Can We Start Calling Iran a Terrorist Nation?

Earlier I asked if we could stop calling America a terrorist nation, and I was overwhelmingly rebuked.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1895730&mesg_id=1895730

Then my question becomes, is Iran a terrorist nation? Plenty of folks here argue they are not, while there seems to be near unanimous opinion that America is. Help me out here.

Just keep repeating "America BAD" and "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" over and over and you will be forgiven.

:sarcasm:

But the notion that Iran should not be labeled terrorist and America should is curious at best.

And if anyone points out the BAD they are evil terrorists.

So. You think GOOD America should bomb and invade Iran.

Look at a map first.

Because I can see where I have stated I thinking bombing and invading Iran is a good idea.......

:eyes:

There are a lot of self-hating Americans on DU.

And hating what your country is doing in your name.

That you do not understand this is utterly unsurprising.

Called the Reagan Administration.

... when he was CEO of Halliburton.

The U.S. practices imperialism on a scale writ large. That entails invasions that result in massive death and destruction. Want to call it state sponsored terrorism? I have no objection to that.

Iran sponsors groups like H'zbollah with funding and weapons as well as other groups. Is it a terrorist nation? That's sloppy.

Summing up either country as a terrorist nation is lazy.

I tire of this can-we-reduce-gigantically-complex-matters-of-life-and-death-into-two-word-sound-bites crap. It's stupid when the media does it. It's stupid when the administration does it. And it's just as stupid when we do it, because we're supposed to know better.

Having an argument about whether the US and Iran are "terrorist nations" is so mind-numbingly pointless, so trivializing of important issues. End rant.

... and he was pretty adamant that, against the will of the people, the government was heavily into financing terror throughout the region.

That said, I'm SO DISTRUSTFUL, FOR GOOD REASON, of our current administration that I don't necessarily believe that they are shipping masses of weapons into Iraq.

I just don't know.

People love propaganda, don't they?

There are no purely evil or purely good countries. It's a false paradigm put forward and
played ad nauseum for the sheeple by the * admin.

the fray on your last thread simply because you yourself did not address all the replies that you received which in my mind you should have if you felt we are not guilty of terroristic acts, now you come out with another one pinpointing Iran?

Could it be your agenda is attempting to find a reason that bombing Iran is just fine and dandy and your hope is that when it occurs the people will rally behind it?

Iran is not our country, it is not up to us to decide for them how they rule their own country nor would we want them having that right in ours, they have yet to attack us, if your so worried about terroristic activities I would suggest you do a bit more research on our country's involvement and speak out against it so it can be curtailed instead of attempting to point at others as being more so.

...everyone who doesn't agree with you of wanting to bomb Iran. It's every bit as juvenile as this flap over Nutwad's speech.

I think that terrorism is a weak and fake concept forged to ostracize weaker forms of power.

But if you insist to use "terrorism" : Yes Iran is a terrorist nation, it supports violent groups that kill and terrorize. But US is worse, it supports various violent groups and commit itself great deals of violence on populations to achieve its political goals. Beside the communist chinese regime which terrorized and killed millions of its own population (which is very very large), i don't see any other regime in the world beside US regime managing to kill millions, crush entire nations, and submit them into total fear.

do you think this actually helps anything? can you effectively use diplomacy once you have labelled a country 'terrorist'?

this jingoistic crap has got to stop.

the "axis of evil" including Iran. Stupid man.

how are we defining terrorism?

the number of civilians killed by a nation?

the number of unprovoked attacks on other sovereign nations?

what is the definition we are using to determine whether iran or united states is a terrorist nation?

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

While claiming that America isn't? Judging by the number of imperial wars, and the body count, I'd say that the US wins:shrug:

I didn't get that memo.

I think that Iraq can be a terrorist state and so can America. There is room on the terrorist bandwagon for EVERYBODY!!

What has Iran done? Has it carried out any terrorist attacks? What's the body count?

What's the case for Iraq being labeled as such? Most sane agencies and press didn't find any connection between known terrorist groups and Iraq:shrug:

Simply saying that they're a terrorist state doesn't necessarily make them one. You've got to make a case for it.

:thumbsup:

People provided examples of why they disagreed with you on the other thread. Perhaps you could list the reasons that you want to call Iran a terrorist nation.

I have read that the IRG supplies terrorists with weapons. Does Iran the state support them? (I honestly don't know)

I have read is in the same territory as 'some people say'. And please don't use neocons, Lieberman or Wurmser types to make the case.

Now, some seem to be saying terror is an inexact concept, a meaningless label. Yet, in the other thread, almost all replied that America is a terrorist nation, without qualification or concerns about the term being imprecise.

that you chose to ignore them and not address them and then begin this thread without giving a bit of insight into your reasons why you believe Iran to be a terrorist nation leaves me to believe only one thing, your attempting to exactly what the msm has been doing lately and that of course is trying to find reasons why it will be okay to attack Iran...

