Taking bets...when will we go into iran

61 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
  • |
Obama Demands Iran Open Secret Nuke Plant to Inspectors - Political News - FOXNews.com

We're accusing them of having secret nuke plants for creating weapons, and demanding they allow inspections.

If we know about it, how is it secret? But this sounds an awful lot like us saying iraq had wmd's that nobody has ever found. I'm betting we are about to go into iran
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Iran is pissing a lot of countries off right now - I'm thinking that the UN will be stepping in and not just the US very shortly. We don't need no more stinking bombs. They had some meeting about Nukes at the UN this week sometime and Iran was in major play in the discussions. Not sure how it ended up.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1217294].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      Iran is pissing a lot of countries off right now - I'm thinking that the UN will be stepping in and not just the US very shortly. We don't need no more stinking bombs. They had some meeting about Nukes at the UN this week sometime and Iran was in major play in the discussions. Not sure how it ended up.
      With Kadafi looking for a place to pitch his tent:rolleyes:
      Signature

      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
      Getting old ain't for sissy's
      As you are I was, as I am you will be
      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218495].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    Sorry but, military action on Iran will not happen.

    ( whether it was the Bush admin or any other US admin )

    Israel is not crazy enough to attack Iran but some of them may be crazy enough to hope we're stupid enough to do it for them.

    Cooler heads will prevail and no military action will be taken to prevent them from gaining nukes.

    Why not??

    - The fallout of trying to prevent them from having nukes will be worse than them having nukes.

    ( what are they really going to do with them? They'll just be another nation in the nuclear club )

    Guess what??

    - Iran now has the capacity to retaliate - especially against Israel.

    They have 100's of missiles ( maybe more ) than can reach downtown Tel Aviv and these missiles are high tech, quality Russian...


    ... - not that garbage Saddam had that was hand pushed off launching pads and had no real targeting at all. ( scuds )


    Unless Iran is nuked, no one's going to be able to get them all before they are launched and devastate Tel Aviv.

    also...

    A nuke attack on Iran will be just like an attack on Russia because no one can control the winds etc., and I'm sure the Russians have made that clear to all concerned.

    - Oil will go to $300 per barrel. Imagine gas prices.

    While we were wasting people, time and resources in Iraq, Russia was arming the Iranians to the teeth with quality high tech stuff.

    Remember when Israel attacked Saddam's nuke facilities in 1984??

    They only did it because Iraq did not have the capacity to retaliate in any meaningful way.

    It's not just me,...

    ..I've heard retired U.S. military generals say on MSNBC that Iran is going nuclear and there's nothing we can do about it now.

    Lot's of chest thumping, diplomatic, economic and other measures will be taken but an attack?

    I think not.

    TL
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1217425].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Michael Motley
      Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

      Sorry but, military action on Iran will not happen.

      ( whether it was the Bush admin or any other US admin )

      Israel is not crazy enough to attack Iran but some of them may be crazy enough to hope we're stupid enough to do it for them.

      Cooler heads will prevail and no military action will be taken to prevent them from gaining nukes.

      Why not??

      - The fallout of preventing them from having nukes will be worse than them having nukes.

      ( what are they really going to do with them???? They'll just another nation in the nuclear club )

      - Iran has the capacity to retaliate.

      They have 100's of missiles ( maybe more ) than can reach downtown Tel Aviv and these missiles are high tech, quality Russian...

      ... - not that garbage Saddam had that was hand pushed off launching pads and had no real targeting at all. ( scuds )

      Unless Iran is nuked, no one's going to be able to get them all before they are launched and devastate Tel Aviv.

      also...

      A nuke attack on Iran will be just like an attack on Russia because no one can control the winds etc., and I'm sure the Russians have made that clear to all concerned.

      - Oil will go to $300 per barrel. Imagine gas prices.

      While we were wasting people, time and resources in Iraq, Russia was arming the Iranians to the teeth with quality high tech stuff.

      Remember when Israel attacked Saddam's nuke facilities in 1984??

      They only did it because Iraq did not have the capacity to retaliate in any meaningful way.

      It's not just me,...

