Why, six years ago, did the CIA give the Iranians blueprints to build a bomb?

[Rudey]

You know there are liberal intellectuals that make effective arguments. Paul Krugman could convince you that the world is flat if he wanted to. The New Republic also has a lot of writers like that. Sometimes Daily Kos carries work that isn't rubbish.

At no times do those people create an article with links. That is what you do. I am not going to spend hours reading this just to respond to you. I opened them only to find half of them don't work and the other half are about Iraq. You are obviously out only to post links and spread BS.

As for the issue of arming both sides, it's something every nation has done. Right now, Iran is incredibly advanced in its nuclear technology because of China, Russia, and Pakistan. Those are the nations in the spotlight right now. So stop with the jibberish and go respond to comments on blogs instead of filling a website that isn't receptive to you with your jibberish.

-Rudey

Originally posted by positive14
Here's my claim:

The US and the UK continually arm the states and organizations that we eventually deem to be our enemies.



Here's the evidence:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,73292,00.html

http://www.sfbg.com/News/32/21/Features/iraq.html

http://foi.missouri.edu/terrorbkgd/following.html

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nigh...y_1_020917.html

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/index.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/stor...1678220,00.html

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/220.html

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/03/16/P...lt_its_we.shtml

I left out the London Gaurdian Story because you don't like alligation (however credible),


*IMPORTANT*
Having said that.... that article in NO WAY changes the validity of my claim OR... the validity of the other sources I use... or the thousands of others that are available if you took the time to find them.

[Rudey]

You are giving me a tumor

-Rudey

[positive14]

thats ok ... I understand... I guess its easier not to read the reseach I provided. I appologize.

[positive14]

Again...

Here's my argument:

The US and the UK arm states and organizations that we eventually deem to be our enemies.



and... Here's the evidence:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,73292,00.html

http://www.sfbg.com/News/32/21/Features/iraq.html

http://foi.missouri.edu/terrorbkgd/following.html

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nigh...y_1_020917.html

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/index.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/stor...1678220,00.html

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/220.html

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/03/16/P...lt_its_we.shtml

[Rudey]

Listen, I can't believe how many times I have to repeat this for you.

1) OpEds don't have one line and then provide 20 links. You do that.
2) Half of your links don't work and the other half are about Iraq or other nations.
3) Nations have been providing assistance to other countries since the beginning of time. If you want to talk about WMD, France built the Osirak reactors in Iraq that were bombed by Israeli F16s. EVERY NATION DOES IT.
4) Right now, Iran has achieved most of its success due to China, Russia, Pakistan, and North Korea.
5)www.positive14isretarded.com has also launched.

-Rudey

Originally posted by positive14
Again...

Here's my argument:

The US and the UK continually arm the states and organizations that we eventually deem to be our enemies.



and... Here's the evidence:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,73292,00.html

http://www.sfbg.com/News/32/21/Features/iraq.html

http://foi.missouri.edu/terrorbkgd/following.html

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nigh...y_1_020917.html

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/index.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/stor...1678220,00.html

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/220.html

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/03/16/P...lt_its_we.shtml

[positive14]

I did not realize that Opinion Editorials are the only credible source of informtion. I appologize once again.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by positive14
I did not realize that Opinion Editorials are the only credible source of informtion. I appologize once again.

I apologize to humanity for dealing with you.

You are writing an opinion. OpEds are opinion pieces with arguments and evidence.

You're a suspected terrorist anyway so the NSA is probably watching you.

-Rudey

[KSig RC]

Originally posted by positive14
Again...

Here's my argument:

The US and the UK arm states and organizations that we eventually deem to be our enemies.

That's not an argument, silly - it's a historical fact. Here's an argument:

There is nothing implicitly negative with arming states that later are deemed enemies. The inconvenience of fighting a better-armed foe in the future (using present-day technology and weaponry, which may be out of date in the future battle) should be, in an ideal game of intelligence and espianage, more than offset by the strategic gains in the short term present.

Also, considering the raw amount of foreign aid that goes to arms, it would seem that any sort of cost/benefit analysis would indicate that there is a low incidence of allies-turned-future-enemies, and an ABSURDLY low incidence of times those allies-turned-enemies have won the future battle.

I'll spare you the links this time.

[positive14]

I could not agree with you more concerning my first statement ( The US and the UK arm states and organizations that we eventually deem to be our enemies.) as being a fact. But... apparently with Rudey my point is still up for debate, thus I labeled it as an argument... for purposes of conversing with him.

However... I also feel diferently than you (perhaps) in the respect that I don't belive that this policy has been healthy (in many ways) for the developed world, especially the United States.

And... I would like to know why we continually push this policy that would arm these terrorist states.

I understand that sometimes the enemy of our enemy is our friend... but it more than often, it turns out that they both become our enemies... only now they can use the weapons we gave them to fight us.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by positive14
I could not agree with you more concerning my first statement ( The US and the UK arm states and organizations that we eventually deem to be our enemies.) as being a fact. But... apparently with Rudey my point is still up for debate, thus I labeled it as an argument... for purposes of conversing with him.

However... I also feel diferently than you (perhaps) in the respect that I don't belive that this policy has been healthy (in many ways) for the developed world, especially the United States.

And... I would like to know why we continually push this policy that would arm these terrorist states.

I understand that sometimes the enemy of our enemy is our friend... but it more than often, it turns out that they both become our enemies... only now they can use the weapons we gave them to fight us.

You have got to be kidding me.

-Rudey