You wish to label terrorism than do so, tell us exactly what you think and why, many people have already done that for you, you have not done the same, you have yet to do anything really regarding the questions you have asked the last two days.

Again, what is your objective?

ie: killing civilians is the act of a terrorist nation. AMerica is therefore not a terrorist nation: This is a big fat lie.

If civilians were collateral damage when striking military targets?

dont blame me for your standards.

Anybody that thinks otherwise is not paying attention. I know the Geneva Conventions assert otherwise, but good intentions don't mean much by themselves. Consider Iraq or the recent fandango in Lebanon. Consider most any guerilla war. The firebombings of WWII were all terror attacks intended to "sap the will" of the enemy. Go for a walk in Baghdad in your Sunday suit and see how far you get, and while you are walking you can wonder who is going to kill you, some militants or some "security guards".

Who knew?

Canm't we all agree to just stop calling Apple Pie a Terrible Desert? It makes us look bad.

World War 2 is a textbook example of total war in action. Both sides were guilty of targeting civilians. We can debate over to what degree each side targeted civilians, but the simple truth is nobody had clean hands by the time the war finally ended.

From A People's History of the United States
by Howard Zinn,
and the Political Literacy Course of the Common Courage Press:

The bombing of Japanese cities continued the strategy of saturation bombing to destroy civilian morale; one nighttime fire-bombing of Tokyo took 80,000 lives. (Zinn points out in the book that "nighttime bombing" was by its very nature indiscriminate, not aimed primarily at military targets.)

And then, on August 6, 1945, came the lone American plane in the sky over Hiroshima, dropping the first atomic bomb, leaving perhaps 100,000 Japanese dead, and tens of thousands more slowly dying from radiation poisoning.

Twelve U.S. navy fliers in the Hiroshima city jail were killed in the bombing, a fact that the U.S. government has never officially acknowledged, according to historian Martin Sherwin ("A World Destroyed").

Three days later, a second atomic bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki, with perhaps 50,000 killed.

The justification for these atrocities was that this would end the war quickly, making unnecessary an invasion of...............more at


http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/Atomicvictims.html

white

there are probably more American citizens on DU than Iranians. Hence, the chances are that DUers as a group are going to be more familiar with US history and current events than with Iranian history and current events. However, you are absolutely entitled to believe otherwise.

Still, you haven't answered my question. Any chance that you will?

that I can come up with as to the reason for two such threads in two days without and real thought out desire to share his or her opinion either way.

The op has an objective, of that I am certain, even more certain that that objective will not be forthcoming nor honest if one is given.

I think that most objective people recognize that "terrorism" is frequently a subjective term.

that depending on the situation....one person's "terrorist" can also be viewed by another observer as a "freedom fighter" or that both could be the same or different after historians have had a chance to go through it all. But, then it's possible that that the point of these endless posts is just to distract by blowing smoke everywhere. I'm betting on the latter....

Qualification: Bombing civilian targets. Abu graib. CIA secret detention facilities in other countries.

The list really is long. Did you forget those things?

I give you great credit for raising this question; it's interesting.

In my opinion, the term terror in the past was applied to a small group of people (two or three, for example) that would set-off a bomb in some unsuspected place to make a small local political statement. It was terrifying because these people could be among us in a metro, supermarket, or restaurant. Now the term has been expanded and distorted out of original recognition. There are many here who would say that the Chinese were terrorists in Tienanmen Square, or that the Russians are terrorists in Chechnya. Thus, the Americans are terrorists in any kind of conflict.

Maybe we should just start by admitting that much of what is going on today is simply a war. The terrorists of yesteryear have grown in numbers, in weapons sophistication, and in global activity to the point that I think of them as an army (albeit unconventional in the historic sense) that are engaged in battle with other armies (conventional ones). It's no longer terror; it's open warfare.