      ..I've heard retired U.S. military generals say on MSNBC that Iran is going nuclear and there's nothing we can do about it now.

      Lot's of chest thumping, diplomatic, economic and other measures will be taken but an attack?

      I think not.

      TL
      Iran has stood in front of the u.n security council and said that israel and the u.s. need to be wiped off the map, not once but twice, and that was before they had their nuclear capabilities. Israel is not a country you really want to mess with, especially if you're arabic. People severely underestimate the israeli army. Not only are the armed with our weapons, some of the best in the world, their soldiers are some of the hardest on the planet.

      Chest thumping is what north korea was doing, he had no intention of doing anything bu ttalking trash, but the iranian leader is just this side of crazy.

      Plus we've run out of things to shoot in iraq and afghanistan.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1217446].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
        Originally Posted by Michael Motley View Post

        Iran has stood in front of the u.n security council and said that israel and the u.s. need to be wiped off the map, not once but twice, and that was before they had their nuclear capabilities. Israel is not a country you really want to mess with, especially if you're arabic. People severely underestimate the israeli army. Not only are the armed with our weapons, some of the best in the world, their soldiers are some of the hardest on the planet.

        Chest thumping is what north korea was doing, he had no intention of doing anything bu ttalking trash, but the iranian leader is just this side of crazy.

        Plus we've run out of things to shoot in iraq and afghanistan.
        I'm not underestimating the Israeli Army in any way.

        They are the best in the middle east.

        They also have at least 3 nuclear powered and equipped subs patrolling the oceans so they don't have to take any type of crap from anyone - including us.


        I also think people should not mistake the Iranians for the Iraqis.

        They've made it clear that if attacked, they will set the whole mid east on fire - and now they have the capacity to cause lots of trouble and property damage etc.

        - Iranian sleeper cells all over the west will spring into action - along with their radical Muslim friends.

        Don't mistake me for any type of Iranian supporter etc.

        But I don't think it's going to happen.


        TL
        Signature

        "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1217537].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author garyv
      Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

      Sorry but, military action on Iran will not happen.

      ( whether it was the Bush admin or any other US admin )

      Israel is not crazy enough to attack Iran but some of them may be crazy enough to hope we're stupid enough to do it for them.

      Cooler heads will prevail and no military action will be taken to prevent them from gaining nukes.

      Why not??

      - The fallout of trying to prevent them from having nukes will be worse than them having nukes.

      ( what are they really going to do with them? They'll just be another nation in the nuclear club )

      Guess what??

      - Iran now has the capacity to retaliate - especially against Israel.

      They have 100's of missiles ( maybe more ) than can reach downtown Tel Aviv and these missiles are high tech, quality Russian...


      ... - not that garbage Saddam had that was hand pushed off launching pads and had no real targeting at all. ( scuds )


      Unless Iran is nuked, no one's going to be able to get them all before they are launched and devastate Tel Aviv.

      also...

      A nuke attack on Iran will be just like an attack on Russia because no one can control the winds etc., and I'm sure the Russians have made that clear to all concerned.

      - Oil will go to $300 per barrel. Imagine gas prices.

      While we were wasting people, time and resources in Iraq, Russia was arming the Iranians to the teeth with quality high tech stuff.

      Remember when Israel attacked Saddam's nuke facilities in 1984??

      They only did it because Iraq did not have the capacity to retaliate in any meaningful way.

      It's not just me,...

      ..I've heard retired U.S. military generals say on MSNBC that Iran is going nuclear and there's nothing we can do about it now.

      Lot's of chest thumping, diplomatic, economic and other measures will be taken but an attack?

      I think not.

      TL
      I don't know if that's true. Israel has gone alone in the past to protect themselves. They bombed a nuclear facility in Iraq in 1981 when Iraq was about to bring it online. If you listened to the Israeli President's speech yesterday, he made it clear that he'd like some help, but would do whatever it takes to protect Israel. He also said that it's very urgent that all players come to the table.

