Israel is going to bomb Iran in the coming weeks . . . if . . .

[LyfeCentenz]

Satan will gathers an army surrounding the "beloved city." Jerusalem is surrounded by Islamic countries and Islam is the enemy.

And to them you are the enemy. The "enemy" is ignorance in the minds of humanity and until its removed there will be no peace. Islam is not the enemy. And we are not the enemy. "The Enemy" is a concept based on your point of reference.

Do you understand that you "believe" that Satan is gathering an army surrounding the beloved city? You picked that idea up somewhere along the way and attached to it. There's no application in reality for that idea except for Satan clearly representing the dark side of the duality of man. Satan, darkness, negativity, black, the moon, ignorance. God, light, positivity, white, the sun, knowledge. Do you see what i mean? You can't have one without the other! You can't know any of those concepts or ideas without their opposites! They wouldn't exist.

If Islam is the enemy then you are the enemy as well because you've automatically created the opposing position against yourself by identifying with that idea. So who is the evil? So who is the devil? Who are Satan's forces? Everyone starts to become it because they all are... beauty is in the eye of the beholder... and so is evil.

You have to "believe" in what your saying. You believe it. You don't know it. Don't ever mistake belief for knowledge. You want that to be true.. with every ounce of your being. That doesn't make it ultimately true.

It's only true to you because you believe it to be true... and being your own island your beliefs create your reality and truths in your little world you mistake for the real world. Again belief. But if applied all the way down the idea of a real world starts to fall apart because the world is an accumulation of beliefs. Outside of belief which is attachment to thought it doesn't exist. Therefore it has no inherent existence... i'll stop because everything starts to fall apart at this point but you should see what i'm getting at. If you don't you're lying to yourself and i don't care whether you do or not... just don't demonize human beings for having opposing beliefs in your ignorance.

 

[Roz]

The formula has be laid out for me in the Holy Bible. Islam is the hydra as far as I can see. Anything that pushes people away from Jesus is demonic. The New Testament is the last Word of God. That means to me that Islam is false.

Your ignorance is astounding... Jesus is a prophet in Islam, and all three religions Islam, Christianity, and Judaism are Abrahamic religions, tracing back to Abraham... The Bible is a book based on many other texts, and stories that were passed on... Over the years it's been translated and edited countless times, but individuals like yourself, claim they get all the answers from it... The story of Jesus is not an original story even, it was based on the story of Horus from the Egyptians...

 

[LyfeCentenz]

The formula has be laid out for me in the Holy Bible. Islam is the hydra as far as I can see. Anything that pushes people away from Jesus is demonic. The New Testament is the last Word of God. That means to me that Islam is false.

The bible is holy because you believe it to be. The authority of the bible is not based on the bible itself. Anyone could write a bible and state that its the word of god that they received and you're at liberty to believe them or not. Islam is the hydra to you and you are the hydra to Islam... Islamic extremists to clarify which don't represent the totality of the belief system. But you're missing the Hydra analogy still. Both sides are still heads. The root is belief which is identification with thought. And the beliefs don't have to be discarded but they have to be seen for what they are... totally... in the expanse of their existence creating all countries, creeds, religions etc... all of those concepts and divisions being themselves inseparable from belief.

Anything that pushes people away from being kind and compassionate would be considered "demonic"... there's no kindness or compassion in what you are saying... thats what your jesus preached... your standpoint outlook is devoid of understanding and reason. The New Testament is the last word of God based on the authority of the Catholic Church which YOU accepted as true... so if you accepted that as the truth then by default you believing Islam is false equally only has what could be referred to as a defeated echo of personal truth in your skewed personal world and has no basis in reality and is therefore false.

These truths are in your mind. Your mind is a sequence of thoughts in time. How can a thought touch reality. How can a thought touch what could be considered truth. Reality and truth are themselves concepts in thought. A thought is a vibration in awareness speaking a learned language. In memory and time which are concepts as well. It all falls apart... and this isn't a nihilistic point i'm trying to make because they all exist relatively in their respected applications. But they're only as real as YOU MAKE THEM.

