05-02-2007, 15:28
|
||
|
Citaat:
Motief, gelegenheid en daarmee grote aannemelijkheid. Wat kun jij daar tegenover stellen? Daar vroeg ik immers naar, een wedervraag kan dat niet verhullen.
__________________
"Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child." - Dan Quayle
|
|
| Advertentie | |
|
|
|
|
05-02-2007, 15:49
|
|||
Verwijderd
|
Citaat:
Citaat:
Ik geloof Bush niet als het zegt dat Iran kernwapens wil ontwikkelen. Zoals ik al eerder zij: Ik geloof Ahmedinejad eerder dan Bush. Vooral de stellingen tijdens het journaal: 'Met verrijkt uranium kunnen kernwapens worden gemaakt.' Ja, pas met 90% verrijking. Niet met 10% (oid) waar ze nu opzitten voor kernenergie.
|
||
|
05-02-2007, 15:51
|
|||
|
|
Citaat:
Citaat:
Eddie, wat is nu je bron? Je baseerde je toch wel ergens op hoop ik?
__________________
"Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child." - Dan Quayle
|
||
|
05-02-2007, 16:11
|
|||
Verwijderd
|
Citaat:
Citaat:
Ik geloof dat Ahmedinejad niet zo dom is om kernwapens te ontwikkelen, omdat hij dan de gehele internationale gemeenschap, inclusief zijn vrienden van de SCO, over zich heenkrijgt. Daarnaast wil elk land in ontwikkeling over op kernenergie omdat dat veel makkelijker en efficienter is dan steenkolen en olie. Van mij mag hij. Bush daarentegen heeft keer op keer gelogen en heeft bij mij daarom elke geloofwaardigheid verloren. Ik heb Ahmedinejad nog niet echt kunnen betrappen op leugens; dus geloof ik hem (nog) als hij zegt dat hij alleen kernenergie wil (en geen kernwapens). Het is gewoon mijn menig/opvatting hierover. Totdat het tegendeel wordt bewezen (dwz, dat Ahmedinejad bezig is met kernwapens) blijf ik er bij 
|
||
|
05-02-2007, 17:02
|
||||||
|
Citaat:
Ik weet zeker dat Iran het niet riskeert om een oorlog te riskeren. Áls er al oorlog komt, dan zullen de VS onder leiding van Bush de initiators zijn. Iran heeft echt geen reden om oorlog te voeren tegen willekeurig welk land dan ook, want dan nuked de VS ze terug naar de steentijd, en dat weten zij ook wel. Citaat:
Citaat:
 Citaat:
Citaat:
|
|||||
|
05-02-2007, 20:10
|
|
|
"... Despite the false success of the Americans in returning [Iran's nuclear] portfolio to the U.N. Security Council and in passing resolutions 1696 and 1737, the ineffectiveness of passing the resolution becomes increasingly clear from day to day, in light of Iran's resistance and of its continued nuclear activity... Therefore, a nuclear and strong Iran that has influence over the countries of the region... is a fact, and a living truth, that others must accept so as to preserve their legitimate interests."
Source: Sobh-e Sadeq, Iran, February 5, 2007 (Volgens Memri: the Iranian Sobh-e Sadeq weekly, (...) is the mouthpiece of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC)) invloed op de landen in de regio door slechts civiele energie uit nucleaire stuff voor de eigen bevolking te halen????
__________________
Bureaucracy is the death of any achievement.
|
|
05-02-2007, 20:40
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
Geloof je me niet!? Google er maar op. Heb er vorige week nog een tentamen over gemaakt.
|
|
|
05-02-2007, 20:47
|
|||
Verwijderd
|
Citaat:
Citaat:
|
||
|
05-02-2007, 21:36
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
http://www.thememriblog.org/blog_personal/en/575.htm de krant zelf heeft geen digitale - althans, niet dat ik kan vinden. een voordat je kritiek op memri levert: volgens mij is die nooit beticht van verkeerde vertalingen; slechts selectiviteit van artikelkeuze en bronnen. (een kritiek die ik niet deel, gezien de uitgebreidheid van artikelen en de verschillende meningen die geventileerd worden)
__________________
Bureaucracy is the death of any achievement.
|
|
|
08-02-2007, 16:26
|
||
Verwijderd
|
VS air-superiority krijgt het nog moeilijk:
Citaat:
|
|
|
08-02-2007, 17:17
|
||
|
Citaat:
|
|
|
08-02-2007, 18:10
|
||
Verwijderd
|
Citaat:
Russia sends air defense systems to Iran Russia completes air defense system deliveries to Iran - Ivanov
|
|
|
08-02-2007, 19:10
|
|
|
|
Is niks mis mee toch dat Iran wapens krijgt/koopt om zich te verdedigen tegen de VS.
|
|
08-02-2007, 20:26
|
||
Verwijderd
|
Aaah... durven ze niet meer?
