit|facebook
Legend
Posted Messages:
5000 5000
2000 2000
1000 1000
500 500
100 100
25 25
Colour Coding:
  • Administrator
  • Forum Moderator
  • Registered User
By doubting we come at the truthCicero
Page: 14 5 6 7 8 9 1041
Back Reply
« Thread »
Posted:
July 2, 2009 6:47 PM
Post #179490—in reply to #179444
John Bunch
Expert
1000500100100100
Mother tongue: English
Posts: 1807
Joined: February 1, 2008
Location: United States
 
RE: Situation in Iran
Derek, if you read my post, it said, "if Iran were to fire a WMD". My "plan", would only go into effect if Iran were to have already begun a major war.

But the reality is that Iran has been at war with the U.S. - at a low level - since 1980. Through its support of Hezbollah and through its active infiltration of weapons into Iraq, where U.S. soldiers have been killed, Iran is already at war with the U.S. So the U.S. would - in my view - already be justified in such an action.

BTW, I consider my "plan" to be far more humane than to hit Iran with the U.S. Air Force and Navy, if they should launch a WMD, for instance, at Israel or our troops in Iraq. Dropping weapons to freedom fighters seems to me far more humane than dropping bombs and killing innocent civilians to punish the mullahs and the Iranian military.

[Edited by John Bunch on July 2, 2009 7:10 PM]

Reply|Quote|Edit|Delete
Posted:
July 2, 2009 7:11 PM
Post #179491—in reply to #179490
Derek Thornton
TC Master
Mother tongue: English
Joined: April 30, 2007
Location: Germany
 
RE: Situation in Iran

Originally written by John Bunch on July 2, 2009 11:47 PM
Derek, if you read my post, it said, "if Iran were to fire a WMD". My "plan", would only go into effect if Iran were to have already begun a major war. 

What you wrote was:

"If I were president of the U.S., I would say to Amajinedad, behind closed doors, the following: "If you fire a WMD, we will begin dropping crate-loads of assault rifles, anti-tank weapons, and body armor into your country and into those areas of Teheran that are against you, and into those areas of Iran where ethnic minorities live, and then we will see how long you last."

So according to that scenario, you would presumably say the same thing to North Korea and threaten them with the massive delivery by air of "crate-loads of assault rifles, anti-tank weapons, and body armor". I have a feeling that both Iran and North Korea would gratefully accept that offer and duly fire off a WMD for you!

I am still having difficulty picturing 20 thousand "peaceful demonstrators" in hajibs suddenly being equipped with body armor, assault rifles and anti-tank weapons. Would there be a crash course on DVD on how to use all that stuff peacefully or would you just let them try it out in their backyards until they got the hang of it?

Derek

 


Reply|Quote|Edit|Delete
Posted:
July 2, 2009 8:04 PM
Post #179492—in reply to #179491
John Bunch
Expert
1000500100100100
Mother tongue: English
Posts: 1807
Joined: February 1, 2008
Location: United States
 
RE: Situation in Iran
Have you ever seen the movie "Syriana" ? It was based on a book by ex-CIA operative Robert Baer, and it begins with Baer delivering a rocket to what he thinks are freedom fighters, or people who are pro-US, inside Iran. Baer has stated that a good way to get at the mullahs would be to just deliver such weapons into areas of Iran where the ethnic Persians are not the majority (the mullahs really do fear that, by the way). It is not very outlandish. Regarding how to shoot the gun, well, of course there would have to be some coordination on that. I still prefer it to nuking Teheran, which is what some conservatives have suggested, if Iran were to fire a WMD. I just don't want to kill millions of people. I want a revolution, not mass murder.

Or do you think that the better punishment for Iran firing a WMD on Israel would be a stern rebuke from Hillary Clinton and Obama ?

[Edited by John Bunch on July 2, 2009 8:08 PM]

Reply|Quote|Edit|Delete
Posted:
July 2, 2009 8:34 PM
Post #179495—in reply to #179492
Derek Thornton
TC Master
Mother tongue: English
Joined: April 30, 2007
Location: Germany
 
RE: Situation in Iran

Originally written by John Bunch on July 3, 2009 1:04 AM
Or do you think that the better punishment for Iran firing a WMD on Israel would be a stern rebuke from Hillary Clinton and Obama ?

It is no use asking me, I am just as confused as you are. First we are told that they were all peaceful demonstrators who were attacked by brutal paramilitary gangs without provocation and now you want me to believe that they were not peaceful demonstrators at all but brave democratic urban guerillas who would have overthrown the legitimate government of Iran by force if only they had had enough weapons and ammunition, all of which the US Air Force would gladly drop on Tehran residential districts by the crate-load (presumably in the middle of the night) the moment a WMD is launched.

In other reports, I seem to remember being told that the harmless Iraqis would have long ago been at peace if they had not been kept supplied with IEDs by Iran of which Iran appears to have an inexhaustable supply. I have to ask myself then why it is that the fearless unarmed Iranian freedom fighters have not long ago brought the ruthless Iranian dictatorship to its knees with IEDs? They are apparently more effective than assault rifles any day and ought to be readily available in Iran.

