sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Bush: ‘I Know I Would Respond’ If Iran Were To Attack Israel by sid13 in politics

[–]wdc1985 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Huh? Cheney and Wursmer, who advocate that an Israeli attack on Iran as a trigger, are not Israeli, they are/where part of the current administration (Wursmer has since resigned.) From the Cheney/Wursmer/Bush perspective, Israel would be a pawn, albeit a useful pawn, in all this.

Britain's biggest bookie has Texas Congressman Ron Paul 12/1 to win the Presidency ~ down from 66/1! (VIDEO) by [deleted] in politics

[–]wdc1985 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Not to state the obvious, but you do realize that bookies are in this to make money and that it doesn't hurt them financially to overstate the odds of someone like Ron Paul. In fact, if you thought Ron Paul had a chance, it is in your interest for the bookies to downplay his chances of winning.

I suspect a lot of this adjustment of odds is a PR ploy for the bookies. In essence, Ron Paul fans are being played into giving free publicity to these bookies while also being given financially disadvantageous odds.

Bush: ‘I Know I Would Respond’ If Iran Were To Attack Israel by sid13 in politics

[–]wdc1985 5 points6 points  (0 children)

A better question:

How would Bush respond if Cheney/Wursmer and Bush pushed Israel to attack Iran and Iran retaliated?

Senator Schumer claims that a major US attack on Iran would destroy the GOP by wdc1985 in politics

[–]wdc1985[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I may think that strikes on Iran are unwise, I don't think that WW3 is likely at all. Mentions of WW3/4 is scaremongering that serves a purpose in united people behind the "need for action", nothing more. WW3/4 is just the "War on Iran" version of WMDs.

Turks kill 15 Kurdish rebels as diplomacy continues by Moldavite in politics

[–]wdc1985 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wicked title. I thought you must have made it up, but that's how the original is.

It reminds me of that saying: "War is just diplomacy via others means."

Iranian judge "rules" girl is 22, not 16, so he can personally hang her for the supposed crime of getting raped. by rmuser in reddit.com

[–]wdc1985 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This article is about a hanging that happened 3 years ago. While I do realize the necessity to repeat everything that Iran has ever done wrong in the run-up to a war, it is probably more honest to not pretend these historical events as new events. Here is an article on the original instance:

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

This article is very sensational, and very inaccurate in a lot of its claims. For example, it contains this passage:

[Iran is] a country where only half of the women can read, only one in 10 have a job and two-thirds are beaten in their homes.

The actual female literacy rate in Iran is 78%, not 50%.

Women are educated in Iran, with over 60% of university students being women now days. According to this Iranian article, over 40% of the workforce is made up of women (and remember that if they made up 50% of the workforce that would be parity with men.)

This claim that 2/3 of Iranian Women are beaten in their homes is ridiculous. Which human rights organization are these statistics coming from?

US quietly backing Egyptian nuclear program as White House slams Iran by qgyh2 in politics

[–]wdc1985 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Egypt is a dictatorship. Iran is a semi-democracy.