Israel - Palestine discussion thread

[Blitz24]

Where is your proof that Iran isn't an attacking nation? Where is your proof Iran isn't dangerous? You believe Israel will destroy the world and that the people there are wrong. So Iran isn't a threat and if they build a bomb then they are justified because Israel, the great evil of the world, has one.


Your response to this (if you have one) will either be one of condescension, claiming I am off topic or saying that what I am saying is irrelevant. You don't seem to believe that other people have any intelligence on the situation.

 

[VolkswagenX]

Where is your proof that Iran isn't an attacking nation? Where is your proof Iran isn't dangerous? You believe Israel will destroy the world and that the people there are wrong. So Iran isn't a threat and if they build a bomb then they are justified because Israel, the great evil of the world, has one.


Your response to this (if you have one) will either be one of condescension, claiming I am off topic or saying that what I am saying is irrelevant. You don't seem to believe that other people have any intelligence on the situation.

Where is your proof that Iran is an attacking nation and should be seen as a real danger? Where is your proof of an Iranian threat?

 

[F1jocker12]

in 2002, when the UN opinion regarding Middle East stability was immediately undermined

in 1992, when Iraq went about almost immediately going against UN Resolutions

in 1982, when the UN kept passing increasingly strongly worded Resolutions against the Iranian-Iraqi war up to and including accusing the countries of actual war crimes

You are correct, and UN stood strong against abuses of any sort. Also I agree there was no reason whatsoever to veto any of the Israel-Palestinians Resolutions as well, like US continuously ended up doing.

The Resolutions reflect correct decisions on UN's side, while bullying nations are not following them. United Nations is not an "arbiter", is the "Supreme Court" and questioning it's decisions is useless. At this point you are trying to find flaws in "Supreme's Court" decisions and I must say, like anywhere in the world, if there are any problems with the law, consequently there will be problems with the decisions made by following that law. In this case, they are based on the Declaration of Human Rights

Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are all interrelated, interdependent and indivisible.

Universal human rights are often expressed and guaranteed by law, in the forms of treaties, customary international law , general principles and other sources of international law. International human rights law lays down obligations of Governments to act in certain ways or to refrain from certain acts, in order to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals or groups

and the Chapters of the UN Charter.

The abuses you are enumerating, had nothing to do with UN ratified decisions.

1441 didn't give anybody "green light" to invade. Doesn't have anything to do with Israel or Gaza Strip.

The moment you learn about the UN Security Council Resolutions on the Israel-Arab matter, you understand where the problem is and how can be resolved.

@Blitz24

Your response to this (if you have one) will either be one of condescension, claiming I am off topic or saying that what I am saying is irrelevant. You don't seem to believe that other people have any intelligence on the situation.

hahahaha... sorry... I couldn't hold it.

@VolkswagenX

Where is your proof that Iran is an attacking nation and should be seen as a real danger? Where is your proof of an Iranian threat?

Thank you.

 

[squadops]

Iran is involved with offensives in the region to the same degree as Saudi Arabia, The U.S. and others. Is that really a question?

The Syrian Golan, Yemen, how about in Iraq, specifically Tikrit? We'll overlook the last one as they are fighting a common enemy lol

Major General Qasem Soleimani, the shadowy former leader of the elite Quds Force, the special operations arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IGRC), is directly overseeing the eastern offensive on Tikrit. The Iranian general has been pictured on the outskirts of the city in photos shared widely on social media.

http://www.newsweek.com/iranian-military-mastermind-leading-battle-recapture-tikrit-isis-311516

A picture to make em look scary

Oh, their 'cyber army' has taken credit for a few things, it's hard to say what's fact in that arena but ...

edit.
@F1jocker12, Bin Laden didn't need Israel's actions to become crazy, he simply was. You cannot justify terrorist actions that way, there is always a right and wrong way to go about obtaining justice.

 

[F1jocker12]

Iran is involved with offensives in the region to the same degree as Saudi Arabia, The U.S. and others. Is that really a question?

