Oh, no, they found a copy of Photoshop on Bit Torrent! Let's bomb them and steal their oil!



Thank God that John McCain is so anxious to protect us from this imaginary threat. We surely need to tie our army down and get several thousand more Americans killed to protect ourselves from Photochop using Iranians.

Still, it's more compelling than Bush's failed intelligence dragging us into Iraq.

I didn't understand the point of the PhotoShop'ed lines.
Can you please explain?

Originally Posted by rsrikanth05

I didn't understand the point of the PhotoShop'ed lines.
Can you please explain?

The point is some of the missiles were copied and pasted with photoshop by Iran.

Originally Posted by joder

The point is some of the missiles were copied and pasted with photoshop by Iran.

Ohkay,
Honestly, I don't find it funny at all.
It looks genuine to me, not at all Photoshop'ed.

Originally Posted by rsrikanth05

Ohkay,
Honestly, I don't find it funny at all.
It looks genuine to me, not at all Photoshop'ed.

Looks at the parts that are circled, they're identical, they faked the image.

Talk about going to war on faulty intelligence! McCain promises 4 more years of Bush policy, which means cutting the value of the dollar in half so that we can rid the world of missiles that only exist in Photochop.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

Talk about going to war on faulty intelligence! McCain promises 4 more years of Bush policy, which means cutting the value of the dollar in half so that we can rid the world of missiles that only exist in Photochop.

This statement made me feel very patriotic, I have the sudden urge to find a flag, put my hand over my heart and sing the national anthem.

...

Oh god, they're getting to me!

Two missiles won't have the exact same exhaust plume. At least that could have used some filters or something. Looks like they would have purchased a Photoshop book off Amazon.com?

Maybe Adobe needs to investigate if the Iranian government purchased a legal copy of Photoshop.

Originally Posted by joder

Looks like they would have purchased a Photoshop book off Amazon.com?

Rumsfeld sold it to them in 1981.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

Talk about going to war on faulty intelligence! McCain promises 4 more years of Bush policy, which means cutting the value of the dollar in half so that we can rid the world of missiles that only exist in Photochop.

So true. Iran is not a threat at all. Why is Obama saying it is?

Originally Posted by cbwm

So true. Iran is not a threat at all. Why is Obama saying it is?

You've got nothing better than the appeal to authority logic fallacy, huh?

I guess in Chum land, everything Obama says is automatically true. Faint at any campaign rallies lately?

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

You've got nothing better than the appeal to authority logic fallacy, huh?

I guess in Chum land, everything Obama says is automatically true. Faint at any campaign rallies lately?

Haha. The logic fallacy defense. Jeremy's school of avoiding the topic?

To the point, you have two real choices (are we going to call Nader a choice?). Both say Iran is a threat. Your photo shop rant implies Iran is not a threat. So, either you are right, or Obama and McCain are right. Maybe you should run for president.

Great logic. Both pander to the same special interest groups. So I guess chum agrees with all they say when their pandering.

Originally Posted by joder

Great logic. Both pander to the same special interest groups. So I guess chum agrees with all they say when their pandering.

I missed the point of that post. Are you saying Obama was just pandering when he said Iran is a threat, and therefore lying? I'll grant you the guy has more personalities and conflicting opinions than Hank Evans from Me, Myself and Irene, and like you, I agree with his personality that says Iran is a threat. Our opinions aside, I was just trying to figure out why Newb was trying to target McCain on the "Iran is a problem" issue, when at least one of Obama's personalities is saying the same thing.

I was referring to both candidates pandering to groups like La Raza. They follow each other sucking up to everyone and ever group they can.

My point is you saying something must be true because McCain and Obama both say it is flawed. Present facts, not two candidates bull s**t.

Originally Posted by joder

Present facts, not two candidates bull s**t.

As I stated, I was just trying to point out the differences between the two candidates OPINIONS on Iraq, and John "Learning Newbie" Alexander. I don't think there is a candidate running that does not feel Iran is a threat, thus the recommendation that maybe he run on a platform based on that OPINION, and find out how popular it is.

Here is a theory. Iran is NOT a threat, they are just posturing like they ARE a threat by doing what they are doing (Claiming long range missles, photoshopped missile photos, Uranium Enrichment etc). Just like Iraq, they are busy doing the equivalent of pointing loaded weapons at the police, in hopes of... death by cop? To what end a sane person might ask. Country wide martyrdom? Sacrifice their sovereignty and millions of lives in hopes of building anti-western (U.S. and Israel, but really anti-western) sentiment? If they really are not a threat, and don't intend to use their new found capabilities against Israel, I can see few other possible motives for their behavior.

Sadly, when you point a weapon(loaded or otherwise) at a police officer or at someone else in front of a cop and say you intend to use it, the behavior of the police officer is pretty much pre-determined.

Originally Posted by cbwm

Haha. The logic fallacy defense. Jeremy's school of avoiding the topic?

You keep building houses on the San Andreas fault line, and then wondering why nobody will spend the time to do a full architectural inspection or insure them. You need to not get your premises wrong if you want anybody to take your faulty conclusions seriously.

That picture definitely looks photoshoped!

Originally Posted by cbwm

As I stated, I was just trying to point out the differences between the two candidates OPINIONS on Iraq, and John "Learning Newbie" Alexander. I don't think there is a candidate running that does not feel Iran is a threat, thus the recommendation that maybe he run on a platform based on that OPINION, and find out how popular it is.

I never said Iran won't be a threat in the future. My point was your argument was they are based on political campaigning and rhetoric by candidates and if both say it, it must be true.

On its present course, Iran will be a threat in the future. But I don't think they are a big enough threat to commit troops to occupying a country or even an immediate threat enough for Dubya to deal with.

Now Afghanistan, that is a real immediate problem that George Bush has failed to address in 6 1/2 years. The next president will have to do the job right. Dubya is still unwilling to do it.