Something is missing in all this Western anti-Iranian propaganda that hinders me from accepting it all at face value.

Derek


Reply|Quote|Edit|Delete
Posted:
July 2, 2009 9:23 PM
Post #179496—in reply to #179495
John Bunch
Expert
1000500100100100
Mother tongue: English
Posts: 1807
Joined: February 1, 2008
Location: United States
 
RE: Situation in Iran
When the Jews got guns, they started shooting back at the Nazis (Warsaw Ghetto, 1944). Unarmed people who suddenly get guns can suddenly start to fight back, particularly when the army they are fighting is "engaged elsewhere".

World history is full of some army dumping a load of guns for "friends" somewhere. The Brits did it, the Russians did it, the Americans did it, the French do it (in Africa), etc [the "gentlemanly way to do it is to write a check, which then gets turned into guns]).

It is not as far-out as you suppose. How do you think for instance that Castro took power in Cuba ? Do you think he petitioned his way into Havana, or did he do it using truckloads of guys with guns, and those guns came from "somewhere". Ditto every revolution everywhere (usually backed by the then-USSR or China). We Americans toppled the world's greatest military power -at the time in 1776 - with bands of guys who picked up guns. What do you think might have happened at Tianemin Square, if you had dropped a few AK-47s into the mix ? Would it have been such a one-sided massacre ? A massacre or holocaust, when you give the victims guns, suddenly is no longer a massacre, but a "civil war".

I bet that the Tutsis in Ruanda in 1994 might have liked to have a box or two of rifles, for instance (as they were being hacked to death by guys with machetes).

And before you get indignant about this position of mine, you might want to go watch that Che Guevara movie, which is 4 hours long, and depicts how Che was basically an arms dealer and distributed guns (and war) all over Africa and Latin America. If it didn't work, people would stop doing it...

[Edited by John Bunch on July 2, 2009 9:29 PM]

Reply|Quote|Edit|Delete
Posted:
July 3, 2009 3:51 AM
Post #179499—in reply to #179496
Jacek K.
TC Master
Mother tongue: Polish
Joined: February 18, 2003
Location: Poland
 
RE: OT

Originally written by John Bunch on July 3, 2009 3:23 AM

When the Jews got guns, they started shooting back at the Nazis (Warsaw Ghetto, 1944).

Poland's capital was the site of not one but two of the major uprisings against German power during World War II: the ghetto uprising of Warsaw Jews in 1943, after which the ghetto was leveled; and the Warsaw Uprising of the Polish Home Army in 1944, after which the rest of the city was destroyed. These two central examples of resistance and mass killing were confused in the German mass media in August 1994, 1999, and 2004, on all the recent five-year anniversaries of the Warsaw Uprising of 1944, and will be again in August 2009. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/22875



[Edited by Jacek K. on July 3, 2009 3:52 AM]

Reply|Quote|Edit|Delete
Posted:
July 3, 2009 4:29 AM
Post #179501—in reply to #179499
Derek Thornton
TC Master
Mother tongue: English
Joined: April 30, 2007
Location: Germany
 
RE: OT

Originally written by Jacek K. on July 3, 2009 8:51 AM
These two central examples of resistance and mass killing were confused in the German mass media in August 1994, 1999, and 2004, on all the recent five-year anniversaries of the Warsaw Uprising of 1944, and will be again in August 2009. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/22875 

The message contained in that article, Jacek, appears to me to be that in any situation in which several crimes against humanity are taking place concurrently, if you are going to get killed in one of them and don't want to be forgotten then arrange to be killed in the worst one because the mass media cannot handle more than one crime against humanity at a time.

It also occurs to me that the Allied strategy of reducing all the major German cities to rubble by bombing them was fatally flawed. If instead of dropping bombs, the Allies had dropped assault rifles, anti-tank weapons and body armor by the crate-load as described in the Bunch Plan then the entire German population, deprived of weapons by the Nazis, would have been able to rise up and sweep Hitler and the Nazis out of power.

So that was the problem then in World War II Germany, there weren't enough weapons available for a popular uprising! Why didn't I see that before?

Derek

 


Reply|Quote|Edit|Delete
Posted:
July 3, 2009 4:36 AM
Post #179502—in reply to #179501
Jacek K.
TC Master
Mother tongue: Polish
Joined: February 18, 2003
Location: Poland
 
RE: OT

Originally written by Derek Thornton on July 3, 2009 10:29 AM

the mass media cannot handle more than one crime against humanity at a time.

Which brings us back to Michael Jackson's death, an undoubted God's crime against humanity, which eclipsed what was going on in Iran. Says http://rothkopf.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/06/29/how_michael_jackson_answered_the_ayatollahs_prayers:

[Michal Jackson] was no hero. He was certainly no one to be celebrating. Unless of course, you were an ayatollah. Because one of the truly transcendental ironies of recent history has to be the fact that a symbol of the worst sort of Western spiritual and social corruption...celebrity worship, drug culture, financial excess, debauchery...ended up providing just the distraction that the keepers of the Islamic Revolution's flame in Tehran needed to direct the world's attention away from their abuses of their own people. 

