The IRR, the Islamist Rapist Republic defiance of UN Security council resolutions and continuing its illegal nuke program is inching Iran ever closer to the edge of the precipice. The path IRR recklessly follows will result in human calamity and infrastructural devastation which will take generations of Iranians to recover from.
And like many other scoundrel regimes the Islamist Rapists are using the patriotism card with the sad thing being some are falling for it. To those the following is put to gauge the Islamist regime’s patriotic bona fide and their own devotional carelessness.
Lets imagine by divine intervention all the occupants of Iran were instantaneously transferred to Canada and from then on Canada was renamed Iran. Lets further imagine Canadians were supplanted in former Iran, now called Canada. Now as an Iranian it would be quite natural to have more affinity with Iranians in Iran (the former Canada) than with Canadians who live in Canada (the former Iran).
The point is true nationalism has to do more with love for certain people and their culture than for mountains, lakes and valleys. In other words Iran is loved because that is where Iranians are, if they were to be in Canada, that is where the love and unbridle loyalty would be showered on.
If this take on patriotism makes any sense, then buying into nationalism claims stemming from the IRR nuke program, the same regime which for thirty years has been raping, torturing and murdering Iranian men, women and children on a vast scale just does not make any sense. And thinking some do fall for such patently false claim, worse yet help out in perpetuation of such Islamist Rapist nationalism fraud are truly stupefying. It is the people, stupid!
Recently by Fred | Comments | Date |
---|---|---|
ادا اطوار اسلامی | 5 | Dec 05, 2012 |
مسجد همجنسگرایان | 1 | Dec 05, 2012 |
Iranians are legitimate target | 10 | Dec 04, 2012 |
Person | About | Day |
---|---|---|
نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
Nousha khanoum - the IR or the Shah?
by Setareh Cheshmakzan on Wed Nov 18, 2009 03:43 AM PSTI did answer you! I made it clear that the definition of a "Responsible" government for you is its responsibility towards Israel's agenda and not the people of Iran! It is true that I had optimistically assumed that you supported the Shah's regime because you were under the illusion that it had been democratic and independent! However, I did demonstrate in my last comment your hypocrisy by pointing out that you supported a regime that yourself acknowledge NOT to have been INDEPENDENT and DEMOCRATIC, but because of its responsible positions vis a vis Israel and the Western imperialist agenda, including Apartheid South Africa!!!
Secondly, There is no evidence despite a lot of clamour by the Zionists and their backers that IR was responsible for the Argentine bombing, or that it is arming both Shia and Sunni in Iraq. But let us assume that to be the case and I agree it would be irresponsible and wrong. However the Shah's support for the brutal terrorist regime of Israel and apartheid South Africa were far more vicious acts of terrorism! The Shah's regime, when South Africa's economy was tittering under OPEC embargo, was the only OPEC country that sustained the Apartheid state by selling it most of its needed supply until the Shah's overthrow in 1979!
So as for comparison, taking into account all of IR's numerous domestic crimes and some irresponsible foreign policy, Israel still remains the arch terrorist state in the world by a very wide margin!
As for comparison with the Shah's regime, I couldn't care less wasting my time on something dead and long decayed. If you have ever been in Iran, you will have noticed that the monarchy is irrelevant there, so I wouldn't waste time pondering the magnitude of its crimes and concentrate instead on the IR and its crimes and responsibilities towards its people. Although my judgement is not coloured by my devotion to Israel and NeoCons!
Setare Khanoum
by Nousha Arzu on Wed Nov 18, 2009 02:07 AM PSTI'm so sorry to say this, but there is so much misinformation and outright pollution in your blog, I would need 10 hours, which I don't have, to correct you.
First, you put words in my mouh and claim that I said Iran was an "independent democratic" country under the Shah, and when I ask you to show me proof that I said such a thing, you point to my statement regarding Iran being a "responsible" government under the shah.
Responsible and "independent democratic" are two Waaaaaaaaaay different things, do you get that????
Yes, Iran was responsible under the Shah, in terms of its global agenda, in that it was not the world's biggest financier of terrorism around the world, as the IRI is -- do you get that?
