Externe

evreu mandru din israel
2006-02-06 23:51:07

Cam asa...

a mers si cu un alt erou, Saadam, pana l-au scos soldatii americani din gaura si i-au facut frizura si barba.

Pinkie
2006-02-06 23:59:45

Bravo Ahmadinejad !

Zen
2006-02-07 01:58:38

Re: Cam asa...

Ancutza Hazu
2006-02-07 02:13:46

Ahmadinejad iti rupi dinti nenica!

Cum dai cu tifla, si vezi povestea cu nen'tu' Saddam, cum ii inghiti dintii una-doua. Problema e ca nu se digera.

stefanell
2006-02-07 02:19:59

da,sigur!!

ce sa zicem??!!
nu se sperie de nimeni!!
dar intrebarea e,poate cineva sa-l opreasca din elanul nebun ,la care a ajuns ahmandinna ,din cauza la adevaratii vinovati ptr.toate aceste obraznicii???????(sa zicem ,mina aia de clerici care conduc tara in realitate)
speram ca da,dar in realitate nu va fi asa;
asa ca neamule,pregateste-te de filme de groaza !!

Phil
2006-02-07 02:31:21

Asta este inconstient

Cum dreaq a ajuns presedinte? Nu cred ca a fost ales democratic, dar oricum acum e presh. iresponsabilitatea lui probabil va produce consecinte devastatoare pt poporul lui si probabil in imprejurimi cind bombardarea facilitatilor nucleare din Iran vor produce un nor radioactiv a la Cernobil re uraniul prelucrat acolo!

traktorist
2006-02-07 02:39:23

Re: Cam asa...

ingineru
2006-02-07 02:39:26

Ahmadinejad nu se teme de ONU... pai cine naiba se teme de ONU ?

Nici Saddam nu s-a temut niciodata de ONU, si-a avut dreptate ! Nu de la ONU i s-a tras... :-)

costy
2006-02-07 02:41:38

Nici nu are de ce ce, mai toti dezaxatii gasit intelegere la "natiunile unite"!

Abia dispare, cu chiu cu vai, cate un monstruletz de pe fata pamantului
si locul lui este ocupat de urgenta de altul ...si mai cu motz.
Iranul pare sa fi primit de cateva luni bune mai multi. Presedintele
cel viteaz de la capatul conductei a sistat schimburile comerciale,
oprind importurile daneze in tara sa, reusind dintr-o pocnitura abila
din degete sa aduca Danemarca-n pragul colapsului! Cei aprox.250 de
milioane de dolari, valoarea exporturilor daneze-n Iran, par sa fie
hotaratori pt. existenta viitoere a tarii nordice care a provocat seismul.
Iar prim ministrul iranian isi doreste sa-si intreaca presedintele,
sarind la sfarsitul saptamanii la gatul cangelarului german. Greseala
lui Angela Merkel, cum si-o fi permis tanara cancelareasa sa apare
statul Israel??, a fost rapid taxata: aceasta "ebuie sa deschida intai
ochii, si apoi, incet-incet, gura"!!!, sau s-o tina inchisa cum a facut-o
precedentul ei....
Axa Iran, Siria, "Palestina" devine pe zi ce trece tot mai dezaxata, iar
vina este a noastra, a europenilor, in primul rand. Ne-am trezit destul
de tarziu, fundamentalismul extremist musulman ne-a speculat la sange lasitatea si slabiciunile. Poate intr-o zi vor intelege si europenii cei de
la urma ca problema "astora" nu e decat in parte Israelul, ei au nevoie
continuu de un dusman de moarte, fara el nu pot trai!!

ingineru
2006-02-07 02:46:47

Re: Ei chiar cred ca vor stapini Lumea... desigur ! Doar ca nu asta...

2006-02-07 02:59:01

Re: Nici nu are de ce ce, mai toti dezaxatii gasit intelegere la "natiunile unite"!

Ancutza Hazu
2006-02-07 03:08:46

Satelitul TV pentru CNN este deja pe orbita deasupra Teheranului.