The Syrian Golan, Yemen, how about in Iraq, specifically Tikrit? We'll overlook the last one as they are fighting a common enemy lol


http://www.newsweek.com/iranian-military-mastermind-leading-battle-recapture-tikrit-isis-311516

A picture to make em look scary

Oh, their 'cyber army' has taken credit for a few things, it's hard to say what's fact in that arena but ...

The story starts like this....

A notorious Iranian commander is spearheading the Iraqi offensive on the ISIS-held city of Tikrit, providing tactical expertise and a key link to Tehran for supplies to the Iraqi militias advancing on the terror group’s territory.

This week, a combination of 30,000 Iraqi security forces, Sunni and Shia militiamen launched a campaign to retake the Sunni-majority city

The fact that one iranian general is leading iraqis in fighting ISIS is not showing how Iran was, is, or it would be an aggressor. That would be when the Supreme Leader will give a direct order to iranian military forces to invade or attack a foreign country or a foreign territory. What you show here is (the best case scenario) some military support against ISIS to help iraqis liberate the city of Tikrit.

 

[squadops]

I keep forgetting to pick up a copy of the F1jocker12 dictionary. It's more than military support, they have vested interests. And of course you leave out the Syrian Golan and Yemen. They are aggressors, smart ones but ones all the same.

At this point in the game you can't hardly not be, however their main aggression is against Israel, you know this but choose to look away.

 

[Johnnypenso]

No problem with the translation at all, seems spot on to me. Hope it isn't too difficult for you:

Everything is possible. All the mountains that hinder the movement of people, it is removable.Forty years ago, when forty years have passed, the fate of Israel is perishable and must be destroyed. Until a while ago, no one thought that these superpowers East would collapse.

Time and again it has carried with pride and arrogance .
He stressed: As Imam Myfrmvd, Israel must be wiped out. The destruction of Israel as the only real cure, which means the elimination of the Jewish people in this area...

With the Lord's help, this cruel and murderous regime destroyed,

But of course he means the good definition of destroyed and the good wiped out...not the bad one right?

I did find this part particularly funny...funny like going to a KKK meeting with my pointy hat on, and listening to the other pointy hats cheering wildly after the Chairwoman of the NAACP gives a speech on civil rights:

Gaza's dominant behavior with cruelty to prove that they are human beings, human rights, humanity, faith, and have absolutely no say anything about freedom and human rights, freedom and human rights are ridiculed

EDIT: Found these gems off to the left under "SMS's":

View attachment 341668

I suppose they mean the good massacre right?

I see you missed this @F1jocker12 . Care to address this or just going to avoid answering as usual?

 

[Imari]

It is not tear gas or rubber bullets, it is heavy military weapons.

Did you really just post this after we've been through several posts of arguing about the non-lethality of said weapons, which ended with you posting evidence that they were in fact not heavy military weapons, but low calibre riot control stuff?

You're so caught up in your own rhetoric that even when a new piece of information turns up you appear to be incapable of incorporating that into your worldview. It doesn't suit you to say that the army responded to riots with appropriate weapons, during the use of which a number of civilians were injured with varying degrees of severity, some of them children.

You have to make it into "the Israeli army shoots children!"

I would choose to describe the situation using the first description, because I think it provides an accurate and unbiased outline of events from which people can make up their own minds about what's going on.

Why do you choose the second? You're intentionally omitting relevant information. To what purpose?

 

[F1jocker12]

Did you really just post this after we've been through several posts of arguing about the non-lethality of said weapons, which ended with you posting evidence that they were in fact not heavy military weapons, but low calibre riot control stuff?

You're so caught up in your own rhetoric that even when a new piece of information turns up you appear to be incapable of incorporating that into your worldview. It doesn't suit you to say that the army responded to riots with appropriate weapons, during the use of which a number of civilians were injured with varying degrees of severity, some of them children.

You have to make it into "the Israeli army shoots children!"

I would choose to describe the situation using the first description, because I think it provides an accurate and unbiased outline of events from which people can make up their own minds about what's going on.

Why do you choose the second? You're intentionally omitting relevant information. To what purpose?