Iran, under the Shah, did not bomb a Jewish community center in Argentina, as the IRI did in 1994. The Shah would never finance Hezbollah in Lebanon, nor the Hamas. And it would never finance BOTH the Sunnis and the Shiites in a blood bath in Iraq, as the IRI has and is still doing, merely to embarrass the US and expedite their exit.
Please, take a deep breath and chillax and do not EVER compare the IRI with the Shah's regime in ANY context, including domestic treatment of their citizenry.
The IRI is A BILLION times worse on all fronts, and deep in your heart, if you have one, you know this to be true!
LONG LIVE THE GLORY OF KUROSH
Nousha - keep the bridge, you need it dear!
by Setareh Cheshmakzan on Wed Nov 18, 2009 01:49 AM PSTYou have said before that "Israel had no problem with Iran getting nuclear energy in the 1970's when Iran was being ruled by a responsible government, neither did the USA for that matter. ... And I don't want one of the most ruthelss regimes in the world to have access to nukes! ..."
So you claim that the Shah's regime which you supported, though NOT an independent democratic state, was a responsible government! Therefore, for you what determines whether a regime is responsible is its relationship with Israel and Israel's approval of it, and not responsibility towards its own people.
Thank you indeed for clarifying the above point. I could not have done it better myself!
Secondly, you claim that you do not want "one of the most ruthless regimes in the world to have access to nukes"!! The Shah's regime too was domestically ruthless; the difference was in its subservience to the US and Israel! As far as external ruthlessness is concerned - which should be the issue to consider when it comes to the possession of nukes - Israel has shown itself to have surpassed the IR by a thousand light years! Israel is not only an apartheid state domestically, within the land it has brutally occupied, but the Goldstone report detailing Israeli war crimes in Gaza was approved overwhelmingly by the UN General Assembly only last week. Were you aware of that event or did it not matter?! The US too is the only country in the world that despite a measure of internal democracy, has used nukes on an innocent population and its record of brutality multiplies every second in the brutal occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq
So, Nousha khanoum, my previous reply regarding the ex-shah was related to your own confusion or may I say hypocrisy regarding Israel's position vis a vis Iran and the issue of why you don't want Iran to have access to nuclear technology.
In relation to Iran's attempts to make nuke, You still haven't provided any evidence beside evidence of your own deceitfulness and absence of concern for human suffering. You state your belief that possession of nukes by Iran is an insurance policy against external attack and that's why you are against Iran having access to nuclear technology! Regretfully, the the human suffering and death that would follow an external attack (to get rid of the IR) does not figure in your calculations! Neither have you considered that such an attack as well as sanctions would in fact strengthen the IR by uniting the population around the state in a state of national emergency.
Keep the bridge darling, just in case one day you value people's lives over cynical gain and vacuous rhetoric about responsibility.
Captain and Setare
by Nousha Arzu on Tue Nov 17, 2009 01:18 AM PSTCaptain
Stop spreading lies which Pino-Q created in his dimly-lit mind -- I was also accused of being "Laleh Gillani."
I won't argue with you any longer because you are a die-hard supporter of the IRI, "nuf said."
Setare writes: "I know you liked the Shah and support the monarchy but claiming Iran to have been an independent democratic state under his rule is taking it too far into delusional depths."
Can you show me exactly where I said that Iran, under the Shah, was an "independent democratic state."
Because I have never said such a thing! You people lie and deceive with such facility it's SCARY!
And if you think the mullahs are not trying to build a bomb, I have this bridge I wanna sell you in Brooklyn.
LONG LIVE THE GLORY OF KUROSH
question
by ex programmer craig on Mon Nov 16, 2009 04:08 PM PSTP/S for the records...... Iran is entitled to every and all defensive arsenal, including but not limited to nuclear arsenal. Any questions?
My only question is whether or not you realize that's illegal, Ayhab...
But while you are in a question answering mood, how do you feel about the Kurds wanted their land back from IRI, Iraq, and Turkey? You a big believer in the right of people to have their own sovereign nation on their own historical homeland correct? In fact, you seem to be saying that's reason enough to support a nationalist resistance movement? How would you feel if half the world started supporting the creation of Kurdistan? You're down with that right?
