Ok, let me put it another way, suppose America receives intelligence that Iran is an imminent threat to world peace. That they have weapons of mass destruction, chemical weapons, and are buying enriched uranium from Africa to build nuclear weaponry. With the USA’s superior firepower they could attack with say, a shock and awe campaign, establish democracy and peace, mission accomplished in a few weeks with minimal civilian fatalities. Then democracy would finally reign in what would surely become known as one of the countries of the axis of evil, a sensible exit strategy, already devised, could be carried out and we would all live happily ever after....wait I just got hit with a strange sense of deja vu, that’s weird. Oh, and the “cockpit George flew in the Texas National Guard” defending Houston from Iraq , that didn’t prove he was smart, it proved he was a coward, but that’s another story.
I’ll translate: “blah blah blah, I’m a communist liberal dumbass, blah blah blah, repeat talking points about lies of Iraq, and believe Saddam should still be in power. Blah blah blah, repeat talking points about how flying a jet fighter which seemed to be a death trap for pilots if they made a mistake is cowardly.”
Red Star = giant idiot moonbat
You attended the same school as the ‘war president’ I take it, sounds like you got better grades though
Ok, let me put it another way, suppose America receives intelligence that Iran is an imminent threat to world peace. That they have weapons of mass destruction, chemical weapons, and are buying enriched uranium from Africa to build nuclear weaponry. With the USA’s superior firepower they could attack with say, a shock and awe campaign, establish democracy and peace, mission accomplished in a few weeks with minimal civilian fatalities. Then democracy would finally reign in what would surely become known as one of the countries of the axis of evil, a sensible exit strategy, already devised, could be carried out and we would all live happily ever after....wait I just got hit with a strange sense of deja vu, that’s weird. Oh, and the “cockpit George flew in the Texas National Guard” defending Houston from Iraq , that didn’t prove he was smart, it proved he was a coward, but that’s another story.
I’ll translate: “blah blah blah, I’m a communist liberal dumbass, blah blah blah, repeat talking points about lies of Iraq, and believe Saddam should still be in power. Blah blah blah, repeat talking points about how flying a jet fighter which seemed to be a death trap for pilots if they made a mistake is cowardly.”
Red Star = giant idiot moonbat
You attended the same school as the ‘war president’ I take it, sounds like you got better grades though. Better being a wartime hero in Houston than Vietnam isn’t.?
That didn’t stop Bill Clinton. At least Bush registered and he and Kerry both applied for stateside. Kerry didn’t get it.
Since you are all hung up on how dumb Bush is, lucky you didn’t vote for Kerry.
He got worse grades.
It’s my guess he is intending to wipe Israel off the map with bad language, or maybe an invasion of Iranian homosexuals
He justs wants to give them all hugs and fluffy bunny slippers?
Great, Iran now accepts Israel as a legit country. all we need is regime change.
Wonder what the A-man has in mind.
I don’t follow every one of his speeches , much less anybody else’s.
It is not the only thing, but it is popular.
No worse than the crap slung by Red Star about Bush IMO.
BTW, Red Star, I am not here to defend Bush, he is not my favorite.
If you have to nitpick, it seems like you have a weak argument.
Wiping something off the map and giving them all hugs and fluffy bunny slippers would be two different extremes. I suspect it’s probably somewhere in between, although closer to the wiping as opposed to slippers (for one, fluffy bunny slippers sound gay, which is a big no-no).
He could try and initiate regime change - all he needs is a list of reasons. Once you’ve got that, it’s anything goes!
I don’t follow every one of his speeches , much less anybody else’s.
It is not the only thing, but it is popular.
No worse than the crap slung by Red Star about Bush IMO.
BTW, Red Star, I am not here to defend Bush, he is not my favorite.
If you have to nitpick, it seems like you have a weak argument.
I’m just saying - everyone has picked up on that one statement (and they use the specific words, so I assume everyone is referring to that one speech).
