 Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruffian  Your point, if you have one, appears to be that by destroying and occupying a country, America can impose its will while preventing that country from pursing its interests.
And that's pertinent to the Iran nuclear discussion in what way? | I believe my "point" was rather clear and simple...that being that a country's nuclear weapons program can be stopped...which is something which you earlier said couldn't be done. Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruffian You think that Iran is willing to see itself utterly destroyed in order to inflict damage on Israel? | Well, to a martyr, the idea of being "utterly destroyed" is quite meaningless in a preventive sense since he or she has already accepted that potential fate...and not just for him or herself alone. Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruffian You have an "interesting" perspective." One that isn't shared by rational individuals. | Well, you have an "interesting" perspective yourself...that perspective of seeing yourself as being a self-appointed judge of what is rational and what isn't rational. Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruffian Making public pronouncements that "all options are on the table" is language that is never misunderstood in diplomatic circles.
If you support Bush's stance, that makes you a Bush supporter, yes. Or do you want to argue that supporting Bush is not supporting Bush? | Well, if "all options are on the table" regarding Iran, that would have to mean that EVERYONE must be a Bush supporter regarding Iran since any possible solution regarding Iran could be driven in the future by the Bush Administration.
(You *do* realize, I suppose, that "all options" means...well..."all options"...right?) Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruffian So now you're claiming that the President isn't relevant to a discussion of international relations? You're a fine piece of work. I hope you enjoy discussing issues with yourself.  | I have never claimed that any acting President isn't relevant to a discussion of current international relations.
What I've stated is my perception that you wish to turn this discussion about Iran into a discussion whereby someone's support (or non-support) of Bush's previous actions is the primary subject.
(So, are you now going to run away from this discussion about Iran since you disagree with what I've said?) | 
07-16-2007, 10:21 AM
Linear Mode