Ms Arzu again
by capt_ayhab on Mon Nov 16, 2009 03:40 PM PSTYou noted....[Bogus! "Israel IS hostile towards a powerful Iran, be it the Islamic Republic or an independent democratic nationalist secular government."]
You are correct, Israel is not hostile towards Iran, She is hostile toward the WORLD. She is the biggest threat to world peace and tranquility. Proof?
60 years of war and destruction under the excuse of self defense. Self defense against some rag tag resistance groups whom all they want is their homes back.
Khaili delet khoshe be moola
-YT
Ms. Arzu
by capt_ayhab on Mon Nov 16, 2009 03:34 PM PSTSomewhere in one of the blogs I read that you in fact use to post under the name of Mr. Sassan, who perhaps was banned for the beautiful language he/she used to use on people. But that really does not matter.
What matters is that you are absolutely and categorically clueless about anything and everything that goes around.
Dialogue.......
Dude/dudet, lets say Antarinejad said that[which every DECENT translators says that he did not], screw him anyways. But lets say that he said it.
Is that justification enough for attacking a country that happens to be my homeland? If so[try to comprehend this one ha] If so, then what about all the treats that Israel been using? from giving order to US to attack Iran to actual war and aerial raids?
and please, YOU trying to be objective about this issue, with your track record and all the hate speeches you have been rendering, claim of objectivity does not cut it sir/madame
-YT
P/S for the records...... Iran is entitled to every and all defensive arsenal, including but not limited to nuclear arsenal. Any questions?
Nousha - At any price!
by Setareh Cheshmakzan on Mon Nov 16, 2009 03:12 PM PSTIsrael was more tolerant to Iran at the time of the Shah because Iran was a member of the tripartite client states of America in the Middle East, along with Israel and Turkey. Israel was more tolerant towards Iran because Israel was using Iran as a lever to further its hegemony in the Middle East. Israel trained the Shah's notorious secret service which hunted, tortured and killed the dissidents of his dictatorial rule, as it trained and armed the fascist juntas in central America. I know you liked the Shah and support the monarchy but claiming Iran to have been an independent democratic state under his rule is taking it too far into delusional depths!
I oppose the IR unhesitatingly but firstly despite stringent monitoring and inspections by the IAEA, there is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. To date, no evidence has been offered by the main protagonists, that is Israel and the US of a nuclear weapons programme in Iran. The issue of contention is the technological know-how and if that offers Iran - under the IR or any other legitimate or illegitimate regime - a insurance policy against external aggression, I wholeheartedly support that. Considering the stockpile of nuclear bombs in Israel and its bloodthirsty and brutal record of war mongering and war crimes, the only safe insurance policy for the world, for Israel and for Iran would be global disarmament but in the first instance, Israel must be disarmed of its ACTUAL weapons programme. As for internal dissent, nuclear weapons are as good as a tin of chickpeas!
So the conclusion from your statement is that you are seeking the removal of the IR regime through external force, at any cost. Presumably the human cost of such an attack would mean nothing to you? Yes, I do get that! You pay any price so long as it's others who will pay by their blood and lives. Very patriotic and noble indeed!
Setareh
by Nousha Arzu on Mon Nov 16, 2009 12:03 PM PSTBogus!
"Israel IS hostile towards a powerful Iran, be it the Islamic Republic or an independent democratic nationalist secular government."
Israel had no problem with Iran getting nuclear energy in the 1970's when Iran was being ruled by a responsible government, neither did the USA for that matter. Stop your lies and misinformation, this isn't even about nuclear energy -- this is about nuclear bombs! And I don't want one of the most ruthelss regimes in the world to have access to nukes! Do you have a problem with that?
Nothing the IRI has ever done has been in the interest of Iran -- nothing, not even the nuclear program! It's sole purpose is to give the IRI a life insurance policy so that it won't be removed by external forces, in the order of Saddam Hussein -- it's not about nuclear energy!
Do you get that???
And anything that prolongs the life of this beast, I'm against, period!
LONG LIVE THE GLORY OF KUROSH
No Fear
by KouroshS on Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:53 AM PSTI flagged your commet for advocating excessively violent terminology and promoting Inhumane startegies to stop some whom you think "have gone that far".