Citaat:
|
|
|
08-02-2007, 20:27
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
__________________
"Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child." - Dan Quayle
|
|
|
08-02-2007, 20:28
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
|
|
|
08-02-2007, 20:31
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
__________________
"Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child." - Dan Quayle
|
|
|
08-02-2007, 20:39
|
|||||
|
|
Citaat:
 Misbruik 9/11 -> Afghanistan, Irak etc.Citaat:
Citaat:
Citaat:
|
||||
|
08-02-2007, 20:40
|
||
Verwijderd
|
Rusland en Iran zijn wel goede vriendjes aan het worden:
Citaat:
|
|
|
08-02-2007, 20:43
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
__________________
"Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child." - Dan Quayle
|
|
|
08-02-2007, 21:09
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
 En nou de weerlegging?
|
|
|
08-02-2007, 21:35
|
||
|
Citaat:
__________________
Mein Name ist Joachim von Hassel/Ich bin Pilot der Bundeswehr/und sende Ihnen aus meinem Flugzeug/den Funkspruch den niemand hört
|
|
|
09-02-2007, 09:17
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
Er is trouwens iets aan de gang dat doet denken aan de Koude Oorlog. De VS willen antiraketafweersystemen in Polen en Tsjechie zetten (bondgenoten) tegen eventueel gevaar uit Iran. Oekraine is daar tegen, want volgens dat land trekt het het gevaar alleen maar aan en dan is dadelijk de Oekraine de dupe ervan (geen onlogische redenatie) en volgens Rusland is de actie alleen maar om Rusland te treiteren want raketten vanuit Iran of waar dan ook zullen niet over Europa naar de VS gaan en zij zouden daar dan ook passend op reageren. Rusland vergeet even voor het gemak dat er nogal wat VS bondgenoten in Europa zitten die niet zo goed een doelwit zijn.
__________________
Bureaucracy is the death of any achievement.
|
|
|
09-02-2007, 09:18
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
__________________
Bureaucracy is the death of any achievement.
|
|
|
09-02-2007, 11:24
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
__________________
"Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child." - Dan Quayle
|
|
|
09-02-2007, 14:19
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
[qoute] Er was van tevoren in eerdere discussie al vrij duidelijk gemaakt dat de VS niet eens meer in staat is Iran binnen te vallen.[/qoute] Binnenvallen misschien niet, maar platbombarderen kunnen ze zeker wel. [qoute] Dat terwijl Iran niet alleen andere landen binnen kan vallen, maar daar op dit moment mee bezig is.[/qoute] bron graag, want dit lijkt me nergens op gebaseerd omdat het niet waar is. Het enige land wat momenteel andere landen binnenvalt is de VS. Kijk na Irak en Afghanistan.
|
|
|
09-02-2007, 16:12
|
|||
|
|
Citaat:
Citaat:
Irak Somalië etc, etc
__________________
"Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child." - Dan Quayle
|
||
|
09-02-2007, 16:18
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
|
|
|
09-02-2007, 17:10
|
||
Verwijderd
|
Citaat:
|
|
|
09-02-2007, 19:37
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
(met welke bewoordingen)
__________________
Bureaucracy is the death of any achievement.
