Light Up the Sky

[paracowboy]

I have this odd visual of him in the place of Sterling Hayden as Brig. Gen. Jack D. Ripper, and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the place of Peter Sellers as Group Captain Mandrake.

 

[joaquim]

August 22nd passed and they are still selling falafels in Jerusalem.

But many infidels paid attention, a few were scared, so Ahmadinejad is very happy. And so are all muslims:

Qur'an [3.151] : We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they set up with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority, and their abode is the fire, and evil is the abode of the unjust.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Dude- you're creeping me out with that stuff. What the Iranian president was talking about was Dilana was going to rock her little butt off in Rockstar Super Nova Tuesday night. And she did.

 

[Gunnar]

Although nothing particularly wrong or evil has been discussed in this thread...we might wanna close it on general principles.  Just a thought.

 

[Infanteer]

Do I get to laugh at the people who took this seriously now?

 

[paracowboy]

Do I get to laugh at the people who took this seriously now?

you waited?

 

[a_majoor]

Taking another step forward (and hammering in another nail in the UN coffin at the same time...)

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-08-26T074613Z_01_N26199831_RTRUKOC_0_US-NUCLEAR-IRAN-USA.xml&src=rss&rpc=22

U.S. may bypass U.N. on Iran: LA Times
Sat Aug 26, 2006 3:46 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration has indicated it is prepared to form an independent coalition to freeze Iranian assets and restrict trade if the U.N. Security Council fails to penalize Tehran for its nuclear enrichment program, The Los Angeles Times reported on Saturday.

A Security Council resolution gives Iran until August 31 to stop uranium enrichment, which could provide fuel to produce electricity or possibly atomic weapons, or face penalties.

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said in an interview late this week that the United States planned to introduce a resolution imposing penalties such as a travel ban and asset freeze for key Iranian leaders soon after the August 31 deadline, the Times reported.

It said Bolton seemed optimistic that Security Council members China and Russia, which have been reluctant to impose sanctions, would agree to it once they saw the text. "Everybody's been on board," the Times quoted him as saying.

But on Friday Russia rejected for now efforts to impose sanctions after Tehran agreed to continue talks, but refused to halt enrichment.

In case Russia and China do not accept the resolution, Washington is working a parallel diplomatic track outside the United Nations, Bolton said.

Analysts say the strategy reflects not only long-standing U.S. frustration with the Security Council's inaction on Iran, but also the current weakness of Washington's position because of its controversial role in a series of conflicts in the Middle East, most recently in Lebanon, the Times said.

Under U.S. terrorism laws, Washington could ramp up its own sanctions, including financial constraints on Tehran and interception of missile and nuclear materials en route to Iran, Bolton said, and the United States is encouraging other countries to follow suit.

"You don't need Security Council authority to impose sanctions, just as we have," he said. The United States has had broad restrictions on almost all trade with Iran since 1987.

The Times said Bolton and U.S. Treasury officials refused to provide details on which countries might be interested in joining in sanctions, citing the "sensitivity" of the talks.

And the opposing position as detailed from "Day by Day" (large file, too big to attach):
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/2006/08/27/

 

[George Wallace]

.......But a lot of sheeple believe strongly in the "Please Stop." approach. 

 

[a_majoor]

City Journal has a long but very telling article by Mark Styen on Iran. The analysis of why we should treat Iran differently than normal States is worth the read:

http://www.city-journal.org/html/16_2_iran.html

City Journal
Facing Down IranOur lives depend on it.
Mark Steyn
Spring 2006

Most Westerners read the map of the world like a Broadway marquee: north is top of the bill—America, Britain, Europe, Russia—and the rest dribbles away into a mass of supporting players punctuated by occasional Star Guests: India, China, Australia. Everyone else gets rounded up into groups: “Africa,” “Asia,” “Latin America.”

But if you’re one of the down-page crowd, the center of the world is wherever you happen to be. Take Iran: it doesn’t fit into any of the groups. Indeed, it’s a buffer zone between most of the important ones: to the west, it borders the Arab world; to the northwest, it borders NATO (and, if Turkey ever passes its endless audition, the European Union); to the north, the former Soviet Union and the Russian Federation’s turbulent Caucasus; to the northeast, the Stans—the newly independent states of central Asia; to the east, the old British India, now bifurcated into a Muslim-Hindu nuclear standoff. And its southern shore sits on the central artery that feeds the global economy.

If you divide the world into geographical regions, then, Iran’s neither here nor there. But if you divide it ideologically, the mullahs are ideally positioned at the center of the various provinces of Islam—the Arabs, the Turks, the Stans, and the south Asians. Who better to unite the Muslim world under one inspiring, courageous leadership? If there’s going to be an Islamic superpower, Tehran would seem to be the obvious candidate.

That moment of ascendancy is now upon us. Or as the Daily Telegraph in London reported: “Iran’s hardline spiritual leaders have issued an unprecedented new fatwa, or holy order, sanctioning the use of atomic weapons against its enemies.” Hmm. I’m not a professional mullah, so I can’t speak to the theological soundness of the argument, but it seems a religious school in the Holy City of Qom has ruled that “the use of nuclear weapons may not constitute a problem, according to sharia.” Well, there’s a surprise. How do you solve a problem? Like, sharia! It’s the one-stop shop for justifying all your geopolitical objectives.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyone who spends half an hour looking at Iranian foreign policy over the last 27 years sees five things:

1. contempt for the most basic international conventions;
2. long-reach extraterritoriality;
3. effective promotion of radical Pan-Islamism;
4. a willingness to go the extra mile for Jew-killing (unlike, say, Osama);
5. an all-but-total synchronization between rhetoric and action.

Follow the link and read the rest.