As you can see in the picture and read in the article

http://972mag.com/israeli-army-increasing-use-of-live-fire-at-west-bank-protests/101561/
it is a 10/22 Ruger special rifle

typically 0.22 caliber bullets known as “two-twos” fired from an integrally suppressed (silenced) 10/22 Ruger rifle.
From the perspective of those on the receiving end, the only warnings that these shots have been fired are the sound of the bullet whizzing by and hitting the ground — or the shouts of people hit crying out for help.

that Isreali Police doesn't have access to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Police#Weapons_and_equipment

Also check this out
http://www.btselem.org/press_releases/20150118_use_of_live_ammunition_in_wb

Two-Twos are live ammunition whose impact is less severe than that of “ordinary” bullets (5.56 mm caliber), yet even so they can be lethal and inflict serious injuries. Two-Twos are fired with a 10/22 Ruger rifle, which is often equipped with an integral suppressor, or from a specially converted M4 rifle (“a shortened M16”). Use of this weapon has elicited controversy even within the Israeli military: in 2001, the head of the security department in the Operations Directorate wrote that the Ruger cannot be considered a non-lethal weapon and may be used only in circumstances that justify live fire. In view of the large number of people hit and even killed by 0.22 bullets early in the second intifada, use of this ammunition was suspended from 2001 to 2008. In the time since use of this ammunition was renewed, B’Tselem has documented the deaths of at least two people from these bullets; however, the real number may be higher, as it is difficult to establish whether a person was killed by these bullets or “ordinary” live ammunition, which is very similar in caliber.

As a senior officer told Israeli daily Haaretz in 2001: “The mistake was that the Ruger came to be seen as a means of dispersing demonstrations, in contrast to its original purpose as a weapon in every respect.”

It is the IDF... you are so not ready for this... By law they cannot have police in the Occupied Territories because the state of Israel doesn't have jurisdiction. It is the Army that makes and applies the laws.

And speaking about targeting children?

The most striking of these incidents occurred in the village of a-Nabi Saleh on 5 December 2014. At the end of the weekly demonstration, a handful of village youths threw stones at soldiers. The military had stationed a sniper armed with a Ruger rifle together with a captain in an open area some distance from the village homes. The youths withdrew to a distance some 140 meters away, beyond the effective range of 0.22 bullets, thereby essentially ending the confrontation. Yet, about half an hour later, the captain and sniper walked some 200 meters into the built-up part of the village, for no apparent reason other than provoking the youths into renewing the stone-throwing, as indeed then transpired. The sniper responded by shooting at a Palestinian youth, who was hit in the thigh. The youth, whose injury was termed light, was taken to hospital in Ramallah. At no point were the troops in mortal danger and in any case, the confrontation was intentionally renewed by the soldiers’ who entered the village, apparently on orders from above.

That was only 4 months ago....

 

[Johnnypenso]

It is the IDF... you are so not ready for this... By law they cannot have police in the Occupied Territories because the state of Israel doesn't have jurisdiction. It is the Army that makes and applies the laws.

And speaking about targeting children?

Sorry @Imari, you're just not ready for this.

 

[squadops]

http://972mag.com/israeli-army-increasing-use-of-live-fire-at-west-bank-protests/101561/
it is a 10/22 Ruger special rifle

that Isreali Police doesn't have access to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Police#Weapons_and_equipment

Also check this out
http://www.btselem.org/press_releases/20150118_use_of_live_ammunition_in_wb

Do you know anything about fire arms? Why would Isreali Police want access to a .22cal rimfire carbine shooting low load cartridges? Considering what they do have access to is much more what they'd want.

Border Guard policemen, however, carry an M16 or M4 assault rifle as a standard personal weapon and can carry it home while off-duty (like regular infantry in the Israel Defense Forces)

These are most likely configured for .30cal centerfire which packs the kind of punch they would want. As for the military, which in this case is being used for riot control, are interested in crowd dispersal. It seems to me they would be better off with tear gas grenade launchers, beanbag and rubber bullet shooters.

It is the IDF... you are so not ready for this... By law they cannot have police in the Occupied Territories because the state of Israel doesn't have jurisdiction. It is the Army that makes and applies the laws.