In an instant, the really important story of tens of millions struggling to be heard in Iran was swept off the air by the death of a 50 year old accused pedophile in America. CNN, which had been congratulating itself daily for bringing the "green revolution" in Iran to the world as only it could in an instant tossed its news judgment out the window and started offering 24/7 retrospectives on how Michael Jackson chose the red leather jacket he wore in the
">"Thriller" video
.  It was an appalling, cheap and cynical programming choice made worse by the fact that other major stories...from the Congress passing the landmark Waxman-Markey climate legislation to the coup in Honduras...were left to play the role only of journalistic spackle, filling in the cracks between paeans to a man who spent the last twenty years shocking the world with his unhinged depravity.



[Edited by Jacek K. on July 3, 2009 6:07 AM]

Reply|Quote|Edit|Delete
Posted:
July 3, 2009 4:40 AM
Post #179503—in reply to #179496
Liliana Boladz-Nekipelov
Expert
2000500100100100100
Mother tongues: Polish, English
Posts: 2907
Joined: September 13, 2008
Location: United States
 
RE: OT

Originally written by John Bunch on July 2, 2009 9:23 PM When the Jews got guns, they started shooting back at the Nazis (Warsaw Ghetto, 1944). Unarmed people who suddenly get guns can suddenly start to fight back, particularly when the army they are fighting is "engaged elsewhere".

 A massacre or holocaust, when you give the victims guns, suddenly is no longer a massacre, but a "civil war"

Do you think that civil war is such a great thing? Arent't there other ways to help the nations.
Did the so called help in Warsaw help anybody, except that everybody got killed, all the Warsaw dwellers. 2/3 of the pre-war Warsaw popullation got killed. What a great help, indeed amazing.

 



[Edited by Jacek K. on July 3, 2009 6:08 AM]

Reply|Quote|Edit|Delete
Posted:
July 3, 2009 5:01 AM
Post #179505—in reply to #179502
Liliana Boladz-Nekipelov
Expert
2000500100100100100
Mother tongues: Polish, English
Posts: 2907
Joined: September 13, 2008
Location: United States
 
RE: OT

Originally written by Jacek K. on July 3, 2009 4:36 AM

Originally written by Derek Thornton on July 3, 2009 10:29 AM

the mass media cannot handle more than one crime against humanity at a time.

_prayers:

[Michal Jackson] was no hero. He was certainly no one to be celebrating. Unless of course, you were an ayatollah. Because one of the truly transcendental ironies of recent history has to be the fact that a symbol of the worst sort of Western spiritual and social corruption...

I do not thing Michael Jackson was a symbol of all the worst in the modern culture: I personally think quite the opposite, regardless of his presumed prescription drug use and all the lies attributed to him by dirty minds of the "moral world" and fortune seekers. In this sense he was just a victim, a scape-goat that the society is looking for, always. He was a great artist and mainly a symbol of eliminating all the boundaries and finding something transcendent in us. He was also a very nice person and even the US police does not believe in all the accusations he was subjected to twice, after carefully examining all the evidence and invading his mention. I think that he was bigger than the awaited Iranian revolution, being a revolution himself. A revolution against prejudice, the source of all evil, in my mind.

 

 



[Edited by Jacek K. on July 3, 2009 6:08 AM]

Reply|Quote|Edit|Delete
Page: 14 5 6 7 8 9 1041
Back Reply
« Thread »
Principal | Foros | Albums | Búsqueda
Series de Artículos Recientes | Hoy | Esta Semana | 25 Principales
Estadísticas del Foro | Quién Está En Línea | Citas Aleatorias
New TC Terms Móvil | Configuraciones del Foro | Ingresar
TranslatorsCafé.com

Seleccionar el idioma del sitio English | Español | Ver más...

Copyright © ANVICA Software Development 2002—2009. Todos los derechos reservados.
Política de Privacidad. Términos y Condiciones de Uso. El uso de este sitio da por hecho la aceptación de estos términos y condiciones por parte del usuario.
Comentarios y sugerencias por correo electrónico a TranslatorsCafe.com webmaster
Directorio de traductores, intérpretes y agencias de traducción.

Excención de Responsabilidad de los Foros: Las opiniones expresadas en los foros son exclusivamente de los autores y no son necesariamente las opiniones del dueño del sitio y/o de los moderadores. Si el lector considera que una publicación le ha ofendido, entonces ella o él debe establecer una queja al moderador del foro. Ésta debe establecerse dentro de las 24 horas, pero por favor, respete el hecho de que el moderador puede estar viviendo en una zona horaria diferente. El uso de los foros significa su acuerdo con la Reglas de Publicación del Foro.