I'm not sure why they deicded to try out their fancy radar cloaked warhead carrying missiles after the Security Council asked Iran to stop enrichment within 30 days. It seems the bravado's egging the Security Council on which I thought would be a bad idea since they could get Russia and China to cover them as long as things didn't get out of hand.

 

ME go boom?

sabre-rattling

n noun the display or threat of military force.

Ah yes the good old hey look what we have scenario.

You're talking about (arguably) the oldest surviving civilization on Earth, y'know.

Though that'd weaken Russia and China's position.

I'm officialy lost, now.

About being the oldest civilization, does the post-soviet islamistic extremist-creation sandbox of a nation really count?

Why wouldn't it? You see civilizations have these pesky little habit, one they never seem to be able to shake off, it's called evolution, or in this case devolution, oh well.

 

Unless, of course, the population has thoroughly changed from an ethnic point of view.

Are Italians still Romans too?

Edited April 1, 200619 yr by Musopticon?

If they wish themselves so. And one could say that the Italian culture is in a way an evolution of the culture that existed before it.

 

But the Italians have suffered both ethnic and linguistic changes, serious changes, and as I've already mentioned I am not very familiar with Iran's current status.

Me neither, I have to admit.

 

So let's leave it at that, shall we?

Edited April 1, 200619 yr by Musopticon?

Latinus

Latin

n noun

1 the language of ancient Rome and its empire.

2 a native or inhabitant of a country whose language developed from Latin, e.g. a Latin American.

n adjective

1 relating to the Latin language.

2 relating to or denoting countries using languages that developed from Latin, especially Latin America.

3 relating to or denoting the Western or Roman Catholic Church.

4 historical relating to ancient Latium in Italy.

 

DERIVATIVES

Latinism noun

Latinist noun

Latinity noun

 

ORIGIN

from Latin Latinus 'of Latium'.

I'm not sure I get it.

 

Do you mean to point that the culture was so wide-spread and integrated to every people in Europe, that it's right to say we all are somewhat Roman?

That, and the Italians aren't Roman, they/we are Latinus.

I rarely make a single point in one comment. :D

 

Also, the Persians / inhabitants of Iran have a long and rich history: just like the Indian subcontinent and the Chinese ... trying to club them over the head and call them (collectively) a bunch of idjits doesn't address the global politcial issues. As soon as Pakistan obtained nukes, everyone started talking to them with respect; Britain talks about refurbishing its nuclear deterrent, not abiding by the spirit of the non-proliferation treaty and putting all nukes beyond use.

 

Is it any wonder other countries, especially those with a long history and a rich culture where they used to be rulers of their region for many centuries (millennia, even), see the double standards in global politics and decide that they need to buy into the nuclear arms race to have a say at the adults' table?

I'm having an argument with myself wether to outright tell you to shut it or go for the "How's that relevant?"-card. I think I'm winning.

 

Edit: Scratch that, I see your point. I'll try to sound less like total stooge next time. :"> For the record, I never denied that the Iranians have a rich cultural heritage(fertile crescent anyone?). My original point was to ask wether the recent state really is just a continuation to what once was Ninive.

Edited April 1, 200619 yr by Musopticon?

What Iran is today, is of course no longer ancient Persia. They most certainly are not the rich culture they once was. The radical islamofascists of today has ruined that.

Would be the same as comparing todays Iraq to, say, ancient Babylon.

 

Or todays Danes, Swedes and Norwegians to the Vikings of old. :">

Edited April 1, 200619 yr by Lucius

Me and my slow edits.

Except that Iraq was a nineteenth century construct, and the culture and people of Iran have remained constant. (That's why, for example, President Bush II addressed the people of Iran in his last State of the Union speech.)

 

Bear in mind that the theocracy is only a generation old (there was a Shah up until the revolution of 1979) and also the population have suffered attritional war for a generation, so that half the population is under 25. Also, the last election (yes, they have a democracy) the hardliner doing all the screaming was elected partially because of the large voter abstention: only 60% of those eligible actually voted.

 

I'll leave you to make up your own mind as to whether they didn't like the slow progress of the previous moderate, or just want to hide behind the rhetoric of a hard-liner (as one is likely to do in times of high stress and uncertainty).

They talk the talk, lets see if they will walk the walk.

Are Italians still Romans too?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Nope, that race be gone.

Reading comprehension: -5

"yes, they have a democracy"

 

 

Yeah, and so did Iraq under Hussein.

 

 

R00fles!

I'm not sure why they deicded to try out their fancy radar cloaked warhead carrying missiles after the Security Council asked Iran to stop enrichment within 30 days.  It seems the bravado's egging the Security Council on which I thought would be a bad idea since they could get Russia and China to cover them as long as things didn't get out of hand.

 

ME go boom?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow, I'm so surprized they didn't listen to the UN[/sarcasm] <_<