Do you have a link that outlines this?(one with facts and not emotions?) The situation you describe is strange indeed, Israeli Police patrol borders, but which borders, the military is allowed where and for what reasons and who is monitoring these things etc.

 

[Imari]

Sorry @Imari, you're just not ready for this.

Apparently so. I think he's ready for my ignore list though, it seems pointless carrying on with someone who has decided already what their opinion is and will cherry pick incidents to prove it.

I'm not going to argue that the Israelis haven't done some terrible and stupid stuff, because terrible and stupid stuff happens in all conflict zones. But the way he boils everything down to the worst possible catchphrase whilst ignoring any of the ongoing circumstances makes it impossible to have a legitimate discussion.

These are most likely configured for .30cal centerfire which packs the kind of punch they would want. As for the military, which in this case is being used for riot control, are interested in crowd dispersal. It seems to me they would be better off with tear gas grenade launchers, beanbag and rubber bullet shooters.

You're probably right, but gas has limitations on how it can be used, and rubber bullets aren't as non-lethal as most people think. I think there's a legitimate argument to be made for slightly increased lethality of a real low-calibre bullet being a significantly increased deterrent. I'd go for the rubber myself, but I could easily see the chain of logic that would lead someone to use 22s as an anti-riot weapon by preference, especially if they don't have to worry about public relations.

 

[F1jocker12]

I keep forgetting to pick up a copy of the F1jocker12 dictionary. It's more than military support, they have vested interests. And of course you leave out the Syrian Golan and Yemen. They are aggressors, smart ones but ones all the same.

At this point in the game you can't hardly not be, however their main aggression is against Israel, you know this but choose to look away.

I imagine a group of IDF officers reading your post and chocking on their laugh. Yes.. Iran is dangerous... If that is the only proof you were able to come up with, is funny and sad at the time. Keep trying though!

Do you have a link that outlines this?(one with facts and not emotions?) The situation you describe is strange indeed, Israeli Police patrol borders, but which borders, the military is allowed where and for what reasons and who is monitoring these things etc.

Watch this:

 

[TenEightyOne]

Watch this:

No, it's an hour-and-a-half long. Perhaps you could summarise it for us? (snorts)

 

[squadops]

I think there's a legitimate argument to be made for slightly increased lethality of a real low-calibre bullet being a significantly increased deterrent. I'd go for the rubber myself, but I could easily see the chain of logic that would lead someone to use 22s as an anti-riot weapon by preference, especially if they don't have to worry about public relations.

Yup, range for one thing, and a stronger deterrent, hopefully. I don't know if it's a pr nightmare or not as they have to do something. Even though some actions seem over the top, this one shows some reserve. At least for me.

I imagine a group of IDF officers reading your post and chocking on their laugh. Yes.. Iran is dangerous... If that is the only proof you were able to come up with, is funny and sad at the time. Keep trying though!

Keep laughing, just remember as a U.S. citizen you reap the rewards of a government who secures resources and public safety. They are not laughing at Iran I assure you 👍

I'm not going to try and pic through 1.5 hours of a propaganda video searching for answers to a question I asked of you. You made the claim and I believe there to be a hodgepodge of laws, agreements, whatever, you can't do better than that?

 

[Johnnypenso]

I imagine a group of IDF officers reading your post and chocking on their laugh. Yes.. Iran is dangerous... If that is the only proof you were able to come up with, is funny and sad at the time. Keep trying though!

The government of your country thinks Iran is the most active state sponsor of terrorism in the world

Wikipedia, one of your favourite sources, agrees.

The Clarion Project agrees

The Washington Institute for Near East Policy agrees

Hope this isn't too difficult for you.

 

[F1jocker12]

Yup, range for one thing, and a stronger deterrent, hopefully. I don't know if it's a pr nightmare or not as they have to do something. Even though some actions seem over the top, this one shows some reserve. At least for me.



Keep laughing, just remember as a U.S. citizen you reap the rewards of a government who secures resources and public safety. They are not laughing at Iran I assure you 👍

I'm not going to try and pic through 1.5 hours of a propaganda video searching for answers to a question I asked of you. You made the claim and I believe there to be a hodgepodge of laws, agreements, whatever, you can't do better than that?