Dar nu prea se vede bine, mai este inca un pic pana se crapa de ziua.

Mos Grigore
2006-02-07 03:22:45

Tangoul Continua, ba ti-o dau ba nu ti-o dau....................

Iran tells IAEA to remove nuclear monitoring gear

By Paul Hughes
1 hour, 42 minutes ago



Iran has told the International Atomic Energy Agency to remove some surveillance equipment from its nuclear facilities by mid-February, a defiant response to an IAEA vote reporting Tehran to the U.N. Security Council.

After Saturday's IAEA decision, driven by concerns Iran may be secretly trying to build atomic bombs, Tehran announced it would stop implementing a protocol giving the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency increased inspection powers in the country.

"From the date of this letter, all voluntarily suspended, non-legally binding measures including the provisions of the Additional Protocol, and even beyond that, will be suspended," according to an Iranian government letter to the IAEA released by the U.N. nuclear watchdog group on Monday.

"All Agency containment and surveillance measures which were in place beyond the Agency's normal safeguards measures should be removed by mid-February 2006," the February 5 letter added.

The letter to the IAEA Secretariat said Iran would limit future cooperation with U.N. inspectors to its basic obligations under the 1970 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Iranian officials have said they want the IAEA to remove some surveillance cameras from some nuclear sites and will no longer grant inspectors access to military facilities.

Earlier on Monday Iranian chief nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani announced IAEA inspectors would be arriving in Iran shortly to oversee the resumption of uranium enrichment -- a process that can be used to make bomb-grade material.

"In a letter to the agency (IAEA) we announced the date (for resuming enrichment) and the inspectors will come to Iran for it in the next few days," Larijani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, told reporters.

He did not specify a date for starting enrichment.

EU WARNING

EU officials have warned that Iran's enrichment resumption after a freeze of over two years, and curbing of inspections in retaliation for the vote, will exacerbate its nuclear case and heighten the prospect of U.N. sanctions against Tehran.

Iran says it only wants to enrich uranium to a low grade for use in nuclear power reactors, not to the high grade needed for atomic weapons, which it denies seeking.

But Iran's concealment of fuel research and enrichment work from the IAEA for 18 years until 2003 and what diplomats call efforts to delay or evade U.N. probes since has raised Western suspicions about the Islamic Republic's atomic ambitions.

In Washington, Israel's Ambassador to the United States Daniel Ayalon said that international diplomacy in the next few months could curb Iran's suspected nuclear ambitions and played down the possibility of Israeli military action against Tehran.

"All this notion that the situation is predestined or cannot be stopped ... it's not true. They have not crossed the point of no return ... They don't have all the know-how and equipment they need," he told Reuters in an interview on Monday.

Iran's nuclear program enjoys broad support in the country although some reformist politicians have urged the government to adopt a less confrontational approach to the issue.

An opinion poll carried by the state-run Iran newspaper on Monday found that 74.3 percent of 1,019 people questioned thought Iran should press ahead with the atomic program.

The European Union, China and Russia have urged Iran to use the month before the next IAEA board meeting on March 6 to address the agency's concerns and return to the talks.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan also called for more diplomacy and urged Iran to help create mutual trust.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad once again struck a defiant tone in a speech on Monday.

"They (Western countries) are very angry with us, but it's not important to us because they cannot do anything and we are not scared of anything," the semi-official Mehr news agency quoted him as saying.

"If they could do something against us, they would not have wasted time to prepare the stage," he added.

Mounting tension over Iran's nuclear case sent oil prices more than 70 cents higher on Monday. The Tehran Stock Exchange's main index fell a further 0.4 percent after dropping below the psychological 10,000-point threshold on Sunday.

Fitch Ratings (UK) Limited cut its credit rating outlook for Iran to negative from stable, citing growing political risk surrounding the dispute over its atomic program.

costy
2006-02-07 03:25:48

Re: Nici nu are de ce ce, mai toti dezaxatii gasit intelegere la "natiunile unite"!