DON'T MISTAKE BELIEF AND OPINION FOR COLLECTIVE ULTIMATE TRUTH.

Collective ultimate truth being an empty concept as well... i'm not giving any alternate answers here, i have no answers and know no truths but i will annihilate your ground to stand on.

 

[KCHustla]

The formula has be laid out for me in the Holy Bible. Islam is the hydra as far as I can see. Anything that pushes people away from Jesus is demonic. The New Testament is the last Word of God. That means to me that Islam is false.

Like I said in my previous post... "why would we blindly support a country which is obviously against many ideals of this country and constitution? Can someone explain why we have such a lopsided (monetary) relationship or any relationship at all with them without using God or anything from the bible in your answer? We are supposed to have seperation of church and state but it seems like that is the sole reasoning behind blindly supporting them."

Seperation of church and fucking state. No right winger can give me an answer to why we support them other than religious reasons. We built this country on the total opposite thinking. We would not support them and their human rights abuses against a whole creed of people were it not for religious reasons. Its fucking stupid and our constition clearly is against what is going on.

 

[MrDiamondFDC]

Because the U.S. being allies with Israel is a great strategic tool and Christians have wanted control of the city for centuries. The Jews won't always be lost and there are sects of Jews that believe in The Trinity. They are just overlooked. Just like the Arabic Christians that are beaten and killed when they speak out about situations in Iran, Syria, & Saudi Arabia and now Gaza & the West Bank. Everything about that city is special.

 

[MrDiamondFDC]

the Catholic Church which YOU accepted as true... .

I'm not Catholic or Calvinist.

Your ignorance is astounding... Jesus is a prophet in Islam, and all three religions Islam, Christianity, and Judaism are Abrahamic religions, tracing back to Abraham... The Bible is a book based on many other texts, and stories that were passed on... Over the years it's been translated and edited countless times, but individuals like yourself, claim they get all the answers from it... The story of Jesus is not an original story even, it was based on the story of Horus from the Egyptians...

And Islam doesn't acknowledge that Jesus died on the cross or that he was the Son of God and the Jews are still waiting for the Messiah. They are lost.

 

[Dhadnot]

so basically suck the jews dick but fuck the muslims?

 

[MrDiamondFDC]

Israel has never attacked us. They are our nuclear power in the Middle East.

 

[LyfeCentenz]

I'm not Catholic or Calvinist.



And Islam doesn't acknowledge that Jesus died on the cross or that he was the Son of God and the Jews are still waiting for the Messiah. They are lost.

I'm saying you have accepted the dogma as true, which you eloquently showed as true in this same post replying to roz. You believe that jesus died on the cross, you believe that he was the son of god, I'm not saying the dogma is true or isn't true i'm simply saying it all comes back to belief. If i say the dogma isn't truth that would be just as much a belief as you saying it is true. If you say Islam is lost because they don't acknowledge jesus died on the cross etc... thats your opinion and belief. It doesn't make it true.. its only true to you. You're mistaking your opinion and belief for some type of standard inherent truth and you're judging others against that belief.

They don't believe what you believe. They have a different belief system. They believe their dogma just as much as you believe yours. Attachment to the belief is the problem. Strict attachment... mistaking belief for reality is the problem because it creates separation. Once division is made the seed of war is planted.

I'm simply attempting to make you see what i'm saying. What i'm saying doesn't require any belief i'm not asking you to believe something new or attach to a new idea. Its simply a change in perspective. If what i'm saying is truly seen then there should be a substantial realization leading to that new perspective.

The only difference between you and them are concepts, beliefs and ideas. And as a human being on this planet in this universe you have every right to believe whatever you want.. but so does everyone else.

Think of it this way for an example, hypothetically, if all of a sudden everyones memory was wiped out on the face of the earth would any of these problems/divisions/separations/wars still exist? Fuck no they wouldn't.

Why are your beliefs omniscient?