Problem is, if is propaganda, then is Jewish propaganda...

"Unique and oddly powerful documentary. Essentially a series of talking heads; interviews with the military judges who presided over the military courts in the territory Israel annexed during the 6 day war.. Mixed in, occasionally playing behind these men on a green screen are snippets of archival footage of the conflicts in the occupied territories.

Hearing this description, one could well assume the film would be dry and academic, but the ideas beneath what it being quietly discussed are so powerful and disturbing that the film works as a kind of documentary theater piece. By focusing on one specific aspect of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Israeli filmmaker Alexandrwicz gives a deeper sense of the legal and moral hypocrisy and inhumanity of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians than many wider ranging and flashier documentaries. "

 

[F1jocker12]

The government of your country thinks Iran is the most active state sponsor of terrorism in the world

Wikipedia, one of your favourite sources, agrees.

The Clarion Project agrees

The Washington Institute for Near East Policy agrees

Hope this isn't too difficult for you.

What some think is not proof, is speculation... Clearly difficult for you to comprehend the difference. Proof for being an aggressive attacking nation... that's what you need to look for.

edit - sorry for the double post...

 

[Blitz24]

Can you just outline what you want to happen and give YOUR reasons as to what should happen? And if any of us question it you actually spend time to answer the questions and not give a snarky remark?

 

[squadops]

Problem is, if is propaganda, then is Jewish propaganda...

What difference does that make?(the problem is it's propaganda) You made some claims, I just want to see some solid backing is all.

Hearing this description, one could well assume the film would be dry and academic, but the ideas beneath what it being quietly discussed are so powerful and disturbing that the film works as a kind of documentary theater piece. By focusing on one specific aspect of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Israeli filmmaker Alexandrwicz gives a deeper sense of the legal and moral hypocrisy and inhumanity of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians than many wider ranging and flashier documentaries. "

Nope, that is not going to clearly show where and why Israeli Police can go here but not there, why it's ok for the military to, and all that good stuff you talked about. A theater piece? na, I'll pass

 

[Johnnypenso]

What some think is not proof, is speculation... Clearly difficult for you to comprehend the difference. Proof for being an aggressive attacking nation... that's what you need to look for.

edit - sorry for the double post...

So the government of your country is speculating? Interesting. So basically, anyone that posts anything that disagrees with your narrative, including your own government, isn't credible enough? Or is it too difficult for you to comprehend? I have a feeling I could post up a Youtube video from God himself, or Allah if you prefer, and that wouldn't be credible either if he or she happened to disagree with you. Might be too hard for Him too.

 

[VolkswagenX]

I keep forgetting to pick up a copy of the F1jocker12 dictionary. It's more than military support, they have vested interests. And of course you leave out the Syrian Golan and Yemen. They are aggressors, smart ones but ones all the same.

You only mentioned the Syrian Golan and Yemen and then posted a link about Iranians succesfully supporting the Iraqi's in fighting isis. Is fighting isis a bad thing know? You do know where Iran is right? They have every reason to get rid of the isis threat.

At this point in the game you can't hardly not be, however their main aggression is against Israel, you know this but choose to look away.

What aggression against Israel? Show some real proof of this aggression against Israel from Iran.

 

[squadops]

You only mentioned the Syrian Golan and Yemen and then posted a link about Iranians succesfully supporting the Iraqi's in fighting isis. Is fighting isis a bad thing know? You do know where Iran is right? They have every reason to get rid of the isis threat.

Of course fighting ISIS is not a bad thing in my eyes, it amazes me how selective some can read a post.

Here is what you are asking for I guess...