Mos Grigore
2006-02-07 03:27:40

Re: Nici nu are de ce ce, mai toti dezaxatii gasit intelegere la "natiunile unite"!

canaris
2006-02-07 03:28:18

Da' cine se mai teme de ONU in ziua de azi???

"Ahmadinejad nu se teme de ONU"
-----------------
Da' cine se mai teme de ONU in ziua de azi??? Prin "grija" puternicilor lumii, ONU a devenit o sperietoare de ciori. Cand sunt interese mari in joc, americanii, rusii, chinezii isi sterg bocancii cu ONU. Cand e vorba de zone lipsite de interes, susnumitii fac o plecaciune adanca si invita ceremonios ONU sa intervina. Ca doar n-or sa-si rupa gatul yankeii in Somalia, Azerbaidjan, Gruzia sau alte colturi uitate de lume... -:) Oricum, sistemulde reprezentare si de vot trebuie modificat, fiindca incet-incet se ajunge la situatia Societatii Natiunilor din perioada interbelica, unde multi criticau agresiunile militare, dar nu se lua nici o masura.

Phil
2006-02-07 03:56:43

Imperiul otoman aka musulman, a cucerit

o buna parte din ioropa si a ocupat-o citeva sute de ani, asta nu o sa se mai intimple prea curind in lumea moderna sau poate? doar in caz faceti-va rezerve de turbane si valuri, sau cum se spune pe limba lor la valuri si cearceafuri!

George W. Bush
2006-02-07 04:16:41

Re: Imperiul otoman aka musulman, a cucerit..efendi Filica..

roy
2006-02-07 06:23:36

Re: Nici nu are de ce ce, mai toti dezaxatii gasit intelegere la "natiunile unite"!

Doro
2006-02-07 07:31:06

ONU si initiativa o politica combatanta

Va aduceti aminte ca tot ONU la facut pe Sadam sa scoata rachetele sa le distruga in fata lor ,si ce s-a intamplat dupa acea s-a putut vedea.

cosor ion
2006-02-07 07:42:25

Re: Nici nu are de ce ce, mai toti dezaxatii gasit intelegere la "natiunile unite"!

cosor ion
2006-02-07 07:44:13

Re: Nici nu are de ce ce, mai toti dezaxatii gasit intelegere la "natiunile unite"!

cosor ion
2006-02-07 07:45:06

Re: Nici nu are de ce ce, mai toti dezaxatii gasit intelegere la "natiunile unite"!

romanul
2006-02-07 08:55:01

IRAK-ul a cooperat si unde a ajuns?

IRAK-ul a cooperat si unde a ajuns?

evreu mandru din israel
2006-02-07 09:41:58

De ce Israel da si Iran nu.

Time to come clean on the bomb

By Avner Cohen

Every time the subject of the Iranian nuclear issue comes up in international forums - as happened over the weekend when the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) decided to transfer the issue to the United Nations Security Council - there is someone who raises the issue of the exceptional Israeli nuclear issue. Every time Iran suffers condemnation for its nuclear conduct, its spokesmen accuse the Western world of a double standard: How is it that the West, according to them, turns a blind eye and permits Israel to develop nuclear weaponry whereas Iran - a country that only wants to realize its legitimate right to develop atomic energy for peaceful purposes - is not left alone?

Among the Arab states as well, including those that truly do oppose and are afraid of the Iranian atom, this double standard argument also comes up. Why is the West dealing only with the Iranian atom and ignoring the Israeli atom, ask the Egyptians. Softer versions of this line of thinking are also common in Europe, where many argue that only anti-nuclear norms that apply to the entire region, including Israel, will prevent a nuclearized Middle East.

Even in the United States there are those who argue that only if Israel is brought into the Iranian equation in some way is there a chance of preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. And indeed, the United States has made possible the introduction of a connection in this spirit, though softer and diluted, into the IAEA decision of this weekend, which also included a mention of the commitment to establish a zone free of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East.


