Originally posted by ivanhoeTake as long as you would like, it isn't a very difficult problem. If you prefer we will put it an imaginary land.
Not much choice .... but I guess you're the quizz master.
I have to think about it. How much time do I get ?
So country one claims falsely to have evidence against country three and invades country three. Country one qualifies for the World Cup.
The leader of country two spouts stupid statements about country four. Country four is closely allied to country one. Country four has illegally occupied areas of country five. Country five is closely allied with country two. Country two qualifies for the World Cup.
Which of the two countries that qualified for the World Cup is guilty of doing something worse?
A simple question is what is worse; Rhetoric or Action?
Originally posted by CliffLandinThey're both bad puppies, I guess .... so ..... let's kick both of them out of the World Cup .... yeah, that's it ... that's my answer.
Take as long as you would like, it isn't a very difficult problem. If you prefer we will put it an imaginary land.
So country one claims falsely to have evidence against country three and invades country three. Country one qualifies for the World Cup.
The leader of country two spouts stupid statements about country four. Country four is closely ...[text shortened]... p is guilty of doing something worse?
A simple question is what is worse; Rhetoric or Action?
Okay, so you are saying that rhetoric is equal to an illegal invasion of a soviergn country. Interesting.
So if the country is guilty of both rhetoric and illegal invasion?
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Wednesday that Iran must live up to its international obligations to halt its nuclear program or "the next steps are in the offing."
"And I think everybody understands what the 'next steps' mean," Rice told reporters after a meeting with NATO foreign ministers and European Union officials.
Sounds like a threat to me.
I tend to waver on this issue. I'm more in favour of boycotts and demonstratons than I am of bans: if people want to protest the Iranian President's virulent speeches, the best way to do it would be to let the Iranian team play their opponents in an empty stadium.
Personally, as much as I detest the recent developments in Iranian politics, I think you have to remember that theological populism, for all its flaws, is a variant of democracy, and targeting the nation for something one particular politician has said is a slightly crude approach.
Originally posted by CliffLandinYes, it is. It is a threat to bring Iran before the Security Council in an attempt to impose economic sanctions. The question is whether France, Russia and China will agree or use their veto right.
Okay, so you are saying that rhetoric is equal to an illegal invasion of a soviergn country. Interesting.
So if the country is guilty of both rhetoric and illegal invasion?
[b]U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Wednesday that Iran must live up to its international obligations to halt its nuclear program or "the next steps are in the ...[text shortened]... ing with NATO foreign ministers and European Union officials.
Sounds like a threat to me.[/b]
Originally posted by ivanhoeOkay, so you agree that the US invaded Iraq illegally and that the US is spewing rhetoric against another nation. So who is the bigger threat to world peace?
Yes, it is. It is a threat to bring Iran before the Security Council in an attempt to impose economic sanctions. The question is whether France, Russia and China will agree or use their veto right.
As far as I know, Iran has not invaded any country in the modern era of Iran (post Shah). They did engage in a war with thier neighbor, the US backed forces of Saddam Hussein. So the country that is now threatening them has financed one war against them and has illegally invaded thier neighbor. The same country (the US) has made threats against Iran's ally Syria.
So based on this, who is the bigger threat to Middle East stability?
Originally posted by CliffLandinYou got me there Cliff.
Okay, so you agree that the US invaded Iraq illegally and that the US is spewing rhetoric against another nation. So who is the bigger threat to world peace?
As far as I know, Iran has not invaded any country in the modern era of Iran (post Shah). They did engage in a war with thier neighbor, the US backed forces of Saddam Hussein. So the country that ...[text shortened]... inst Iran's ally Syria.
So based on this, who is the bigger threat to Middle East stability?