Damn U.N.

More sanctions against Iran.

Well, UN is actually a puppet organization, financed by the USA and its European allies. So no doubt it makes sanctions against the enemies of US, and not its allies.

I think that the anti-nuclear sanctions on Iran are a good thing. Perhaps the UN should hold the United States to the same standard...

Riddler wrote:

Well, UN is actually a puppet organization, financed by the USA and its European allies. So no doubt it makes sanctions against the enemies of US, and not its allies.

I don' think so. The US has NATO for that. However It can certainly be said that nations like the US and the "Peoples Republic" of China get preferential treatment.

Renegade_Kautsky wrote:

I think that the anti-nuclear sanctions on Iran are a good thing. Perhaps the UN should hold the United States to the same standard...

They would make sense if Iran was making nuclear weapons but they're not.

Renegade_Kautsky wrote:

Riddler wrote:

Well, UN is actually a puppet organization, financed by the USA and its European allies. So no doubt it makes sanctions against the enemies of US, and not its allies.

I don' think so. The US has NATO for that. However It can certainly be said that nations like the US and the "Peoples Republic" of China get preferential treatment.

The UN only serves the purposes of the permanent members of the security council.

Renegade_Kautsky wrote:

I think that the anti-nuclear sanctions on Iran are a good thing. Perhaps the UN should hold the United States to the same standard...

Well, I think that each country has a right to develop it's own nuclear weapons to defend itself. If the US has it, than why Iran can't?

Riddler wrote:

Renegade_Kautsky wrote:

I think that the anti-nuclear sanctions on Iran are a good thing. Perhaps the UN should hold the United States to the same standard...

Well, I think that each country has a right to develop it's own nuclear weapons to defend itself. If the US has it, than why Iran can't?

becuse it's leaders aren't developing nuclear wepons.

mattabesta wrote:

Riddler wrote:

Renegade_Kautsky wrote:

I think that the anti-nuclear sanctions on Iran are a good thing. Perhaps the UN should hold the United States to the same standard...

Well, I think that each country has a right to develop it's own nuclear weapons to defend itself. If the US has it, than why Iran can't?

becuse it's leaders aren't developing nuclear wepons.

We haven't developed many new ones because we already got a bunch!

That said, I think all nations need to disarm their nukes. With the push of a button, or even a solar flare, we could find ourselves without an inhabitable world in which to have this debate.

Renegade_Kautsky wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

Riddler wrote:

Renegade_Kautsky wrote:

I think that the anti-nuclear sanctions on Iran are a good thing. Perhaps the UN should hold the United States to the same standard...

Well, I think that each country has a right to develop it's own nuclear weapons to defend itself. If the US has it, than why Iran can't?

becuse it's leaders aren't developing nuclear wepons.

We haven't developed many new ones because we already got a bunch!

That said, I think all nations need to disarm their nukes. With the push of a button, or even a solar flare, we could find ourselves without an inhabitable world in which to have this debate.

Or we could launch them all at the sun.

Renegade_Kautsky wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

Riddler wrote:

Renegade_Kautsky wrote:

I think that the anti-nuclear sanctions on Iran are a good thing. Perhaps the UN should hold the United States to the same standard...

Well, I think that each country has a right to develop it's own nuclear weapons to defend itself. If the US has it, than why Iran can't?

becuse it's leaders aren't developing nuclear wepons.

We haven't developed many new ones because we already got a bunch!

That said, I think all nations need to disarm their nukes. With the push of a button, or even a solar flare, we could find ourselves without an inhabitable world in which to have this debate.

no nation with a right mind will trust the other nations to disarm

mattabesta wrote:

Renegade_Kautsky wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

Riddler wrote:

Renegade_Kautsky wrote:

I think that the anti-nuclear sanctions on Iran are a good thing. Perhaps the UN should hold the United States to the same standard...

Well, I think that each country has a right to develop it's own nuclear weapons to defend itself. If the US has it, than why Iran can't?

becuse it's leaders aren't developing nuclear wepons.

We haven't developed many new ones because we already got a bunch!

That said, I think all nations need to disarm their nukes. With the push of a button, or even a solar flare, we could find ourselves without an inhabitable world in which to have this debate.

no nation with a right mind will trust the other nations to disarm

In the Cold War for example, if one side disarmed, it would have been far too great of a propaganda victory for the other side's opponent not to disarm.

oligarch wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

Renegade_Kautsky wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

Riddler wrote:

Renegade_Kautsky wrote:

I think that the anti-nuclear sanctions on Iran are a good thing. Perhaps the UN should hold the United States to the same standard...