|
|
|
09-02-2007, 19:48
|
||
Verwijderd
|
Citaat:
Om er een paar te pakken: http://www.parool.nl/nieuws/2007/FEB/01/buit2.html http://www.ipsnews.be/news.php?idnews=8396
|
|
|
09-02-2007, 21:07
|
|||
|
|
Citaat:
Ik zie nog steeds het verband niet tussen één willekeurige filosoof en het machtsmisbruik van de regering-Bush, maar als jij het zegt... ... Citaat:
|
||
|
09-02-2007, 23:17
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
Maar, Bekijk de aannames van de world systems theory eens. Je zult zien dat op basis van die aanames vanzelf een analyse ontstaat die in combinatie met enkele recentere aannames (want er is een enkele wereldeconomie, maar je kunt je er ondanks de ramp die dat inhoudt wel tijdelijk van afschermen) een zich aanpassen model vormt. Maar, het hoofdpunt is dat de Amerikaanse hegemonie al jaren op zijn retour is, en het feit dat Amerika fysiek niet meer in staat is Iran binnen te vallen of anderen zo gek te krijgen dat te doen een symptoom van hun desintegrerende macht is. Al met al geen reden over om nog zo panisch over Amerika te doen. Over een jaar of 10-20 hebben we het over de Amerikaanse invloed zoals we het ook hebben over de Britse, Nederlandse en eventueel Duitse invloed op de wereld hebben, in de geest van een voorbij wereldrijk.
__________________
"Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child." - Dan Quayle
|
|
|
09-02-2007, 23:33
|
|||||
|
|
Citaat:
 Citaat:
Daarna is Afghanistan binnengevallen, waar een bevriende ex-werknemer van Bush, Hamid Karzai werd geïnstalleerd. Daarna heeft de regering-Bush gegevens over het wapenprogramma van Saddam Hussein en links tussen Irak en al Qu'aida vervalst om Irak binnen te vallen, waar de zakenrelaties van de familie Bush lucratieve no-bid contracten kregen en waar pas een controversiële wet is aangenomen die het Westen controle geeft over Iraakse olie, die mede ontworpen is door de Amerikaanse regering. Ondertussen zinspeelt de regering-Bush nog steeds op het aanpakken van andere landen, als Iran en Syrië, terwijl corrupte regimes als Saudi-Arabië nog steeds gesteund worden. Terwijl dit gebeurt, spreken prominenten als Dick Cheney van een nieuwe Koude Oorlog, over een oorlog die misschien nog wel 40 of 50 jaar zal duren, of zelfs oneindig zal zijn. Ik verzin dit niet. Dit zijn allemaal controleerbare feiten. Citaat:
Citaat:
|
||||
|
09-02-2007, 23:39
|
||||
|
|
Citaat:
Citaat:
Citaat:
Amerika gaat Iran niet aanvallen als ze enigsinds over intelligentie beschikken, wat ze ook zeggen of andersinds doen, en als dat toch gebeurd is dat een premature zelfmoord van hun toch al tanende macht. Niet dat dat uit zou maken, omdat het toch twee rotte appels tegen elkaar wegstrepen zou zijn.
__________________
"Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child." - Dan Quayle
|
|||
|
09-02-2007, 23:49
|
|||||
|
|
Citaat:
Citaat:
Citaat:
Maar ja, Bush is rechts en ik ben links, dus je moet en zal deze gristen-fundamentalist, waar je normaal zo van gruwelt, verdedigen. Citaat:
|
||||
|
10-02-2007, 09:51
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
__________________
Bureaucracy is the death of any achievement.
|
|
|
11-02-2007, 13:19
|
||
Verwijderd
|
Citaat:
Zoiets heet Politiek.
|
|
|
11-02-2007, 15:22
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate...n/13000779.htm Dus ik denk dat je dreigementen overdreven zijn in vergelijking met wat Ahmadinedhad ervan bakt.
__________________
Bureaucracy is the death of any achievement.
|
|
|
11-02-2007, 15:24
|
||
Verwijderd
|
Citaat:
Daarnaast zal het wel verkeerd zijn vertaald ('zionist regime' is niet hetzelfde als 'Israel').
|
|
|
11-02-2007, 15:29
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
En "zal wel" zegt niets. Bovendien lijkt het mij onwaarschijnlijk dat als Israel het woord zionisme (overigens een begrip dat totaal verkeerd uitgelegd wordt - de verhalen daarove rkunnen in de protocollen van zion. Net zo'n pamflet dat je als wc-papier kunt gebruiken vanwege de onwaarheden daarin) uit enige wet of wat dan ook schrapt, dat Ahmannogwat er opeens mee instemt dat Israel bestaat of mag bestaan.
