CHOULO19

Well this is disappointing, the tittle was completely misleading Seriously though, i agree with a lot in there. Main point I disagree with is Mikel. I'd argue why, but by now I just sound like a broken record.

1) Make it 23m and you have a deal. At least with 23m I could buy a Mata! 2) 117..

Happy birthday mate. Hope you find this year better than the last. Have an awesome day

It's not just Steve...

You can't really compare Chile to Iran. First thing is, Iran was never given a chance to "move on". Straight after the revolution, Saddam was moved by the US to attack Iran. Iran has been considered an enemy by the US since. Second, the location of Iran in the middle east means they are right in the middle of the action zone of everyone in the world. There are no neutrals here, every middle-eastern country is either in the American axis or against it. Third and most importantly the presence of entity of Israel. The injustice in Palestine is the cause of most Muslims in the world.

The offside rule for women:

No, it's not funny anymore when Torres does it!

I'm still laughing at what Hulk did!

A minor note, the revolution was not religious until after it ended. The people that rebelled included communists, Christians, Jews...etc Iran is a country full of diverse religions, beliefs and ideologies. By that same reasoning you should be more worried about the American nuclear weapons. The post-revolution Iran is a state that made big enemies by it's mere existence. Enemies like the US and Israel that have a lot of Nuclear weapons. And like you said, they will use them if it is profitable like it was in Japan. Now imagine for the sake of the discussion an Iran that had the current strong military but no nuclear plants or plans to make nuclear weapons. If that Iran does go to war with Israel, what is stopping Israel and the US from using nuclear weapons against Iran? They already have half the world convinced that Iran is the devil and they already commit or arm and finance equally horrendous crimes all over the world on a regular basis (surely you've heard about the Syrian "rebels" using chemical weapons on cities in Syria this week). On the other hand, who will Iran use their nuclear weapons on? The US? First they don't have the missiles to reach the US and second they would have written their death verdict by themselves. Israel? The middle east is a very small region. Iran can't use a nuclear weapon on Israel just like the latter can't use one on Lebanon or Syria. A nuclear missile there would be devastating to everyone in the area. That's why I'm convinced that Iran's nuclear weapon, would be for defense only or what's a called a "balance of terror". In an ideal world, I'm against anyone owning nuclear weapons; I hate all kinds of weapons, but if there were people with guns that called me an enemy, I'd want to keep a gun with me.

So, how well did you do in math in high school? :P

Thank fuck the games are back! Great win at home against Super Villains

He played more than 70 mins with that injury on Sunday. Not sure if that's a good or bad sign.

Took you long enough! Cahill and Rami should be fit for this one, right?

International breaks surely must increase the suicide rates world-wide. They should be illegal!

Right, at the risk of getting involved in whatever is going on up there, I think Toure is dirty cunt, but that's not why I don't want to sign him. He's clearly on the decline. The good performance he put in this season can be counted on one hand. Practically, he'll be another Deco. I would much rather see us invest in a more permanent solution.

I was referring to two different incidents: Let me ask you this for the sake of the discussion: How much do you know about the Iranian ideology? What would make Iran so different than other nuclear countries? And finally, what do you think gives only some countries the right to have a nuclear weapon?

I was, and it's because I can't help but feel strongly about some of the stuff in there. I apologize.

:lol: So after Jose claimed FIFA changed people's votes for manager of the year and FIFA denied, Pandev comes out and says his vote for Mourinho had been changed: http://www.football-italia.net/32132/pandev-fifa-changed-my-mou-vote Are we really surprised by this? I mean look at the best XI in the world..

Was everyone playing without keepers on that day?!

There's nothing wrong with not knowing, but just don't be so defensive about your opinions if they are not based on many facts. I'll gladly discuss anything with you if you are open minded even if you do not know much about the subject. But I have to ask, why do you want a discussion about something you don't know or care about? It was not only the Soviet union threatening. It was the cold war. It was the US vs the Soviets and both were involved in the nuclear threatening. For about thirty years people all over the world lived with the possibility that a nuclear war could ignite any day. There were nuclear shelters all over America and Europe. I'm pretty sure you still have some in Belgium. It was not a distant possibility. Everyone back then was convinced that it was only a matter of time. In fact, most historians would tell you know that the world escaped a global nuclear war by luck more than anything. For example, the 1963 Cuba crisis came about as a result of the soviets wanting to build nuclear missiles in Cuba because the US and allies had nuclear missiles in Europe near Russia. Everyone knew that that would ignite a nuclear war, except it miraculously did not. In 1983, a soviet emergency detection station detected a US nuclear missile heading towards Russia. The soviet union almost launched a nuclear attack in return but the commander of the station decided that it was a false alarm even though that had never happened. That is how close we were to a nuclear world war 3. If that officer was in a different mood, history would have been drastically changed. And there are many other close calls. Like I said, I think it's actually good that you don't about all this, and if you want my advice, don't learn about them. You can afford to not know and fear politics, other people in other countries can't.

Not true. The US is the most hated country in the world. I've never seen anyone burn an Iranian flag, but I've seen people of different ethnicity, races and beliefs in tens of different countries burn the American flag. The US have the military power but that is no reason to bend over backwards for them. Life is fight. If you choose to live, you have to fight for it. If you want to give in just because someone is more powerful then you might as well just go back to being a slave for aristocrats and being worked to death by some over fed kings. Millions of people world-wide have given their lives so that the concept of the equality and the right to live came to be accepted. You may chose to not live if you want, but, luckily those rights are not your to give back and so everyone, Iran included can fight for their lives. No one wins wars completely. At least not in the modern world. You win small battles that give small benefits and leverage. The current Iran war started with Islamic revolution. Back then the US was backing the puppeteer of the king of Iran who was a a dictator and one of the wealthiest men on earth who oppressed his people. The people fought for their rights and took back their country from the US and have since been defending it from it. They've won many battles and come a long way from there. They are now a country that manufactures almost everything including cars. I'm not saying that the situation there is perfect, but it's much better than where they started from. Iran is much tougher than you give them credit for. Why else are the US and Israel afraid of war with it?

I thought you didn't want to read a 2000 word reply?

The Cuban missile crisis? The nuclear war that nearly happened in 1983? You know what? I actually think the world is better off with people who believe as you do, so let's leave the subject here.. That's not an assumption. I'm very familiar with the western media and that is where you ultimate get you news whether directly or inderectly. The only assumption I made is that you don't tune in to Iranian media and listen to the other side of the story.

I'm not assuming anything about you, everything I posted has been about what you actually said. My original post, which was a general comment not directed at you in particular was about how people hypocritically someone and claim him to be the devil when he's not much different that everyone else which you demonstrated when you claimed that Iran is a nuclear threat while the US was not. The point was, no one is an angle just like no one is the devil. It's all just a difference in opinion and beliefs and a contradiction in interest.