Obama, Ahmadinejad, and the toy lost on the playground

[giblets]

at this thread!

I'm looking forward to the day Iran finally gets nukes!

I think all this paranoia about an emerging global Iranian empire is getting kind of tiring.

[BlackCat]

So I'm checking at Ordbogen.com which is Danish for dictionary.com. I see ditto defined as:

som er eller mener det samme, som noget netop nævnt

Which, in English, is:

who are or think the same as something already mentioned

Nope, that translates to "wich is or means the same etc.."

So that sounds like the English definition of ditto, after all:



BlackCat, sir, are you lying about this other Danish definition of ditto?

No.


Edit: quotes are messy but I can't be bothered to fix.

[DaShi]

[Al B. Sure!]

That's not even different from the definition I gave. Oh, it's not 'who are or think the same as something already mentioned' (which I'll admit sounds awkward since it comes from a google translation), it's 'which is or means the same as something already mentioned'. Fortunately, your version sounds better and is more in keeping with the English definition of ditto, anyway. 'Who are or think the same' sounds off since you never say ditto about something that is a person which can think.

Your translation is more in keeping with the English definition of ditto.

[Al B. Sure!]

Anyway, I found HC whenever Israel finally bombs Iran:

[Hauldren Collider]

You've used that picture twice. The resemblance is not there, I assure you.

[DaShi]

It's too late, association made.

[kentonio]

Suppose the existence of some protocol applying to this case. Now suppose it was followed in this instance. Now ask yourself: why follow a protocol if there is no point?

Protocols in international diplomacy serve a purpose: to ensure that diplomatic transactions are resolved amicably. There is no amicable resolution to this issue. The Americans want this spy plane back. The Iranians want to keep it. The Americans don't want it back bad enough to fight for it.

Suppose the Americans are planning to do something about this, like bomb the site, send in a team to destroy it, or take some action to prevent the technology from being studied. We (obviously) don't know whether they are planning anything, but the discussions will have taken place and its certainly something they'd consider if they thought they could get away with it. If they don't ask for the return of the drone, but then take action to destroy it then internationally they are on very sensitive ground. The Iranians can say 'they violated our airspace and then carried out an act of military violence against us. WTF UN?!'. By requesting its return, the US can potentially muddy the waters quite a lot and say something like 'Our peaceful aircraft which was outside Iranian borders malfunctioned and when we asked nicely for it to be returned, they told us to get ****ed. We were left with no recourse other than to destroy it'.

(1) Under Obama's leadership, a nuclear-armed Iran is a probability that will eventuate unimpeded. It is difficult for me to say whether there are reasonable alternatives, in terms of foreign policy, to the current Administration, as I do not actively follow the GOP race.

Most of the GOP field would bomb the **** out of Iran causing the middle east to potentially explode, Paul would do nothing at all, and about the only one who'd deal with it well would be Hunstman, and he's still nowhere in the polls. Plus his dealing with it would be incredibly similar to how Obama has dealt with it, ie like a grown up.

(2) If Iran does go nuclear, its power and influence in the region may rise. American allies may weaken. This has consequences reaching far and wide. From the Middle East to Latin America, Iran has its fingers in many pies. And it is working to damage American interests. From attacks on American soil to arms smuggling and drug dealing: you name it, the Iranians have either tried it or done it successfully. Now, and particulary in the Middle East, they're going to be doing it much better than before. Getting nukes will--to borrow an American term--"energise" the Islamist narrative, attract more followers (or simply people who accept the basic Islamist logic without actively becoming members of the movement) and the consequent power of Islamist movements throughout.

In my view, the consequences of a strike on the Iranian leadership and their nuclear facilities would pale in comparison. What more can the Iranians do in the event of such a strike but struggle to survive it?

How about start firing their substantial missile stock into Israel, vastly increase their funding to terrorist groups, turn the Strait of Hormuz into a burning hell of wrecked shipping, and basically cause hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of deaths and hit the world economy for trillions in the process?

[BlackCat]

That's not even different from the definition I gave. Oh, it's not 'who are or think the same as something already mentioned' (which I'll admit sounds awkward since it comes from a google translation), it's 'which is or means the same as something already mentioned'. Fortunately, your version sounds better and is more in keeping with the English definition of ditto, anyway. 'Who are or think the same' sounds off since you never say ditto about something that is a person which can think.

Your translation is more in keeping with the English definition of ditto.

Oh, so "who are" and "wich is" is similar ?

[Al B. Sure!]

Oh, so "who are" and "wich is" is similar ?

Your translation makes more sense. Your translation equates with the English definition of ditto. So therefore, your definition means I win.

[MRT144]

where does this need to win petty internet points stem from

[Aeson]

Ages ago before primates developed arms to kill each other with, it was the male who could out-squawk all the others who got to mate with the females. This genetic propensity has been repressed throughout most of human history because of the dominant gene of "beat the **** out of the loudest squawker", but recently been freed from that tyranny by the anonymity of the internet.

So really, all this technology has done is bring us about full circle back to when we were limbless beasts flopping around squawking at each other. (Or at least will once Facebook finally realizes it's full potential as the new breeding grounds...)