What about Saudi Arabia? There's slave labor there. Yet they're our ally.What is this about "self-hating" Americans? Sounds like something right out of the right-wing play-book. How many dictatorships do we support and/or look the other way? How many of our allies practice torture and denial of basic human rights? Quite a few and we don't call them on it. Not only don't we call them on it we send them billions in aid. It's not hating America. It's not about Iran (a country that has done nothing to us and cannot invade or overthrow us - see IRAQ). It's the hypocrisy. It's hard to lecture Iran on human rights when you look at the case of Jose Padilla. Padilla is an American citizen tortured to the point of insanity by his own government. You may say that's one case. As a human being I say that's one case too many. I watched a documentary where we picked up two men. One from the Middle East the other from North Africa. What did we ask them? Do you know Jose Padilla? If they denied knowing him they were tortured until they changed their story. No Americans didn't conduct the torture, their proxies did on America's behalf. This is what the peoples of other countries see in their news reports on a regular basis. Is it any wonder they're puzzled by our silence and lack of outrage? Is it any wonder some see the U.S as a rogue terrorist state?

n/t

I'm with you 100%. You made my day.

but then, the theocrats here hold quite a lot of political clout as well.

n/t

It's amazing, isn't it. The theologians fuel all this stuff by promoting beliefs they don't have a shred of evidence for, and then the politicians are expected to sort it all out. Why doesn't the UN Security Council ever call in the Mullahs, Rabbis and Pope to explain what they're going to do to fix their own mess?

It's still a theocracy though...as would be Tibet if it was taken back from China.

I'm more directly concered with Falwell's heirs and Robertson and other televangelists that forget that they should have not a damn thing to do with politics.

I fully agree on the evangelists. And Pope John Paul did actually establish a working group of theologians from other faiths including Muslims and Jews to find areas of agreement. Pope Ratzinger canceled this working group, but is now reinstating it from what I understand.

Iran isn't the terrorist threat they're being made out to be, anymore than Iraq was.

America is not a terrorist nation either. It's just been duped into despicable acts by despicable people and their despicable supporters.

or people might get suspicious of your agenda.

Patience, grasshopper, patience....

Thanks.

I'll just watch from the balcony how this all plays out.:smoke:

some people might disagree with me but thats ok.

innocent people. Yea, Blackwater or should they be called Death Squads.

course you already know.

Jamaica.

Jamaica never bothers nobody. They just smoke their weed and listen to their Bob Marley and don't have a care in the world.


We should all strive to be like Jamaica.


not like those dirty Canadians. :mad:

I sure did like that guy.

"What Ahmadinejad will learn while he's here is that America is united in rejection of his hateful views, and in opposition to the Iranian government's support of terrorism and pursuit of nuclear weapons."

There you have it. Your candidate agrees Iran supports terrorism.

I had a shower this morning and our weed is BETTER than Jamaicas, BC bud is the BEST!


Thanks for the laugh!

:rofl:

Ha! that's a laugh! Jamaica is considered to be one of the most homophobic places on earth. I would never set foot in that filthy island toilet.


http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1182991,00.html

You keep starting controversial threads and then running away when you are challenged.

There is a name for that.

sh**?

YOU can say whatever you want. YOU can label,cast aspersions, present your arguments, debate, chastise, rant, rave, ridicule, agree, disagree, seek approval or even, if you really must, disrupt, although that is the short sighted way to go.

I'm not part of your "we", just because I'm a DUer. Why on earth would anyone think that they could "dictate" language and syntax to any group of people, just because one "feels" a certain way? Well, Repubs think that, but they're clearly the minority here and in this country.

Some advice...make your argument, be ready to support said argument with objective information and be open to the possibility that you could be shown clearly, and often without a lot of diplomacy, why your premise may be incorrect.

MKJ

Namecalling and demonizing. Choose your own target.

Like Hillary and Obama supporters? Both of them recognize Iran's support of terror.

this seems like flamebait.

I can call my neighbor and asshole but I can't, legally, blow up his house, shoot him, or even threaten him because of my opinion.

Bush, and some of his predecessors, has designated certain nations "terrorist" and imposed sanctions, sent in, or financed, "terrorists" to overthrow them, or, invaded them to impose our "democracy" on them.

Also, "terrorism" is a tactic. Not a government, a movement, a political party, or an ideology.

As I said in your other thread, the difference between a terrorist planting a bomb to kill civilians and a pilot dropping a bomb to kill civilians is their distance from the murdered.

“What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy.” - Gandhi

I'll remain more concerned with Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United States.

Just don't be shocked when everyone doesn't fall lock-step in with your views.

Terrorists are people who are unafiliated with any state government and wish to invoke violence on civilian populations in order to achieve their stated goal through fear and intimidation. Al Qaida, the IRA, ETA, name your terrorist organization--these are not nations. These are terrorist groups.

A nation is generally viewed as a soveriegn government, or alternately an entire group of people concentrated in a single geographic area.

So to call a country a terrorist nation either assumes the government is the terrorist organization, which is a contradiction in terms, or otherwise everyone in the nation is a terrorist themselves. Which is ludacrious.

It's a misnomer in whatever context it's used. I can see warmongering nation, rougue nation or aggressive nation, but I don't see terrorist nation.

you sure do sound like a "fire starter" to me, why waste my energy and time debating a 5th grader, with junior high questions with no input from you.

Achew....aaachew (I just sneeze) Bless you my child.