But to use it as unmistakable proof to justify something, you have to be damn sure you got it right. And it’s all being translating, so how sure are we that he meant what everyone here is so 100% sure of. I’m just saying that there is a theory which suggests that’s not an accurate representation of what he said.
I know some will just say that this makes me anti-American or pro-Iranian, but that’s their problem not mine.
If he’s said other things though, which ARE clear, and not in dispute, then people can be sure they are right when they claim it.
I am sure all the rest of these are unfortunate mistranslations or taken curiously out of context. It continues to astound me how blind some people can be. However, as Cm might say, “Until Iran has nuclear weapons ‘we just can’t say’ if it will be good or bad and of course who it will be good or bad for and indeed how we even define ‘good’ and ‘bad”
“Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation’s fury.” - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
“As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map.” - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
“We ask the West to remove what they created sixty years ago [Israel] and if they do not listen to our recommendations, then the Palestinian nation and other nations will eventually do this for them.” - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
“The Zionist regime is a dried up and rotten tree which will be annihilated with one storm.” - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
“Israel cannot continue to exist in an atmosphere of peace and tranquillity without threats and aggression. If this regime stays on one inch of Palestine’s soil, it will continue its threats.” - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
“There is no doubt that the new wave [of attacks] in Palestine will wipe off this stigma [Israel] from the face of the Islamic world...the World without Zionism.” - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
“If some want to misuse the generosity of our nation, and re-examine what was previously examined, they should know the fire of the anger of the Iranian nation will be extremely burning and devastating.” - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
“The establishment of the Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world. The Islamic world will not let its historic enemy live in its heartland.” - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Of course we can say it will be bad if they get nukes. I’m just not so sure that we’ve reached a point whereby an attack is justified.
Links?
Assuming those are all accurate translations (which is a crucial point, as I mentioned), these would support the idea that it’s the regime he’s been talking about. Aside from the first one. The second would appear to be the one that everyone uses, possibly incorrectly.
Assuming those are all accurate translations (which is a crucial point, as I mentioned)
“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the--if he--if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true.”
Here we go again spinning another “is is” discussion.
I like to talk about sex. I like to think Ahmadinejad was speaking in broader terms, and didn’t specifically mean there are no gays in his country. I think he’s talking more about sexual deviants and their practices, a porn industry, and the like.
Assuming those are all accurate translations (which is a crucial point, as I mentioned)
“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the--if he--if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true.”
That’s hilarious, given the time people have spent here telling me and others what Bush REALLY meant, and how important ‘context’ is in explaining what people say.
Cmon, you’ve educated me on Germany and Europe and the US so many times… And now you’re telling me you know Farsi and Spanish (and also recently Mallorquin, which is Catalan, per se, not Spanish) better than your average MSM hack/shill?
That I/we need to read between the lines to find a gentler, more comforting meaning in “Israel must be wiped out”?
Only because I’m not trying to insult you (as per official Moorewatch rules and all)). “Troll” was a statement of fact, based on you posting the same abuse in two different threads.
Assuming those are all accurate translations (which is a crucial point, as I mentioned)
“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the--if he--if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true.”
That’s hilarious, given the time people have spent here telling me and others what Bush REALLY meant, and how important ‘context’ is in explaining what people say.
And usually that’s one statement by Bush one time. What we have here are repeated statements by one man, who you have a crush on, on the same subject. You’d need to get that nose out of the air though to figure out the difference, and you’re just too much of an arrogant elitist snob to do that.
Only because I’m not trying to insult you (as per official Moorewatch rules and all)). “Troll” was a statement of fact, based on you posting the same abuse in two different threads.
Go look again. I’m sure you’ve never ever posted something on the wrong thread. Even if the statement fits on the other thread for you too.
Cmon, you’ve educated me on Germany and Europe and the US so many times… And now you’re telling me you know Farsi and Spanish (and also recently Mallorquin, which is Catalan, per se, not Spanish) better than your average MSM hack/shill?