__________________
Bureaucracy is the death of any achievement.
|
|
|
11-02-2007, 17:45
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
__________________
"Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child." - Dan Quayle
|
|
|
11-02-2007, 17:50
|
||
Verwijderd
|
Citaat:
regime != land
|
|
|
11-02-2007, 17:58
|
||
|
|
Citaat:
__________________
"Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child." - Dan Quayle
|
|
|
11-02-2007, 18:13
|
||
Verwijderd
|
Citaat:
|
|
|
11-02-2007, 19:16
|
||
|
Citaat:
 . Als er iets is wat Teheran zich nu niet kan permitteren is het wel een oorlog, 'het regime' is trouwens veel pragmatischer in dat soort zaken dan sommigen hier denken.
__________________
J'ai vu l'orient dans son écrin, avec la lune pour bannière
|
|
|
12-02-2007, 18:18
|
|
|
|
Evidence Grows That White House Planned To Release Cooked Intel On Iran
The New York Times today published a front-page story by Michael Gordon which recites administration claims about Iran’s involvement in Iraq “without the slightest questioning, investigation, or presentation of ample counter-evidence.” Greg Mitchell notes, via Glenn Greenwald, that it was Gordon “who, on his own, or with Judith Miller, wrote some of the key, and badly misleading or downright inaccurate, articles about Iraqi WMDs in the run-up to the 2003 invasion.” The Times story comes even as evidence grows that the administration planned to release contained cooked intelligence in a “briefing” on Iranian involvement in Iraq . In little noted comments on Feb. 2, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley acknowledged that the Iran briefing washeld back because it was “overstated” and not “focused on the facts.” HADLEY: The reason we put the intelligence briefing on hold was really two reasons. One, we thought we’d better get the NIE out so people could see the full context, which you now can. And secondly, quite frankly, we want to make sure that if we put out intelligence, the intelligence community and MNFI can stand behind it, because we are sensitive to try and put out the facts as accurately as we can. … Q And now [the briefing has] been pushed back. Can we conclude anything from that other than people looked at the intelligence that was set to offered and said, this is not good enough? MR. HADLEY: No, I wouldn’t – Q Does that mean there was a willingness to overstate it? MR. HADLEY: The truth is, quite frankly, we thought the briefing overstated. And we sent it back to get it narrowed and focused on the facts. But a new report in the National Journal states that it was the intelligence community, not the White House, that demanded the briefing be “scrubbed” of overstated claims: At least twice in the past month, the White House has delayed a PowerPoint presentation initially prepared by the military to detail evidence of suspected Iranian materiel and financial support for militants in Iraq. The presentation was to have been made at a press conference in Baghdad in the first week of February. Officials have set no new date, but they say it could be any day. Even as U.S. officials in Baghdad were ready to make the case, administration principals in Washington who were charged with vetting the PowerPoint dossier bowed to pressure from the intelligence community and ordered that it be scrubbed again. Despite the intelligence community’s intervention, there is still no guarantee that the intel on Iran that is eventually made public will be factual or comprehensive. As yesterday’s report on Douglas Feith reinforced, senior administration officials are perfectly willing to work around intelligence professionals to obtain the “facts” that justify their ideology. UPDATE: U.S. officials leak the intelligence to Joe Lieberman, who says he approves: U.S. military commanders in Iraq have shown members of Congress explosive devices that bear Iranian markings as evidence Tehran is supplying Iraqi militants with bombs, a senior U.S. government official said Saturday. One of the lawmakers, independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, said he has seen some of the evidence, though he would not be specific. “I’m convinced from what I’ve seen that the Iranians are supplying and are giving assistance to the people in Iraq who are killing American soldiers,” said Lieberman, who was attending an international security conference in Munich. http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/10/iran-cooked-intel/ (incl. bronnen) Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites are well advanced Ewen MacAskill in Washington Saturday February 10, 2007 The Guardian US preparations for an air strike against Iran are at an advanced stage, in spite of repeated public denials by the Bush administration, according to informed sources in Washington. The present military build-up in the Gulf would allow the US to mount an attack by the spring. But the sources said that if there was an attack, it was more likely next year, just before Mr Bush leaves