Well, I think that each country has a right to develop it's own nuclear weapons to defend itself. If the US has it, than why Iran can't?

becuse it's leaders aren't developing nuclear wepons.

We haven't developed many new ones because we already got a bunch!

That said, I think all nations need to disarm their nukes. With the push of a button, or even a solar flare, we could find ourselves without an inhabitable world in which to have this debate.

no nation with a right mind will trust the other nations to disarm

In the Cold War for example, if one side disarmed, it would have been far too great of a propaganda victory for the other side's opponent not to disarm.

well in most wars both sides proclaim victory.
exampel: Iran and iraq were at war for 9 years and millions dide but at the end of the war both had gained as much as they lost but still both celebrated victory to influence the population

If the UN is fascist and pro-American, how do you explain China's and Russia's UN Security Council seats since 1945. :p

Regardless, trade sanctions are very common, it probably wouldn't affect much. Call me when they sanction a more important nations, say Brazil or China.

carmen510 wrote:

If the UN is fascist and pro-American, how do you explain China's and Russia's UN Security Council seats since 1945. :p

It is international, however it's financed by the US. Plus, Russia and China don't do anything important there, except vetoing some of UN's sanctions.

It isn't Iran we are worried about, It is some random durka durka group buying one from Iran to use on Israel, US, UK, etc

Diogritor wrote:

It isn't Iran we are worried about, It is some random durka durka group buying one from Iran to use on Israel, US, UK, etc

These "durka durka" groups as you call are weak and scattered; they are not linked together. Al-Qaeda for example does not actually exist, its just a blanket term used by militant islamist movements with common ideologies that started using the name after the western media. They are not capable of obtaining or using a nuclear weapon.

oligarch wrote:

Diogritor wrote:

It isn't Iran we are worried about, It is some random durka durka group buying one from Iran to use on Israel, US, UK, etc

These "durka durka" groups as you call are weak and scattered; they are not linked together. Al-Qaeda for example does not actually exist, its just a blanket term used by militant islamist movements with common ideologies that started using the name after the western media. They are not capable of obtaining or using a nuclear weapon.

It would't be impossible though and that is what worries us. Countries follow the rules of war for fear of the same fate..who do we retaliate aginst when a nationless group does it?

Diogritor wrote:

oligarch wrote:

Diogritor wrote:

It isn't Iran we are worried about, It is some random durka durka group buying one from Iran to use on Israel, US, UK, etc

These "durka durka" groups as you call are weak and scattered; they are not linked together. Al-Qaeda for example does not actually exist, its just a blanket term used by militant islamist movements with common ideologies that started using the name after the western media. They are not capable of obtaining or using a nuclear weapon.

It would't be impossible though and that is what worries us. Countries follow the rules of war for fear of the same fate..who do we retaliate aginst when a nationless group does it?

George W. Bush.

[

dose anyone know what the un can do to nations that are impotant ?
they can do this.

1.pleas stop that genocide, pleas.

2.evrybody wants you to stop the genocide.

3. you have to stop that genocide now!.

4. fucking qit it!

5. ok i I did all I can.


the un can do sqat

mattabesta wrote:

dose anyone know what the un can do to nations that are impotant ?
they can do this.

1.pleas stop that genocide, pleas.

2.evrybody wants you to stop the genocide.

3. you have to stop that genocide now!.

4. fucking qit it!

5. ok i I did all I can.


the un can do sqat

Notice how much we have been talking about N.Korea since it got nukes..none lolololo.

Diogritor wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

dose anyone know what the un can do to nations that are impotant ?
they can do this.

1.pleas stop that genocide, pleas.

2.evrybody wants you to stop the genocide.

3. you have to stop that genocide now!.

4. fucking qit it!

5. ok i I did all I can.


the un can do sqat

Notice how much we have been talking about N.Korea since it got nukes..none lolololo.

well north korea did just fine when still being sacksiond

People's Korea doesn't have nukes anymore.

oligarch wrote:

People's Korea doesn't have nukes anymore.

They fire em all?

Diogritor wrote:

oligarch wrote:

People's Korea doesn't have nukes anymore.

They fire em all?

eh probably disarmed but they have some in hiding