Your claim is preserving iran's sovereignty but deep down you are promoting IRI's interests. That is wrong.
delete
by sag koochooloo on Thu Dec 03, 2009 02:37 AM PSTdelete
IF IRI is building nukes (to hazrate Fred)
by kharmagas on Mon Nov 16, 2009 07:08 AM PSTFred says: "Iranian men, women and children who are being raped, tortured and murdered..."
Hazrate Fred, Israel/U.S that you support, have been committing the same crimes on a much larger scale and against several nations in the middle East. Israel/U.S are capable of doing the same to Iran and the most/only effective weapons to stop them are nuclear weapons.
IF indeed IRI is planing to build the nukes, I wish it total success (note the big IF).
Nuclear Iran is the topic. Avoid side tracks.
by No Fear on Mon Nov 16, 2009 04:50 AM PSTTo Fred , Willy, Dick and mickey mouse;
Do you really think the west opposition to a nuclear Iran is really about weapons of mass distructions in the hand of IR? If your answer is yes to the above,
Think again, Its not about that at all. Iran already posses the largest stockpiles of bio and chemical weapons in middle east. We are talking about some of the world dirtiest WMDs here. In terms of human lives loss, these weapons are just as effective as a nuclear bomb. Iran REALLY doesn't need the bomb since it has said many times before ,if attacked by one, their response would be just as hard. A chemical attack over israel's largest cities can wipeout half of the jewish populations worldwide , and it will keep the infrastructures intact for the palestinians. Hezbollah can fire it on our behalf if needed. Israel knows this very well and can't afford to play with the Lion's tail. Thats why they need cheerleaders like you to provoke an attack by US on Iran.
The Nuclear issue has always been about the technology and the monopolization of a very important ( and cheap ) energy source. Who will form tomorrow's next energy cartel? ( We are talking enrichment here, do you follow, or are you still high? ). Ahmadinejad has repeatedly stated that his goal is to have enrichment facilities on an industrial scale. We can't use that for the bushehr plant since we have to buy the fuel from Russia. This can only means export and this is exactly where the problem lies. France, Britain and US are the major players in this market and ironically the ones oppose to Iran's enrichment.
Wake up, No one cares about human rights or democracy in todays world. Its all about Energy , Money and Economy. Economy is the driving force behind politic, not human rights, you fool.
Nuclear energy is one of the cheapest and safest form of energy and most likely be the main source of energy for tomorrow. Iran has recognized this and must not cave in to the pressure.
Nousha - you are very honest
by Setareh Cheshmakzan on Mon Nov 16, 2009 03:21 AM PST"As far as I care, Israel is the enemy of my enemy (the IRI), so that makes it my friend".
Although your honesty does not make your logic any less bankrupt! The enemy of one's enemy is not necessarily one's friend and people who act on this simple minded binary logic, often do so to their detriment.
The "little fact" of the hostility of Israel's neighbours towards it, is perhaps due to not so little fact that Israel has been a colonial racist occupation "from its inception", and has brutalised and terrorised the native inhabitants as part of a policy of extermination and driving them away. Its neighbours, by and large, are American client states and have either formally recognised this brutal occupation as a legitimate state or are turning a blind eye. As for the "right to exist", I can't imagine you are not aware of expanding settlements which have made a nonsence of any prospect of peace with the Palestinians and establishment of an independent Palestinian state!
When it comes to the question of the IR and Iran, my logic dictates that my opposition to the IR must not blind me to the fact of Iran's interests. The civil and human rights of Iranians vis a vis IR's repressive and oppressive rule do not stand in contradiction and opposition to the rights of the current and future generations to nuclear energy, technological progress, and military, strategic and economic strength. Israel IS hostile towards a powerful Iran, be it the Islamic Republic or an independent democratic nationalist secular government.
Fred, it's good to get all the adhominem attacks off your chest
by Q on Mon Nov 16, 2009 03:39 AM PSTWe all understand the theraputic function this has for you and have come to expect it from you.
We love to have more and more evidence when we tell someone what YOU are really about. So thanks again for the latest piece. We are thankful.
And thank you for proving that national rights (including nuclear rights) should be defended no matter what one's government is.