:silly: :silly:

You should, too.

Please provide details.
Thank you.

Iran supports terrorists.

Not just the U.S. (which caused you such consternation), but Iran and virtually every nation on the planet.

against the U.S." Could you cite it for me?

I don't think a nation needs to launch a terrorist attack against the U.S. in order for it to be considered a terrorist nation. The U.S. is not the only other country in the world.

Iran is indeed linked to terrorism:

"What terrorist groups are linked to Iran?

U.S. officials say Iran mostly backs Islamist groups, including the Lebanese Shiite militants of Hezbollah (which Iran helped found in the 1980s) and such Palestinian terrorist groups as Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. A few months after Hamas won the Palestinian Authority (PA) elections in early 2006, Iran pledged $50 million to the near-bankrupt PA. The United States, among other nations, has cut off aid to the PA because of Hamas’ terrorist ties.

Iran is suspected of encouraging Hezbollah’s July 2006 attack on Israel to deflect international attention from its nuclear weapons program. Iran was also reportedly involved in a Hezbollah-linked January 2002 attempt to smuggle a boatload of arms to the PA. Some reports also suggest that Iran’s interference in Iraq has included funding, safe transit, and arms to insurgent leaders like Muqtada al-Sadr and his forces.
What terrorist activities have been linked with Iran?

The U.S. government first listed Iran as a terrorist sponsor in 1984. Among its activities have been the following:

* Observers say Iran had prior knowledge of Hezbollah attacks, such as the 1988 kidnapping and murder of Colonel William Higgins, a U.S. Marine involved in a UN observer mission in Lebanon, and the 1992 and 1994 bombings of Jewish cultural institutions in Argentina.
* Iran still has a price on the head of the Indian-born British novelist Salman Rushdie for what Iranian leaders call blasphemous writings about Islam in his 1989 novel The Satanic Verses.
* U.S. officials say Iran supported the group behind the 1996 truck bombing of Khobar Towers, a U.S. military residence in Saudi Arabia, which killed nineteen U.S. servicemen."

Here is the link:

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9362/#2

Jesus, you have a lot to learn.

You don't like the source or the information?

how about documented evidence, or is that even required anymore?


* Observers say that Saddam is in possession of WMD.
* U.S. officials say that Saddam assisted the 911 hijackers.

Is just a phrase coined by Bush. Since he came up with it and he made them part of it, I suppose so. But it isn't meaningful, just rhetoric.

The term terror has meaning.

Unfortunately, the U.S. has become a terrorist nation as well. Invading Iraq is an act of terrorism and killing innocent Iraqis could never be called anything other than terrorism. BushCo. want to instill fear in the middle east, but their plan has (fortunately for the world) been a disaster.

Think, Hawaii.

Pretty much every nation in the world is a terrorist nation? So Iran should get a free pass in your book?

Hawaii, Mexico, Cuba, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Chile, Haiti, Viet Nam, Cambodia, Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq. (This list gets very long. Us history is a history of state sponsored terrorism. You'd have to be a very dedicated ostrich not to get that.)

And, it's not a zero sum game. Iran, unlike the US, seems to do what it needs to do to protect itself. The US does what it needs to do to sack vulnerable nation states.

and it's war against the Moors, and it's war against the native peoples of Chile, Argentina, Peru, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Uruguay and each and every part of South, Central and North America that they colonized by slaughtering the native people and by forcing them to convert to their own religion? You don't think they should share in your game of territorial control? How about Rome? Greece? The Mongols? The Moors themselves and what they did to the Spanish and to the Jews while they ruled over Spain? How about Mughal India and what they did to the Hindus? How about the Germans and their two failed World Wars in the last century? You don't think they are guilty of "state sponsored" terrorism? Let's not even go into China and what they have done to get where they are today? Japan? Afghanistan and it's atrocious treatment of it's citizens and to the desecration of it's Buddha figures?

What exactly is your point? Do you consider Iran a Sainted nation? Just because it's cretinous ruler hates *? Seems like a ridiculous reason to support a despot to me.

this frontman. :hi:

"Iran couldn't compete with us on any day."

"Iran, unlike the US, seems to do what it needs to do to protect itself."


Here is an image of what Iran does to gays:





But thank you for sharing.:hi:

of the state sponsored terrorism of the United States. That's not the same thing as excusing anyone for anything. Try again.

I gave myself a headache yesterday with this nonsense.

of state sponsored terrorism by countries such as Spain, Germany et al. As I asked you earlier, what exactly is your point?

But thank you for sharing.:hi:

Before you can be helped, you must define for us (which should have occurred in the OP):

"Terrorism"

"Terrorist"

"Terrorist Nation"

What to do....? :shrug:

N/T.