That I/we need to read between the lines to find a gentler, more comforting meaning in “Israel must be wiped out”?
What’s the difference between having a discussion and ‘educating’? If we are going to avoid facts or opinions that someone might be uncomfortable with, what’s the point of this place?
Not a more gentler or comforting meaning, but rather an accurate translation. I would have thought that was pretty basic if you are going to rely on the translation over and over again. Seems I’m being ‘educated’ that I’m out of line on that though. Walter would indeed be proud that someone is being nudged back to the official line.
Assuming those are all accurate translations (which is a crucial point, as I mentioned)
“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the--if he--if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true.”
That’s hilarious, given the time people have spent here telling me and others what Bush REALLY meant, and how important ‘context’ is in explaining what people say.
And usually that’s one statement by Bush one time. What we have here are repeated statements by one man, who you have a crush on, on the same subject. You’d need to get that nose out of the air though to figure out the difference, and you’re just too much of an arrogant elitist snob to do that.
Nah, it’s been Bush many times. Lately it’s Greenspan, who said something that doesn’t make sense, even when it didn’t need translating.
Yes, repeated statements on the ONE SUBJECT, but NOT ALL SAYING THE SAME EXACT THING. But the translations we have (unlinked so I can’t see where they are from) mostly seem to suggest that he’s specifically talking about the leadership/regime. But don’t let mere details like actual meaning get in the way of a good beating of war drums. Get that rhythm going!
I did enjoy that ‘crush’ comment though. Very high school!
Whether I’m an arrogant elitest snob isn’t relevant to any of these arguments. Points either stand or they don’t. When you venture into abuse, it’s a sign that you don’t have an argument, or a response to one that’s been put to you.
Only because I’m not trying to insult you (as per official Moorewatch rules and all)). “Troll” was a statement of fact, based on you posting the same abuse in two different threads.
Go look again. I’m sure you’ve never ever posted something on the wrong thread. Even if the statement fits on the other thread for you too.
Repeating generic abuse is troll-like behaviour anyway.
Nah, it’s been Bush many times. Lately it’s Greenspan, who said something that doesn’t make sense, even when it didn’t need translating.
Read again. You really need to take a reading comprehension lesson because you clearly lack that ability. And just because you say Greenspan is doing that doesn’t make it true except in your deluded mind.
Yes, repeated statements on the ONE SUBJECT, but NOT ALL SAYING THE SAME EXACT THING. But the translations we have (unlinked so I can’t see where they are from) mostly seem to suggest that he’s specifically talking about the leadership/regime. But don’t let mere details like actual meaning get in the way of a good beating of war drums. Get that rhythm going!
So where is his statement about the government of Israel? What does he want to see it replaced with? Does he want a Jewish state there? Because it sure doesn’t sound like it. Thanks for proving your an apologist for terrorist supporters though.
Whether I’m an arrogant elitest snob isn’t relevant to any of these arguments. Points either stand or they don’t. When you venture into abuse, it’s a sign that you don’t have an argument, or a response to one that’s been put to you.
I tend to address points, then insult you. Sometimes I’ll just outright insult you because what you’ve said is so stupid it doesn’t need addressing. And its relevant to pointing out why you can’t grasp very simple things that people say to you. Which seems to be quite often.
You talk about reading comprehension, and yet in the same breath you ask for his statements about the government of Israel even though it’s provided on this very page (within the quotes provided by Aetius)?
I don’t see anything that I haven’t comprehended. You can say ‘read again’ though if it’ll make you feel better.
I don’t think you know what I’m talking about with the Greenspan thing. Just say if you don’t, it won’t mean anything other than that you’ve not read the thread about his comments.
‘Your’ should be ‘you’re’. Comprehend?
I’ll continue to address points and not abuse. And I’ll continue to grant you the benefit of the doubt. We’re nice like that, us elitists.