BEIRUT — A recent surprise offensive against Syrian rebels in southern Syria, apparently directed by Iran, may have more to do with preparing a new front against Israel along the Golan Heights and deterring Jordan than with crushing armed opposition to the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.

http://america.aljazeera.com/articl...-as-hezbollah-iran-move-on-golan-heights.html

The Iranian strategy is to combine the Lebanese and Syrian fronts against Israel. If Hezbollah is struggling to operate against the Zionist enemy from Lebanese soil, since Israeli counterstrikes could hurt Hezbollah politically in Lebanon, the chaotic Golan Heights is much less problematic for the Shiite organization and for its Iranian masters. In this area, the Iranians wanted to establish territory under their control with no Syrian opposition presence, which would give them a double achievement: seriously harming Jubhat al-Nusra, so dominant in southern Syria, and creating a forward headquarters from which to direct attacks against Israel and drag it into a war of attrition. Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah himself said in an interview that the Golan and southern Lebanon have become one front.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/on-the-syrian-golan-unlike-in-yemen-an-iranian-offensive-fails/

The warning from the human rights chief, Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein, came as a Saudi-led military offensive against the Houthis, a militia group from northern Yemen that Saudi officials have accused of serving as a proxy force for Iran, threatened to burst into a broader conflict.

The Houthis, acknowledging their alliance with Iran but denying acting on its orders, have been able to extend their offensive despite intensifying airstrikes by Saudi warplanes across Yemen.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/01/w...e-in-yemen-as-houthis-continue-offensive.html

Growing internation sanctions emposed on a peaceful government just for the lolz.

By its resolutions 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008) and 1929 (2010), the Council adopted certain measures relating to the Islamic Republic of Iran. These measures include but are not limited to:

a proliferation-sensitive nuclear and ballistic missile programmes-related embargo;
a ban on the export/procurement of any arms and related materiel from Iran and a ban on the supply of the seven categories, as specified, of conventional weapons and related materiel to Iran;
a travel ban and an assets freeze on designated persons and entities. The assets freeze also applies to any individuals or entities acting on behalf of, or at the direction of, the designated persons and entities, and to entities owned or controlled by them.

http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1737/

It looks like the U.N. has it all wrong then.

 

[Johnnypenso]

You only mentioned the Syrian Golan and Yemen and then posted a link about Iranians succesfully supporting the Iraqi's in fighting isis. Is fighting isis a bad thing know? You do know where Iran is right? They have every reason to get rid of the isis threat.

What aggression against Israel? Show some real proof of this aggression against Israel from Iran.

Couple of posts above - The government of your country thinks Iran is the most active state sponsor of terrorism in the world

U.S. officials say Iran mostly backs Islamist groups, including the Lebanese Shiite militants of Hezbollah (which Iran helped found in the 1980s) and Palestinian terrorist groups like Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command. The U.S. Department of Defense estimates Iranian support to Hezbollah at roughly $100 million to $200 million annually (PDF).

Testimony before the U.S. Senate Comittee on Foreign Relations shows Iran isn't just limiting themselves to trying to destroy Israel:

Over the past seven months, a spate of terrorist plots targeting U.S. and Israeli foreign interests has illustrated Iran’s propensity for sponsoring attacks abroad. Some were thwarted, including plots in Thailand, Bulgaria, Singapore, Kenya, Cyprus, and Azerbaijan. Others were not, including bombings in India and Georgia. Some of these operations were carried out by Iranian agents, others by Iran’s primary proxy, Hezbollah. A few were joint operations executed by Hezbollah operatives working with Iranian intelligence or members of the Qods Force, an elite branch of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Consider that a plot in Turkey involving four members of the Qods Force targeting diplomatic missions in Istanbul was reportedly foiled by Turkish security authorities this March. Some, like one of the plots in Azerbaijan, leveraged relationships with local criminal networks to execute an attack. The most brazen, and bizarre, was the October 2011 plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington.

 

[F1jocker12]

Couple of posts above - The government of your country thinks Iran is the most active state sponsor of terrorism in the world

This is what US government does

An annual report delivered recently to the US Senate by James Clapper, the director of National Intelligence, removed Iran and Hezbollah from its list of terrorism threats, after years in which they featured in similar reports.

NSA report - March 16th 2015
from
http://www.timesofisrael.com/us-report-scraps-iran-hezbollah-from-list-of-terror-threats/

The date on the story under your link is October 13 2011... really?