office. Neo-conservatives, particularly at the Washington-based American Enterprise Institute [dezelfde haviken die global warming proberen te ontkennen door wetenschappers om te komen (zit je er lekker, Hirsi Ali?) -M.A.], are urging Mr Bush to open a new front against Iran. So too is the vice-president, Dick Cheney. The state department and the Pentagon are opposed, as are Democratic congressmen and the overwhelming majority of Republicans. The sources said Mr Bush had not yet made a decision. The Bush administration insists the military build-up is not offensive but aimed at containing Iran and forcing it to make diplomatic concessions. The aim is to persuade Tehran to curb its suspect nuclear weapons programme and abandon ambitions for regional expansion. Robert Gates, the new US defence secretary, said yesterday: "I don't know how many times the president, secretary [of state Condoleezza] Rice and I have had to repeat that we have no intention of attacking Iran." But Vincent Cannistraro, a Washington-based intelligence analyst, shared the sources' assessment that Pentagon planning was well under way. "Planning is going on, in spite of public disavowals by Gates. Targets have been selected. For a bombing campaign against nuclear sites, it is quite advanced. The military assets to carry this out are being put in place." He added: "We are planning for war. It is incredibly dangerous." Deployment Mr Cannistraro, who worked for the CIA and the National Security Council, stressed that no decision had been made. Last month Mr Bush ordered a second battle group led by the aircraft carrier USS John Stennis to the Gulf in support of the USS Eisenhower. The USS Stennis is due to arrive within the next 10 days. Extra US Patriot missiles have been sent to the region, as well as more minesweepers, in anticipation of Iranian retaliatory action. In another sign that preparations are under way, Mr Bush has ordered oil reserves to be stockpiled. The danger is that the build-up could spark an accidental war. Iranian officials said on Thursday that they had tested missiles capable of hitting warships in the Gulf. Colonel Sam Gardiner, a former air force officer who has carried out war games with Iran as the target, supported the view that planning for an air strike was under way: "Gates said there is no planning for war. We know this is not true. He possibly meant there is no plan for an immediate strike. It was sloppy wording. "All the moves being made over the last few weeks are consistent with what you would do if you were going to do an air strike. We have to throw away the notion the US could not do it because it is too tied up in Iraq. It is an air operation." One of the main driving forces behind war, apart from the vice-president's office, is the AEI, headquarters of the neo-conservatives. A member of the AEI coined the slogan "axis of evil" that originally lumped Iran in with Iraq and North Korea. Its influence on the White House appeared to be in decline last year amid endless bad news from Iraq, for which it had been a cheerleader. But in the face of opposition from Congress, the Pentagon and state department, Mr Bush opted last month for an AEI plan to send more troops to Iraq. Will he support calls from within the AEI for a strike on Iran? Josh Muravchik, a Middle East specialist at the AEI, is among its most vocal supporters of such a strike. "I do not think anyone in the US is talking about invasion. We have been chastened by the experience of Iraq, even a hawk like myself." But an air strike was another matter. The danger of Iran having a nuclear weapon "is not just that it might use it out of the blue but as a shield to do all sorts of mischief. I do not believe there will be any way to stop this happening other than physical force." Mr Bush is part of the American generation that refuses to forgive Iran for the 1979-81 hostage crisis. He leaves office in January 2009 and has said repeatedly that he does not want a legacy in which Iran has achieved superpower status in the region and come close to acquiring a nuclear weapon capability. The logic of this is that if diplomatic efforts fail to persuade Iran to stop uranium enrichment then the only alternative left is to turn to the military. Mr Muravchik is intent on holding Mr Bush to his word: "The Bush administration have said they would not allow Iran nuclear weapons. That is either bullshit or they mean it as a clear code: we will do it if we have to. I would rather believe it is not hot air." Other neo-cons elsewhere in Washington are opposed to an air strike but advocate a different form of military action, supporting Iranian armed groups, in particular the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), even though the state department has branded it a terrorist organisation. Raymond Tanter, founder of the Iran Policy Committee, which includes former officials from the White House, state department and intelligence services, is a leading advocate of support for