Sassan: Unless you are lying, you must be friends of Al-Qaeda, Saddam Hussein and Maryam Rajavi. Good to know!
Captain Ayhab
by Nousha Arzu on Mon Nov 16, 2009 02:21 AM PSTwrites: "Does any one notices that Israel, since its bloody inception been at war with every one??????????????"
Perhaps that has something to do with the little fact that none of the nations in its neighborhood accept its right to exist, not to mention now you have the president of Iran calling for it to be wiped off the face of the Earth???
Just trying to be objective here. As far as I care, Israel is the enemy of my enemy (the IRI), so that makes it my friend. But take the IRI out of the equation and I couldn't care less about Israel and its plight vis-a-vis its neighbors, in all honesty :-)
LONG LIVE THE GLORY OF KUROSH
Thanks gramps
by Fred on Mon Nov 16, 2009 02:05 AM PSTThank you Grandpa Islamist wedding photographer for demonstrating the point of the blog, Iranian men, women and children who are being raped, tortured and murdered have no place in your belated Islamist nationalism. It is the people & their culture gramps, the people.
BTW, there you go again with the plural pronouns, you are one Islamist and should use singular pronoun.
sophistry at its finest!
by Q on Sun Nov 15, 2009 06:43 PM PSTYou have outdone yourse AND made AIPAC proud, Fred jan, I have to hand it to you this time.
Persian Gulf, Caspian Sea, Arvand Rood, of course these things aren't important!!! (to YOU!) What's land, after all?
This from a proud Israel supporter is really rich!
According to your convinient fantasy de-jure, Iranian national rights can be kissed off now and will be "given" back to our "people" after the government that you don't approve of disappears.
Yes, we all remember how we got all the land (and citizens) lost under the Ghajars back as soon as that administration was gone!!! Why not? Wasn't that "Iranians" rights?
Your level of respect for Iranians has really sunk below zero now. You must think of us as total idiots if we are to buy this load of crap from you.
Shame on those who question Iran's sovereignty.
by No Fear on Sun Nov 15, 2009 06:30 PM PSTThe fact that you even question this fact makes you a traitor. There is no justification for that. How dare you compare a 50 year old country like israel with a country like Iran with a hundred times more history and an established administration for 2500 years.
To all true Iran lovers like Kharnagas and Ayhab, don't be discouraged by these second generation kids living and growing up in US who are clearly more in tuned with CNN and fox news than Iran's sovereignty. Thanks heavens that they are just a few trolls with no sense of nationalism. I guess globalism has affected their judgement. I don't hold any bad feelings towards them since they grow up in a different country. These are the types who become translators working with an occupying army. If they go that far, each and every one of them deserves a bullet between their eyes, that is what a collaborator always ends up getting.
I am a melli-mazhabi . I used to be only a part of it until i realized they can't be seperated and be as effectives without the other. I also support a faction within IR and believe in natural transitions politically and culturally.
But above all, I believe in Iran and its sovereignty. I will willingly give my life fighting alongside those who believe in the same.
Mr. Ayhab,
by Bijan A M on Sun Nov 15, 2009 03:21 PM PSTSir, slogans have their own world and place which could be entirely different from common sense and rational thinking.
If you thought you are making any sense or you think you are very creative in ridicule, please, think again…..
Ayhab
by ex programmer craig on Sun Nov 15, 2009 03:17 PM PSTWhat makes you think that I give a hoot about a criminal state like Israel?
Why wouldn't you? You seem to like criminal states! IRI is the biggest criminal state of them all, and you like IRI 100%! You said so yourself! Since when does Ayhab object to criminality?
Now if you'll excuse me I have to go run some errands for a while. Maybe you can go kick your dog or do whatever it is you do to amuse yourself, until I return.
Craig
by capt_ayhab on Sun Nov 15, 2009 03:12 PM PSTWhat makes you think that I give a hoot about a criminal state like Israel? Only thing that concerns me about Israel is one thing.. The constant and existential threat that they pose to Iran and the entire world. You wanna[as a neocon] bankroll and support that with lives, money and blood of the American youth be my guest. Who gives a crap?
Ya ghamare Bani Hashem[aka Jesus Christ]........... Does any one notices that Israel, since its bloody inception been at war with every one??????????????