The attempt to put Israel and Iran on the same level, or even to create a concrete political connection between them, is ignorant, unfair and biased. First of all, from the point of view of international law: whereas Iran is a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and is committed to comply with it, Israel, like India and Pakistan, is not a signatory to the treaty and therefore is not beholden to a formal commitment. Whereas Iran has been caught in flagrant breach of its international commitments, Israel has not broken such commitments. In other words, like the seven other nuclear states in the world, and in stark contrast to Iran, Israel has never relinquished the right to develop nuclear weaponry.

However, beyond the formal plane there is a profound historical difference between Israel and Iran. Israel began its nuclear program in a world in which there were not yet explicit international norms against the possession of atomic weapons. When - according to foreign publications - Israel completed the first phase of the research and development of its nuclear activity around 1966, the NPT had not yet been completed. Had Israel decided at that time to realize its nuclear potential, and not to elect a policy of ambiguity, its nuclear status would be no different today from the status of the five other recognized nuclear states.

Beyond these differences there is also a profound difference between the two countries at the existential level. According to foreign reports, Israel began to develop its Samson option in the 1950s, while it was establishing a state for a people still in the shadow of conflagration, in a hostile geopolitical environment that was opposed to its very existence. It found itself committed to the creation of an insurance policy within the pre-1967 borders, without external guarantees for its existence. In the political climate of that time, a decade after the Holocaust, Israel had perhaps the strongest strategic and moral justification for turning to the nuclear option, certainly no less than France or China, which also began the atomic journey at that time.

Not only is Iran not under existential threat - its nuclear aspirations are an issue that puts it on a collision course with the world. Even the leaders of North Korea are not daring to declare their aspirations to wipe countries off the map, as the president of Iran has declared with respect to Israel.

The writer, author of Israel and the Bomb and The Last Taboo, is a senior researcher at the University of Maryland.

lucid
2006-02-07 10:31:04

Re: EMI De ce Israel da si Iran nu.

Asa cum am comentat pentru roy ieri, atat Iranul cat si Israelul sunt in cazul de fata doar primul nivel, cel superficial, al problemei. In spate se poate afla - vom afla in curand - un targ intre marile puteri nucleare - USA si Rusia sigur, foarte probabil si China, caci prea au virat-o brusc la IAEA, targ facut pentru a controla resursa de combustibil nuclear a lumii. Avem argumentul ca asa se asigura neproliferarea, ca si echilibrul lumii s-a mentinut intre URSS si USA pe baza bombei, dar acum e si aspectul dependentei oricarui stat daca vrea sa aiba energie nucleara de jupanii de la Washington sau Kremlin. Deci jocul pare mult mai complicat. Vom trai si vom vedea.
La 2006-02-07 09:41:58, evreu mandru din israel a scris:

> Time to come clean on the bomb
>
> By Avner Cohen
>
> Every time the subject of the Iranian nuclear issue comes up in
> international forums - as happened over the weekend when the
> International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) decided to transfer the
> issue to the United Nations Security Council - there is someone who
> raises the issue of the exceptional Israeli nuclear issue. Every time
> Iran suffers condemnation for its nuclear conduct, its spokesmen
> accuse the Western world of a double standard: How is it that the
> West, according to them, turns a blind eye and permits Israel to
> develop nuclear weaponry whereas Iran - a country that only wants to
> realize its legitimate right to develop atomic energy for peaceful
> purposes - is not left alone?
>
> Among the Arab states as well, including those that truly do oppose
> and are afraid of the Iranian atom, this double standard argument
> also comes up. Why is the West dealing only with the Iranian atom and
> ignoring the Israeli atom, ask the Egyptians. Softer versions of this
> line of thinking are also common in Europe, where many argue that
> only anti-nuclear norms that apply to the entire region, including
> Israel, will prevent a nuclearized Middle East.
>
> Even in the United States there are those who argue that only if
> Israel is brought into the Iranian equation in some way is there a
> chance of preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. And
> indeed, the United States has made possible the introduction of a
> connection in this spirit, though softer and diluted, into the IAEA
> decision of this weekend, which also included a mention of the
> commitment to establish a zone free of weapons of mass destruction in
> the Middle East.
>
>
> The attempt to put Israel and Iran on the same level, or even to
> create a concrete political connection between them, is ignorant,
> unfair and biased. First of all, from the point of view of
> international law: whereas Iran is a signatory to the Treaty on the
> Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and is committed to comply
> with it, Israel, like India and Pakistan, is not a signatory to the
> treaty and therefore is not beholden to a formal commitment. Whereas
> Iran has been caught in flagrant breach of its international
> commitments, Israel has not broken such commitments. In other words,
> like the seven other nuclear states in the world, and in stark
> contrast to Iran, Israel has never relinquished the right to develop
> nuclear weaponry.
>
> However, beyond the formal plane there is a profound historical
> difference between Israel and Iran. Israel began its nuclear program
> in a world in which there were not yet explicit international norms
> against the possession of atomic weapons. When - according to foreign
> publications - Israel completed the first phase of the research and
> development of its nuclear activity around 1966, the NPT had not yet
> been completed. Had Israel decided at that time to realize its
> nuclear potential, and not to elect a policy of ambiguity, its
> nuclear status would be no different today from the status of the
> five other recognized nuclear states.
>
> Beyond these differences there is also a profound difference between
> the two countries at the existential level. According to foreign
> reports, Israel began to develop its Samson option in the 1950s,
> while it was establishing a state for a people still in the shadow of
> conflagration, in a hostile geopolitical environment that was opposed
> to its very existence. It found itself committed to the creation of
> an insurance policy within the pre-1967 borders, without external
> guarantees for its existence. In the political climate of that time,
> a decade after the Holocaust, Israel had perhaps the strongest
> strategic and moral justification for turning to the nuclear option,
> certainly no less than France or China, which also began the atomic
> journey at that time.
>
> Not only is Iran not under existential threat - its nuclear
> aspirations are an issue that puts it on a collision course with the
> world. Even the leaders of North Korea are not daring to declare
> their aspirations to wipe countries off the map, as the president of
> Iran has declared with respect to Israel.
>
> The writer, author of Israel and the Bomb and The Last Taboo, is a
> senior researcher at the University of Maryland.
>
>
>

Adrian v.D.
2006-02-07 11:41:21

Reactii ale neputintei....

Se vehiculeaza prin presa occidentala tot felul de ineptii.Stiu, nimic nou sub soare; totusi, situatia de azi, daca privim lumea, este mai incordata ca niciodata.
Despre ce este vorba?
Presa occidentala, majoritara de stanga(de aceea nu inteleg de ce se vaita SRS,acasa la el, parca el nu stie ca exista o presa de stanga si la Bucuresti, liberala,reactionara, socialista,care nu se poate acomoda cu un presedinte Basescu!-ca si cand toate ziarele tarii ar fi la fel!De ce nu se vaita cei de la "R.L."??)lanseaza tot felul de idei , doar sa opreasca hotararea unor tari de a starpi raul din radacini.....
De exemplu, se spune ca populatia Teheranului este tanara si "deschisa spre nou si schimbari"......Eu ma intreb cine l-a votat pe Ahmadinejad, daca nu populatia tanara si majoritara....Daca au stat acasa, pentru ca au boicotat(oare?!) alegerile, nu au dorit acelasi lucru cu revolutionarii-talibani?!Romanii sarmanii , l-au votat inca o data pe Iliescu, ca tara sa nu cada pe mana populuistului-poet!Multi spun ca ar fi fost jale.....