the MEK. If it comes to an air strike, he favours bunker-busting bombs. "I believe the only way to get at the deeply buried sites at Natanz and Arak is probably to use bunker-buster bombs, some of which are nuclear tipped. I do not believe the US would do that but it has sold them to Israel." Opposition support Another neo-conservative, Meyrav Wurmser, director of the centre for Middle East policy at the Hudson Institute, also favours supporting Iranian opposition groups. She is disappointed with the response of the Bush administration so far to Iran and said that if the aim of US policy after 9/11 was to make the Middle East safer for the US, it was not working because the administration had stopped at Iraq. "There is not enough political will for a strike. There seems to be various notions of what the policy should be." In spite of the president's veto on negotiation with Tehran, the state department has been involved since 2003 in back-channel approaches and meetings involving Iranian officials and members of the Bush administration or individuals close to it. But when last year the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, sent a letter as an overture, the state department dismissed it within hours of its arrival. Support for negotiations comes from centrist and liberal thinktanks. Afshin Molavi, a fellow of the New America Foundation, said: "To argue diplomacy has not worked is false because it has not been tried. Post-90s and through to today, when Iran has been ready to dance, the US refused, and when the US has been ready to dance, Iran has refused. We are at a stage where Iran is ready to walk across the dance floor and the US is looking away." He is worried about "a miscalculation that leads to an accidental war". The catalyst could be Iraq. The Pentagon said yesterday that it had evidence - serial numbers of projectiles as well as explosives - of Iraqi militants' weapons that had come from Iran. In a further sign of the increased tension, Iran's main nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, cancelled a visit to Munich for what would have been the first formal meeting with his western counterparts since last year. If it does come to war, Mr Muravchik said Iran would retaliate, but that on balance it would be worth it to stop a country that he said had "Death to America" as its official slogan. "We have to gird our loins and prepare to absorb the counter-shock," he said. War of words "If Iran escalates its military action in Iraq to the detriment of our troops and/or innocent Iraqi people, we will respond firmly" -George Bush, in an interview with National Public Radio "The Iranians clearly believe that we are tied down in Iraq, that they have the initiative, that they are in position to press us in many ways. They are doing nothing to be constructive in Iraq at this point" -Robert Gates "I think it's been pretty well-known that Iran is fishing in troubled waters" -Dick Cheney "It is absolutely parallel. They're using the same dance steps - demonise the bad guys, the pretext of diplomacy, keep out of negotiations, use proxies. It is Iraq redux" -Philip Giraldi, a former CIA counter- terrorism specialist, in Vanity Fair, on echoes of the run-up to the war in Iraq "US policymakers and analysts know that the Iranian nation would not let an invasion go without a response. Enemies of the Islamic system fabricated various rumours about death and health to demoralise the Iranian nation, but they did not know that they are not dealing with only one person in Iran. They are facing a nation" -Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2010086,00.html Uh-oh... 
Laatst gewijzigd op 12-02-2007 om 18:25.
|
|
12-02-2007, 18:45
|
|
Verwijderd
|
Komen Irans stealth drones toch nog van pas
Laatst gewijzigd op 12-02-2007 om 18:56.
|
|
12-02-2007, 19:23
|
|||
|
|
Citaat:
Citaat:
__________________
Bureaucracy is the death of any achievement.
|
||
|
13-02-2007, 19:31
|
||
Verwijderd
|
IAEA: Geen atoomwapen programma in Iran
Citaat:
Geen reden dus voor de VS om Iran te bombarderen. Daarnaast gaat Iran ook ziekenhuizen bouwen in Irak.
|
|
| Advertentie |
|
|
 |
«
Vorige topic
|
Volgende topic
»
|
|
Soortgelijke topics
|
||||
| Forum | Topic | Reacties | Laatste bericht | |
| Nieuws, Achtergronden & Wetenschap |
Iran RepsaJ Neretgun | 207 | 15-04-2007 19:42 | |
| Nieuws, Achtergronden & Wetenschap |
Libanon/Iran: VS willen ontmanteling Hezbollah Gatara | 55 | 25-07-2005 21:02 | |
| Nieuws, Achtergronden & Wetenschap |
Iran basis voor Terrorisme (Al Qaeda) Skyrise | 69 | 03-08-2004 17:22 | |
| Nieuws, Achtergronden & Wetenschap |
De waarheid over de vs!! Verwijderd | 163 | 09-03-2004 13:21 | |
| Nieuws, Achtergronden & Wetenschap |
Plannen voor militaire inmenging op het eiland (Ogen VS gericht op Cuba) niceman1984 | 24 | 04-12-2003 00:17 | |
| Nieuws, Achtergronden & Wetenschap |
Volgend doel: destabilizeren regering Iran Gatara | 36 | 28-05-2003 16:42 | |
Alle tijden zijn GMT +1. Het is nu 15:32.
Adverteren