Iran claims Assasination of their Scientist.

Are you counting the long war with Iraq, by any chance?
And want to hazard a guess as to who is the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism?

The US did and it brought an instant end to WWII. Countless lives were saved and a long door to door campaign in Japan was averted.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8028064.stm Iran, if you believe all the facts and studies.

 

No, Iran-like many other nations-wants to see the Zionist cabal, ruining Israel and any chance of peace, vanish from the pages of time. I agree.

 

Yep, they murdered a moderate Israeli jew in the aftermath of Oslo did they not?

 

Uh huh. So America didn't sponsor Pol Pot or the Contras, didn't invade based Iraq on a lie or two, didn't get involved in Vietnam for nothing but ideological reasons, didn't invade Korea for much the same, didn't bomb countless nations in the name of 'democracy', didn't start the sh1t you're now getting from Iran by overthrowing Mossadegh. Yep, America is the innocent party in all this...

 

Zionism = Jewish Israel

Thanks for confirming my worst fears, Ahamdinejad does want to get rid of Israel as a jewish homeland.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Yitzhak_Rabin

 

Iran responded to Iraqi aggression not the other way around...Is there an issue you actually have not been brainwashed by?

 

In your dreams mate, in your dreams.

 

Thanks for that, his name escaped me.

 

Nope, Zionism is a fascist ideology not a nation state, just as Nazism was a fascist ideology. If during WW2 a leader of another nation said that he desired the destruction of Nazism, this would not correlate to the destruction of Germany. Equally the desire to wipe communism from the pages of time, would not mean the destruction of say the pre 1989 Soviet Union as a land mass..Jeez, you are dumb.

 

You are talking about issues that ALL had their beginnings in the Cold War, and like all good liars you want to spotlight the actions of one nation without mentioning at all the culpability the Soviet Union (and their many client states) had in all this.

Without the US facing down the Soviet bear, you and your friends in the sh*tty UK would be slurping borscht, kissing the rings of Russian mobsters (like Putin) and dancing to the delightful sounds of Diskoteka Avariya.
You needn't thank us. Just **** and realize how asinine you sound.

 

This from The Guardian, London, January 1, 1999, on de-classified British Foreign Office documents:

'The Soviet Union had no intention of launching a military attack on the West at the height of the cold war, British military and intelligence chiefs privately believed, in stark contrast to what Western politicians and military leaders were saying in public about the "Soviet threat".
"The Soviet Union will not deliberately start general war or even limited war in Europe", a briefing for the British Chiefs of Staff-marked Top Secret, UK Eyes Only, and headed The Threat: Soviet Aims and Intentions-declared in June 1968.
"Soviet foreign policy has been cautious and realistic", the department argued, and despite the Vietnam war, the Russians and their allies had "continued to make contacts in all fields with the West and to maintain a limited but increasing political dialogue with NATO powers".

What 'culpability'?

 

Oh, God no! The same "experts" in British intelligence hierarchy also thought they could throw the Czechs and their Sudetenland to Hitler and he would leave them all alone.
I don't know which is more stupid: English experts or your citing of them.

 

I'm afraid the sponges soak up the propaganda they are fed like obedient slaves. Marx described layers and layers of propaganda throughout time as being akin to what he described as the 'muck of ages'. He was absolutely right.

 

Do I really have to cite US experts too?

 

You are kidding right, Even if it is true and the Soviets indeed had no intention to attack the West, it was because it was protected by the US, not because of the Soviets' good peace loving pacifist nature. Do you seriously think the Soviets would not consider an attack if the US declared its neutrality and withdrew from NATO? Come on, get real.

 

If you want. I would just counter with the testimony of other experts, however.
A real intelligent person though would look at what the Soviet Union did during the Cold War...not what think tank heroes said about them.
Look at Soviet Union expansionism, particularly after WWII. Ask those living in East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Romania, for instance, what they know of Soviet Union expansionism.

What the US did all during the Cold War was to confront and counter Soviet Union expansionism. It was often horrible what we did but the greater good was served and I have people in my own family that lived in East Germany under Soviet client rulers. They have no doubt whatsoever that they would have been better off had the east of Germany not fallen into Soviet hands. It doesn't even bear repeating.

 

You have no admissible evidence. Just idle speculation.

 

You are like a physician who examines a dying patient and assumes the patient is fine because he is not yet dead. The doctor's clean bill of health doesn't change the fact that the patient is dying. You suffer from sclerotic thinking. But since the patient is dying any way I suppose it doesn't matter.

 

Do your words constitute an iron clad guarantee?