@squadops

By its resolutions 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008) and 1929 (2010), the Council adopted certain measures relating to the Islamic Republic of Iran. These measures include but are not limited to:

a proliferation-sensitive nuclear and ballistic missile programmes-related embargo;
a ban on the export/procurement of any arms and related materiel from Iran and a ban on the supply of the seven categories, as specified, of conventional weapons and related materiel to Iran;
a travel ban and an assets freeze on designated persons and entities. The assets freeze also applies to any individuals or entities acting on behalf of, or at the direction of, the designated persons and entities, and to entities owned or controlled by them.

This resolutions were adopted to create an embargo as a sanction... I don't see how Iran is an aggressive nation. If I am wrong, can you please explain? And do you know what was the reason for the embargo? Let me help

The resolution was a reaction to the fact that the IAEA, after over 3 years of investigations, was still unable to verify that there were no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in Iran.

from http://www.sipri.org/databases/embargoes/un_arms_embargoes/iran

Now

apparently directed by Iran


The Iranian strategy is to combine the Lebanese and Syrian fronts


Saudi officials have accused of serving as a proxy force for Iran, threatened to burst into a broader conflict.

The Houthis, acknowledging their alliance with Iran but denying acting on its orders

Again this is not proof to demonstrate how aggressive Iran is... You can not find any proof because there is none. I'll give you their entire history and there's nothing.

 

[Johnnypenso]

This is what US government does

NSA report - March 16th 2015
from
http://www.timesofisrael.com/us-report-scraps-iran-hezbollah-from-list-of-terror-threats/

The date on the story under your link is October 13 2011... really?

It's clear to even Stevie Wonder that removing Iran from the list of terrorist threats is purely political and purely aimed at softening things in the lead up to the current nuclear talks.

 

[F1jocker12]

It's clear to even Stevie Wonder that removing Iran from the list of terrorist threats is purely political and purely aimed at softening things in the lead up to the current nuclear talks.

So the American National Security Agency makes political reports in order to make things easier for the politicians? Is this what you are saying? ... Israeli IDF officers still reading and suffocating on their laugh... Read on the bottom.. in light grey... is from one of Malcolm X's speeches... about the fish, you know... It's about thinking twice about who do you think is your friend... And please, stop insulting Stevie Wonder! (and now I'm waiting to see how some of the commenters will try to make their point on how Stevie Wonder is relevant for Israel-Gaza conflict topic)....

 

[Johnnypenso]

So the American National Security Agency makes political reports in order to make things easier for the politicians? Is this what you are saying? ... Israeli IDF officers still reading and suffocating on their laugh... Read on the bottom.. in light grey... is from one of Malcolm X's speeches... about the fish, you know... It's about thinking twice about who do you think is your friend... And please, stop insulting Stevie Wonder!

It also noted the Iran and Hezbollah were both listed as terrorism threats in the assessment of another American body, the Defense Intelligence Agency.

 

[VolkswagenX]

Of course fighting ISIS is not a bad thing in my eyes, it amazes me how selective some can read a post.

Lol, I'm selective? Will you know post links to US state department stenographers now?
I guess supporting wahabism when it doesn't really effect us here in the free world.

Here is what you are asking for I guess...


http://america.aljazeera.com/articl...-as-hezbollah-iran-move-on-golan-heights.html


http://www.timesofisrael.com/on-the-syrian-golan-unlike-in-yemen-an-iranian-offensive-fails/


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/01/w...e-in-yemen-as-houthis-continue-offensive.html

Growing internation sanctions emposed on a peaceful government just for the lolz.


http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1737/

It looks like the U.N. has it all wrong then.

I asked for real proof. Not what the US state department feels Iran might do. No bias here haha... Lets all be free like saudi arabia

Couple of posts above - The government of your country thinks Iran is the most active state sponsor of terrorism in the world


Testimony before the U.S. Senate Comittee on Foreign Relations shows Iran isn't just limiting themselves to trying to destroy Israel:

My country?

 

[Johnnypenso]

Lol, I'm selective? Will you know post links to US state department stenographers now?
I guess supporting wahabism when it doesn't really effect us here in the free world.


I asked for real proof. Not what the US state department feels Iran might do. No bias here haha... Lets all be free like saudi arabia


My country?

Yeah, sorry, I just copy/pasted what I said to F1Joker...