Thats the thing, there is actually no problem with you being this way, i know you don't know any better it's hard to see these things. The identification with thought, opinion, belief creates a pseudo-self identity and thats who you are... it's not fun to hear that who you take yourself to be is constructed of beliefs and opinions. Reality is whole and unbroken and every facet of it is interconnected and creates the other side. In Buddhism is called the law of interdependent origination... summed up in the statement "this is, that becomes"... if hot arises then you automatically know cold. Darkness automatically creates light. Good automatically creates bad. They depend on each other. The illusion is not seeing the connectedness between the polarities and thats where suffering spawns from. So wanting to have good all the time. And people do this, they go through life and want to feel happy all the time, they want good things and positive things to happen all the time. But the other shoe always drops... you always have to have a bad day, bad things happen etc... so relate that to this social-political-religious discussion... you can't have one thing all the time. If a conceptual belief system like christianity, islam, hinduism, buddhism, taoism, judaism etc... automatically not-that-belief-system arises. And that has to be respected. You have to know the world you're in otherwise you struggle and suffer in illusory games that create problems.

So by you being a completely thought-based form-involved strict believer of dogma and opinions unable to accept the other polarity you couldn't have someone who does see the need for the other polarity. It all creates each other its all perfect.

But there is a right view that can lead to less conflict and suffering in the world and that's what i'm discussing.

 

[MrDiamondFDC]

II was responding to KCHustla and Roz, but it's cool that you took the time to type all that out. I was just sayin to you that I'm not Catholic and don't follow Catholic doctrine or dogma so don't put me in that group. I'm Protestant, just not Calvinist. The last church I went to regularly was a First Baptist church. I got churches all around me so I'd like to go to a different one each week and listen to the sermon and give some money.

I get what yer sayin though. Muslims ain't gonna quit believing what they believe and Christians and Jews ain't either. Everybody wants that land because of it's significance. I just voice a different opinion than the blame America, blame Israel stuff that is becoming the norm. I don't hate all Arabs or Muslims either. I have some friends from Afghanistan that moved here before 9/11 and told me some really bad shit about what went on and probably still does goes on there. I trust my life in the hands of a doctor of Afghani decent, yet a proud American that I would fight for if needed. I'm not a total fuckin loon. Not like the Iranian leader that believes he has to kill 1/3 of the population to bring on the return of the 13th Imam and Jesus.

About being omniscient? I like to have at least some type of answer to everything if that's what you mean and dwell on shit that I don't know or understand. Of course I'm gonna care more about stuff that I believe and follow. I am fascinated in stuff like the stories of Nibiru and the Anunnaki because of the links to events in the Old Testament. I don't believe the story of aliens creating us, but it reinforces my beliefs in God and the stories in the Bible That might be backward to some people, but that's how I work.

The Jews returning to Israel is one of the biggest things to happen since the Crucifixion. I haven't been radical and said that I wanted the Dome of The Rock torn down and the Temple of Solomon rebuilt, even though it will happen eventually.

 

[JoMoDo]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...LEAR?SITE=VABRM&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- U.S. officials have convinced Israel that Iran needs at least a year to develop a nuclear weapon, dimming prospects of an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, The New York Times reports.

Israeli officials thought Iran could develop nuclear weapons within months. But Gary Samore, President Barack Obama's top adviser on nuclear issues, told the Times he thinks it would take Tehran "roughly a year" to turn low-enriched uranium into weapons-grade material.

"A year is a very long period of time," Samore was quoted by the newspaper in an report posted on its website late Thursday.

The assessment is based on U.S. intelligence and international inspectors' reports.

Israeli officials have indicated that if they thought Iran was developing a nuclear weapon, they would probably take military action. Iran says it is enriching uranium only for peaceful purposes.

American and Israeli officials believe that Iran has only enough nuclear materials for two weapons. And to build those two would require the country to kick out international inspectors, which would make it clear what its intentions were.

It would also take some time for Iran to convert its nuclear facilities to produce weapons-grade uranium.

Iran has added relatively few centrifuges - machines that enrich uranium - this year, and only about half of those are working, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

"Either they don't have the machines, or they have real questions about their technical competence," Samore told the Times.