      There is now a meeting set up with Iran next week in Geneva, and I don't think that it's necessarily to get Iran to comply as much as it is to get Israel to take it's finger off of the trigger.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218478].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
        Originally Posted by garyv View Post

        I don't know if that's true. Israel has gone alone in the past to protect themselves. They bombed a nuclear facility in Iraq in 1981 when Iraq was about to bring it online. If you listened to the Israeli President's speech yesterday, he made it clear that he'd like some help, but would do whatever it takes to protect Israel. He also said that it's very urgent that all players come to the table.

        There is now a meeting set up with Iran next week in Geneva, and I don't think that it's necessarily to get Iran to comply as much as it is to get Israel to take it's finger off of the trigger.

        The reason Israel bombed Saddam in 1981 was because the Iraqis could not retaliate in any meaningful way.

        The story is much different this time around.

        While the U.S. was going after the easy target in Iraq, Russia was arming the Iranians to the teeth.

        The Iranians have 100's of quality missiles that can reach downtown Tel Aviv with accuracy and unless you nuke the whole country you're not going to get even 20% of them before they are launched.

        No one is going to detonate a nuclear device on Iran because it's too close to Russia.

        As I said earlier, I've heard a retired U.S. general say on MSNBC that Iran is going nuclear and there is nothing we can do about it.

        That cat is out the bag and that train has left the station.

        We'll get lots of tough talk - from all sides but nothing serious is going to happen except diplomatic, social and economic stuff.

        TL
        Signature

        "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218571].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author locpic63
          Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

          The reason Israel bombed Saddam in 1981 was because the Iraqis could not retaliate in any meaningful way.

          The story is much different this time around.


          TL
          Not to long ago Israel launched a massive air strike on Syria that caused major devastation to the country and our own congress did not even find out about it until almost three months after the fact. As Americans how soon we forget.

          Here's to your continuing success
          Locpic63
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218589].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
            Originally Posted by locpic63 View Post

            Not to long ago Israel launched a massive air strike on Syria that caused major devastation to the country and our own congress did not even find out about it until almost three months after the fact. As Americans how soon we forget.

            Here's to your continuing success
            Locpic63
            Meaning what??

            TL
            Signature

            "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218598].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author locpic63
              Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

              Meaning what??

              TL
              Meaning that your post about the only reason Israel attacked Iraq was that they couldn't retaliate is misguided.
              Locpic63
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218616].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
                Originally Posted by locpic63 View Post

                Meaning that your post about the only reason Israel attacked Iraq was that they couldn't retaliate is misguided.
                Locpic63

                Fill me in.


                TL
                Signature

                "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218632].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
                Originally Posted by locpic63 View Post

                Meaning that your post about the only reason Israel attacked Iraq was that they couldn't retaliate is misguided.
                Locpic63



                OK, Let me re-phrase the statement...


                One...

                ... of the major reasons they attacked Saddam was that Saddam could not retaliate.


                TL
                Signature

                "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1221104].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Well we have to stay at war with someone or congress loses a lot of power over its own citizens that it derives solely from being in a state of war.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1217470].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      Well we have to stay at war with someone or congress loses a lot of power over its own citizens that it derives solely from being in a state of war.
      And let's not forget the large, corporate war profiteers...
      Signature

      Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1217614].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
        Originally Posted by MikeAmbrosio View Post

        And let's not forget the large, corporate war profiteers...

        They've already made plenty of money from the Iraq situation.

        The admin is not going to be bullied into any costly ( and I do mean costly ) war period.

        Perhaps a new cold war but not a hot one.


        TL
        Signature

        "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1217630].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Michael Motley
          Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

          They've already made plenty of money from the Iraq situation.

          The admin is not going to be bullied into any costly ( and I do mean costly ) war period.

          Perhaps a new cold war but not a hot one.


          TL
          you dont have to bully the willing.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1217648].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Ken
            Originally Posted by Michael Motley View Post

            you dont have to bully the willing.
            As many have discovered to their despair.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1217876].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author ConcordeWarrior
              I think Satanyahu will bomb Iran and go at it alone any time from October to the year's end. Then the US, the UK and France will join the war and finish them off.

              Someone from the opposite camp - maybe Russia or China - will then retaliate and flatten out IsraHell.

              As soon as they start attacking Iran, the Straits of Hormuz will be blocked and the barrel of crude oil will reach insane prices.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218263].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
          Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

          They've already made plenty of money from the Iraq situation.