-YT
Ayhab
by ex programmer craig on Sun Nov 15, 2009 03:05 PM PSTCongrats it took you only few months to figure that out.
Which? The drinking problem or the sexual dysfunction?
Not very bright are we craig?
Well, we can't all be used car salesmen who moonlight as college professors and try to deal with our alcohol induced impotence by eating viagra like it's candy and abusing random strangers on the internet. I'll grant you that!
Craig
by capt_ayhab on Sun Nov 15, 2009 03:01 PM PSTCongrats it took you only few months to figure that out. Not very bright are we craig?
Any other conclussion you have come up with?
-YT
Ayhab
by ex programmer craig on Sun Nov 15, 2009 02:59 PM PSTNational security and sovereignty of Iran is not subject of debate.
Yes it is. What makes Iran's national security off limits, when Iran threatens the national security of other countries such as the US, Israel, Yemen, Lebanon and Iraq?
What makes the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic off limits, when the Islamic Republic is a state sponsor of international terrorism, and when the islamic Republic threatens the sovereignty of other countries such as Yemen, Israel and Lebanon? What makes the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic off limits when the IRI violates the human rights of Iranians as a matter of routine?
What makes IRI special, that it should be protected from the consequences of its own actions Ayhab?
Let me phrase your statement differently:
National security and sovereignty of Israel is not subject of debate.
Now, how stupid does that look to you?
By the way, I see your testosterone levels are running particularly high today. You managed to get your viagra prescription refilled? Or are you just drunk? You seem to like accusing other people of hitting the bottle a lot... thou dost protest too much, methinks.
Ayhab
by ex programmer craig on Sun Nov 15, 2009 02:50 PM PSTDon't worry! I think we all know whose side you are on! The whole "I give 100% of my loyalty to Iran" thing kind of gave it away. And if not that, pretty much everything else you've ever said on this website has.
Mr. Bijan Am
by capt_ayhab on Sun Nov 15, 2009 02:45 PM PSTLets make one point clear, shall we?
National security and sovereignty of Iran is not subject of debate.
However we can debate whether sugar is sweet or tart if you and Mr. Fred like........
-YT
Mr. No Fear
by capt_ayhab on Sun Nov 15, 2009 02:42 PM PSTOn a different thread I read a comment from you that truly hit the home run with me and I an paraphrasing. You noted that[I will side with devil to protect Iran]
I wanted for you to know that I am glad there are other true lovers of Iran who think the way I do.
Regards
-YT
No Fear
by Bijan A M on Sun Nov 15, 2009 02:10 PM PSTYou still continue with your raw emotions. Forget about whether Fred or anyone else supports sanctions or war of some sort. We are just debating here. What the world ends up doing has nothing to do with what happens on this site.
So for the sake of debating, let me see if I understand your point. You say, in the face of having your hamvatans killed and your country’s infrastructure demolished you still will support the regime that is leading you to this fate, because you are a nationalist? Does that make sense to you? Isn’t that pure and simple raw emotion rather than logic and realism?
I think Fred has a sensible point (within a debate context). To support a system that in all likelihood (very high probability) will drive your nation towards pain and even destruction, is simply childish (nationalism or not).
No Fear
by ex programmer craig on Sun Nov 15, 2009 01:47 PM PSTDid someone mentioned we as a nation should suck up ( becoming friends ) to other countries for our protection?
Being on friendly terms = sucking up?
Glad I don't have to work with you, buddy! You must have an absolutely charming way of asserting your independent thinking by deliberately alienating everyone else in the office. You get fired a lot?
I can't believe i am reading this crap. Did you give your lunch away to the bully at school for his
attention and protection?
Did you spend a lot of time at school calling people names and stealing their homework and then wonder why nobody liked you?
Well, in any case it's quite silly for somebody to takes a great deal of pride in promoting hostility towards other countries to be complaining when those other countries return the favor. You think threatening war is a rational way of trying to prevent war? It's absurd. That's exactly what starts wars. Just like in high school... you walk around threatening fights, you end up getting in fights a lot. Lets all pretend that picking fights is a good way to avoid fights, shall we?