Israeli officials remain suspicious that Iran has a secret enrichment site.

 

[MrDiamondFDC]

I hope that it's just a smokescreen for the U.S. & Israel to plan full Shock & Awe on Iran. If it's not then shit is gonna get deep next year with Israel doing it themselves. Things will change a bit in november when the Jews (who are a major voting block) vote Republican in protest to Obama and his policy.

 

[ColdBlooded]

Why Iran's nuclear reactor may not be an immediate threat

Many breathless pundits have argued in recent days that the world faces a now-or-never window of opportunity to bomb Iran's new Bushehr nuclear reactor to neutralize any potential nuclear threat from Tehran.

Former UN Ambassador John Bolton says the deadline for destroying it must be before the first fuel is loaded on Saturday – and before it becomes more of a radioactive and political mess to destroy.

The reactor, once operating, could give Iran enough plutonium-laced spent fuel to make up to 60 nuclear weapons within 12 to 18 months of operation, according to nuclear experts.

Still, many leading US nuclear scientists caution that even after Russia begins fueling the power plant that it built in southern Iran, the international community will have at least two weeks, and possibly longer, while fuel is being loaded to evaluate the situation since Bushehr will not become instantly radioactive.

"A good number of people have erroneously assumed that once the Russians load the fuel in Bushehr, the plant 'goes radioactive,' " Henry Sokolski, director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, a Washington think tank, writes in an e-mail.

Though he opposes bombing, "the amount of reactivity in the reactor initially is relatively low, so low that the amount of radioactive material that might be dispersed if the plant was bombed would be negligible" for weeks or months.

But other experts say the time is just a few weeks at most. Intense radioactive buildup won't begin at Bushehr until the reactor is turned on after fuel loading is completed on Sept. 5, Iranian officials say.

After that, the intensity of the radiation buildup depends on the power output, says Frank Von Hipple, a nuclear nonproliferation expert and physicist at Princeton University.

"I think that the idea of bombing Bushehr – whether in a day or a month – is crazy," he says.

The potential environmental and health impacts of bombing Bushehr after it is operating depends on wind conditions and how much radiation has built up inside the reactor, he says. Long- and short-lived radiation levels would be relatively small until power output reaches perhaps 10 percent or more, Dr. Von Hipple says.

But dangerous levels of radioactivity could be reached in less than a week after Bushehr begins operating, says Edwin Lyman, a nuclear physicist with the Union of Concerned Scientists, who also does not favor bombing.

Radiation will build up significantly in the two-week span after Sept. 5, if Iranians ramp up power to 50 percent as they say they will, he says.

"There will be an enormous quantity of radioactivity even at a fraction of the rated power of the reactor soon after startup," Lyman writes in an e-mail. "Even after a few days at a significant power level, like 20 percent, these [radioactive isotopes] would be numerous enough to be of great concern if released into the environment."

While Von Hipple, Mr. Sokolski, or Dr. Lyman differ on how significant the threat from Bushehr is, all say that the reactor's first year to 18 months – when the first load of nuclear fuel is being irradiated – will be telling. That's where agreement ends.

During that period of time, Bushehr's first load of fuel could produce about 300 kilograms (kg) of weapons-usable plutonium – enough to entice the Iranians to cheat on international inspectors, Sokolski says. The fuel would be lower in radioactivity at this time – so easier to handle – while also higher in plutonium concentration and better for making bombs.

Von Hipple says it would be about one-third that amount. Still, it takes as little as 6 kg of plutonium to build a bomb, he says.

"The reactor uses tons of low enriched uranium that can be diverted and enriched to make bomb grade uranium fuel – and it produces tons of spent fuel that contains weapons useable plutonium," Sokolski says. The plutonium could be "stripped out chemically relatively quickly in small plants that could be built covertly."

Lyman and Von Hipple agree this scenario is conceivable *– but just barely, they say. It is far less likely, for instance, than the possibility that Iran might simply build a clandestine fuel-enrichment plant to develop bomb fuel with no connection at all to Bushehr.