Presa occidentala cauta mereu scuza bandelor de talhari care se arunca in aer.Vina planeaza mereu asupra Europei, iar colonialismul si aroganta noastra ar fi doua motive elucidate.....Colonialismul a fost si "asul" comunistilor-socialisti pentru a provoca tineretul impotriva "turbocapitalismului" si impotriva "imperialismului american si a neocolonialismului globalizat".
Ai impresia ca te afli la o manifestare de 1 Mai,pe timpul stalinistilor...
Indocrinarea continua, chiar daca este evident ca islamicii teroristi vor sa distruga tot ce le sta in cale....Nu vorbesc de musulmanii obisnuiti.

Sa admitem ca Occidentul(din care facem parte de 200 de ani, fara sa stim poate)are greselile lui.Care sunt concluziile si care sunt rezolvarile?
De ce intreb?
Ieri, renumitul scriitor Salman Rushdie explica la TV-germana ca tot ce trebuie sa faca Occidentul in acesta periculoasa situatie este sa dovedeasca unitate si sa nu arate "slabiciuni in fata unui dusman al libertatilor", pentru ca fanaticii nu inteleg decat de o reactie categorica.......
Este Europa pregatita sa gaseasca solutiile optime?!Deja se critica planurile USA,ca si cand acele planuri n-ar exista si la Pekin(in caz extrem,ce fac ei cu Taiwanul,Tibetul, cu o contrarevolutie,cu resursele de petrol, etc..)si la Moskova, numai ca toti cunosc doar planurile USA!
Nu este curios??Ma indoiesc ca o mare putere nu are planuri pentru a stopa un pericol urias!

Adrian

Pinkie
2006-02-07 12:25:07

Eiiii, si care-i planu' acu' ???

evreu mandru din israel
2006-02-07 16:42:22

Re: Eiiii, si care-i planu' acu' ???

Europeanul
2006-02-07 17:35:48

Re: Reactii ale neputintei....

Adriane, scriiotorii isi spun si ei parerea. Dar eu stau si ma intreb oare cum naiba a ajuns omenirea intr-o asa situatie "un conflict intre civilizatii? Acum 3 ani in urma nimeni nu s-ar fi gindit la asa ceva!

Islamul a a vut ot timpul fundamentalistii lor (precum si alte religii de fapt). Dar priveste si tu harta (bazelor militare "straine" si ale conflictelor din orientul mijlociu) si poate iti vei da si tu seama. Nu este asa ca occidentul a mers peste ei?

Tu spuneai ca Iranul are o populatie tinara dornica de schimbare. Intradevar are o populatie tinara care poate ca si-ar fi dorit schimbari, dar nu este asa ca SUA i-a pus pe lista Evilului? Nu este asa ca Irakul (fosti cap de lista) se scufunda in prapad? Nu este asa ca Iranul este inconjurat de baze militare americane care initial s-ai instalat sub pretextul raspindirii democratiei in orientul mijlociu? DE CE TE MIRA reactia lor? De ce te mira faptul ca populatia iranului sau a palestinei sau a irakului au votat cu radicalii lor?











La 2006-02-07 11:41:21, Adrian v.D. a scris:

> Se vehiculeaza prin presa occidentala tot felul de ineptii.Stiu,
> nimic nou sub soare; totusi, situatia de azi, daca privim lumea, este
> mai incordata ca niciodata.
> Despre ce este vorba?
> Presa occidentala, majoritara de stanga(de aceea nu inteleg de ce se
> vaita SRS,acasa la el, parca el nu stie ca exista o presa de stanga
> si la Bucuresti, liberala,reactionara, socialista,care nu se poate
> acomoda cu un presedinte Basescu!-ca si cand toate ziarele tarii ar
> fi la fel!De ce nu se vaita cei de la "R.L."??)lanseaza tot
> felul de idei , doar sa opreasca hotararea unor tari de a starpi raul
> din radacini.....
> De exemplu, se spune ca populatia Teheranului este tanara si
> "deschisa spre nou si schimbari"......Eu ma intreb cine l-a
> votat pe Ahmadinejad, daca nu populatia tanara si majoritara....Daca
> au stat acasa, pentru ca au boicotat(oare?!) alegerile, nu au dorit
> acelasi lucru cu revolutionarii-talibani?!Romanii sarmanii , l-au
> votat inca o data pe Iliescu, ca tara sa nu cada pe mana
> populuistului-poet!Multi spun ca ar fi fost jale.....
>
> Presa occidentala cauta mereu scuza bandelor de talhari care se arunca
> in aer.Vina planeaza mereu asupra Europei, iar colonialismul si
> aroganta noastra ar fi doua motive elucidate.....Colonialismul a fost
> si "asul" comunistilor-socialisti pentru a provoca
> tineretul impotriva "turbocapitalismului" si impotriva
> "imperialismului american si a neocolonialismului
> globalizat".
> Ai impresia ca te afli la o manifestare de 1 Mai,pe timpul
> stalinistilor...
> Indocrinarea continua, chiar daca este evident ca islamicii teroristi
> vor sa distruga tot ce le sta in cale....Nu vorbesc de musulmanii
> obisnuiti.
>
> Sa admitem ca Occidentul(din care facem parte de 200 de ani, fara sa
> stim poate)are greselile lui.Care sunt concluziile si care sunt
> rezolvarile?
> De ce intreb?
> Ieri, renumitul scriitor Salman Rushdie explica la TV-germana ca tot
> ce trebuie sa faca Occidentul in acesta periculoasa situatie este sa
> dovedeasca unitate si sa nu arate "slabiciuni in fata unui
> dusman al libertatilor", pentru ca fanaticii nu inteleg decat de
> o reactie categorica.......
> Este Europa pregatita sa gaseasca solutiile optime?!Deja se critica
> planurile USA,ca si cand acele planuri n-ar exista si la Pekin(in caz
> extrem,ce fac ei cu Taiwanul,Tibetul, cu o contrarevolutie,cu
> resursele de petrol, etc..)si la Moskova, numai ca toti cunosc doar
> planurile USA!
> Nu este curios??Ma indoiesc ca o mare putere nu are planuri pentru a
> stopa un pericol urias!
>
> Adrian
>

DanBruma
2006-02-07 18:04:00

Ahmadinejad nu se teme de ONU! Dar de ce tremura vocea?

Daca imi aduc bine aminte, asa zicea si Sadam si acum e in spatele gratiilor.

Ratacitul
2006-02-07 19:23:18

Re: Reactii ale neputintei....

Asa e el, mai mirat de felul lui.

La 2006-02-07 17:35:48, Europeanul a scris:

>
> Adriane, scriiotorii isi spun si ei parerea. Dar eu stau si ma intreb
> oare cum naiba a ajuns omenirea intr-o asa situatie "un conflict
> intre civilizatii? Acum 3 ani in urma nimeni nu s-ar fi gindit la asa
> ceva!
>
> Islamul a a vut ot timpul fundamentalistii lor (precum si alte religii
> de fapt). Dar priveste si tu harta (bazelor militare
> "straine" si ale conflictelor din orientul mijlociu) si
> poate iti vei da si tu seama. Nu este asa ca occidentul a mers peste
> ei?
>
> Tu spuneai ca Iranul are o populatie tinara dornica de schimbare.
> Intradevar are o populatie tinara care poate ca si-ar fi dorit
> schimbari, dar nu este asa ca SUA i-a pus pe lista Evilului? Nu este
> asa ca Irakul (fosti cap de lista) se scufunda in prapad? Nu este
> asa ca Iranul este inconjurat de baze militare americane care initial
> s-ai instalat sub pretextul raspindirii democratiei in orientul
> mijlociu? DE CE TE MIRA reactia lor? De ce te mira faptul ca
> populatia iranului sau a palestinei sau a irakului au votat cu
> radicalii lor?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> La 2006-02-07 11:41:21, Adrian v.D. a scris:
>
> > Se vehiculeaza prin presa occidentala tot felul de ineptii.Stiu,
> > nimic nou sub soare; totusi, situatia de azi, daca privim lumea, este
> > mai incordata ca niciodata.
> > Despre ce este vorba?
> > Presa occidentala, majoritara de stanga(de aceea nu inteleg de ce se
> > vaita SRS,acasa la el, parca el nu stie ca exista o presa de stanga
> > si la Bucuresti, liberala,reactionara, socialista,care nu se poate
> > acomoda cu un presedinte Basescu!-ca si cand toate ziarele tarii ar
> > fi la fel!De ce nu se vaita cei de la "R.L."??)lanseaza tot
> > felul de idei , doar sa opreasca hotararea unor tari de a starpi raul
> > din radacini.....
> > De exemplu, se spune ca populatia Teheranului este tanara si
> > "deschisa spre nou si schimbari"......Eu ma intreb cine l-a
> > votat pe Ahmadinejad, daca nu populatia tanara si majoritara....Daca
> > au stat acasa, pentru ca au boicotat(oare?!) alegerile, nu au dorit
> > acelasi lucru cu revolutionarii-talibani?!Romanii sarmanii , l-au
> > votat inca o data pe Iliescu, ca tara sa nu cada pe mana
> > populuistului-poet!Multi spun ca ar fi fost jale.....
> >
> > Presa occidentala cauta mereu scuza bandelor de talhari care se arunca
> > in aer.Vina planeaza mereu asupra Europei, iar colonialismul si
> > aroganta noastra ar fi doua motive elucidate.....Colonialismul a fost
> > si "asul" comunistilor-socialisti pentru a provoca
> > tineretul impotriva "turbocapitalismului" si impotriva
> > "imperialismului american si a neocolonialismului
> > globalizat".
> > Ai impresia ca te afli la o manifestare de 1 Mai,pe timpul
> > stalinistilor...
> > Indocrinarea continua, chiar daca este evident ca islamicii teroristi
> > vor sa distruga tot ce le sta in cale....Nu vorbesc de musulmanii
> > obisnuiti.
> >
> > Sa admitem ca Occidentul(din care facem parte de 200 de ani, fara sa
> > stim poate)are greselile lui.Care sunt concluziile si care sunt
> > rezolvarile?
> > De ce intreb?
> > Ieri, renumitul scriitor Salman Rushdie explica la TV-germana ca tot
> > ce trebuie sa faca Occidentul in acesta periculoasa situatie este sa
> > dovedeasca unitate si sa nu arate "slabiciuni in fata unui
> > dusman al libertatilor", pentru ca fanaticii nu inteleg decat de
> > o reactie categorica.......
> > Este Europa pregatita sa gaseasca solutiile optime?!Deja se critica
> > planurile USA,ca si cand acele planuri n-ar exista si la Pekin(in caz
> > extrem,ce fac ei cu Taiwanul,Tibetul, cu o contrarevolutie,cu
> > resursele de petrol, etc..)si la Moskova, numai ca toti cunosc doar
> > planurile USA!
> > Nu este curios??Ma indoiesc ca o mare putere nu are planuri pentru a
> > stopa un pericol urias!
> >
> > Adrian
> >
>
>

Pinkie
2006-02-07 19:37:56

Re: :-))))

Zen
2006-02-07 19:40:04

Re: Reactii ale neputintei....

Zen
2006-02-07 19:41:33

Re: Eiiii, si care-i planu' acu' ???

Zen
2006-02-07 19:45:22

Ii tremura vocea de indignare. Si-apoi Ahmadinejad nu-i dupa 12 ani de sanctiuni economice.

alwis46
2006-02-07 20:06:20

Re: Eiiii, si care-i planu' acu' ???

George W. Bush
2006-02-07 21:17:35

Re: Eiiii, si care-i planu' acu' ???

ingineru
2006-02-07 21:27:04

Re: Noi ce ne facem ???... folositi tichia de staniol pe post de casca...

ingineru
2006-02-07 21:29:35

Re: Pionii sant folositori dar nu au nici o valoare... Hmm ! Ma intreb daca, in situatia asta, n-ar ajuta...

Pinkie
2006-02-07 22:09:18

Re: Bush !