"Iran would have to steal the fuel out from the under the noses of international inspectors," Lyman says. "The only rationale for using fuel from Bushehr is if they wanted a much higher rate of weapons production which would require a hard-to-conceal large-scale reprocessing plant. I don't think it would be a great benefit to them to build a small quick and dirty plant."

In Lyman's view, Iran is unlikely to tap into Bushehr's closely watched trove and risk the wrath of the world. The reactor does not pose a large proliferation threat as long as close international monitoring continues – and it can exclude the existence of a clandestine plant to reprocess Bushehr fuel.

The spent fuel rods are supposed to go back to Russia and Iran has said all along that it has no intention of building nuclear weapons.

"It's not a slam dunk that the Iranians could get away with it," says Von Hipple of the diversion scenario. "The question is: Is this the most plausible way for Iran, if wants a bomb? What is the lowest risk way to go about it? This doesn't seem like the way to do it."

But whether the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is up to the task of ensuring that none of the fuel in Bushehr goes missing worries Sokolski. If IAEA inspectors check their cameras and appear on-site only once every 90 days, which is standard practice, then fuel could be stolen, processed, and installed in waiting bombs before anyone could do anything, he says.

Bushehr's fuel could be clandestinely extracted and made into bomb material using a "quick and dirty" reprocessing approach made public by Oak Ridge National Laboratory researchers in the 1970s, Sokolski notes.

"You couldn't filch this stuff without it being noticed eventually," he says in an interview. "But the point is: What is anyone going to do about it?"

While the Russian light-water reactor design is widely regarded as fairly resistant to misuse – the technical capabilities of the reactor to produce bomb material are quite clear, experts say.

"It's technically true that the spent fuel coming out of this light-water reactor will be more radioactive and difficult to use for nuclear weapons as time between refueling grows," says Leonard Spector, a nonproliferation expert who directs the Washington office of the Monterey Institute of International Studies. "It's also absolutely true that the spent fuel from it can be reprocessed [to obtain plutonium] for use in nuclear weapons."

But whether Iran is willing to divert fuel from the reactor in defiance of the global community, reprocess it into bomb fuel, and thereby set off a firestorm of condemnation and likely military attacks is unknown.

"Definitely there's a game going on with Iran building secret underground facilities," Lyman, the nuclear physicist, says. "My point is whether there is a real need for immediate military action when we have already tolerated the Iranians building thousands of centrifuges? I don't think so."

 

[mudoloc_650]

i think the problem here is the same problem that always arises when speaking on religion, some people don't know what the word OPINION means. They keep pressing they're beliefs on other people and keep bashing and telling them they're wrong, AGREE TO DISAGREE THEN MOVE ON! stubborn ass people like timm are ruining this discussion

 

[Timm]

disagree and you're a fucking troll racist

 

[iaoish]

You look awful scary there in the backseat waving that gun around, timothy.

But when are you going to post something that has actually something to do with the topic. (that doesn't only go for this thread but for all where I've seen your name pop up).

 

[iaoish]

i think the problem here is the same problem that always arises when speaking on religion, some people don't know what the word OPINION means. They keep pressing they're beliefs on other people and keep bashing and telling them they're wrong, AGREE TO DISAGREE THEN MOVE ON! stubborn ass people like timm are ruining this discussion

And to think they all pray to the same god even, that is so sad....

 

[LyfeCentenz]

 

[MrDiamondFDC]

And to think they all pray to the same god even, that is so sad....

But Muslims and Jews don't acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God and God in the flesh....but that has nothing to do with Iran wanting to destroy Israel.

Dude had a good speaking voice and that's it.

 

[iaoish]

But Muslims and Jews don't acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God and God in the flesh....but that has nothing to do with Iran wanting to destroy Israel.



Dude had a good speaking voice and that's it.

So because they don't acknowledge him to be the son of god, they must all be killed?
I am not sure but I thought the message Jesus spread was about peace and love?
I am also not a christian, must I be killed for that sole reason?

Isn't this thread about Isreal bombing Iran and not the other way around.