          TL
          When it comes to some of these companies, there's no such thing as "made plenty..."
          Signature

          Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1217849].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
            Originally Posted by MikeAmbrosio View Post

            When it comes to some of these companies, there's no such thing as "made plenty..."

            True, oh so true.

            TL
            Signature

            "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1217864].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Michael Motley
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      Well we have to stay at war with someone or congress loses a lot of power over its own citizens that it derives solely from being in a state of war.
      very true. plus we love war, it helps our economy. our biggest companies in this country aren't pizza places and clothes stores, they are weapons manufacturers
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1217645].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author derekwong28
    I agree with TL. The threats against Isreal and the U.S. are for internal consumption only. It is a known fact when dictators are in trouble at home, they turn their attention overseas to look for other countries to blame. Israel is a convenient target because it will be popular with Arabic countries (Iran is not Arabic by the way) and also they know that Israel has few options military wise because of the distances involved.

    The Hezbollah Israeli war in 2006 was the first war that Israel did not win, in fact it was widely perceived by its population and others to have lost that war. Iran was the main backer of Hezbollah and its agents were reportedly involved in firing Iranian supplied Hezbollah missiles at Israel, including a C-801 ant-ship missile at the INS Hanit.

    Israel took all this and did not retailiate against Iran. Why, because Iran is too far away. Its army is simply not goint to cross over Iraq to attack Iran. Its fighter gets will require a number of refillings in order to attack. I don't think anybody in Israel wants to go through the 2006 war again. They know that Iran has a very great capability to retaliate and will almost certainly retaliate.

    Derek
    Signature

    Do not get between a wombat and a chocolate biscuit; you will regret it dearly!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1217620].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by derekwong28 View Post

      Iran is not Arabic by the way
      They might as well be. Farsi is written with arabic script, and I think it may STILL adopt some arabic words. The people in Iran tend to be moslem, and hate Israel just as much.

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1233617].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael Motley
    not the u.s....

    let someone else go play with the crazies...we've lost enough on that useless plot of sand.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218339].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author knight8
    We won't because we can't afford to. It is as simple as that. There is no money.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218358].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael Motley
    where there is a will, there is a tax
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218381].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author locpic63
    Hate to burst the bubble here, but we have had special forces and secret opps. in Iran since before the first gulfwar.
    Here's to your continuing success
    Locpic63
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218427].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
      Originally Posted by locpic63 View Post

      Hate to burst the bubble here, but we have had special forces and secret opps. in Iran since before the first gulfwar.
      Here's to your continuing success
      Locpic63

      Meaning what???


      TL
      Signature

      "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218442].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael Motley
    The Iranian president is now stating that President Obama will be sorry for saying they have a secret nuclear plant
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218443].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
      Originally Posted by Michael Motley View Post

      The Iranian president is now stating that President Obama will be sorry for saying they have a secret nuclear plant

      I think they're talking a lot of smack because they know that nothing is going to happen - just like North Korea.


      TL
      Signature

      "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218475].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Michael Motley
        Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

        I think they're talking a lot of smack because they know that nothing is going to happen - just like North Korea.


        TL
        Yeah, i think a lot of the trash iran and nk's leaders talk is because they know we really wont stomp a hole in them and it allows them to go back to their people and say 'look at your great and powerful leader tell those dirty americans how its going to be'
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218518].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael Motley
    I personally think we should pull out of the middle east all together. Let them go at it, even leave our weapons and ammo.

    When the dust settles we'll pave it and make the worlds biggest walmart.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218734].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author olivier2371
      That's a great idea. Let's bring everyone back to their own countries. Who cares about patrol? Once their fight is over there will be more space for everyone else.
      Signature

      - Do you need scripts for your website. click here
      - For your weight loss needs click here
      -Free softwares, videos and e-books click here

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218809].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
    Any attack on Iran will raise the oil price to insane levels ($1000/barrel anyone?).

    Thus making it impossible for the west to win. Unless the west uses solar powered bombers, missiles, tanks, humvees, etc., etc..

    Iraq was taken over because Iraq couldn't fight back. Iran can, and will fight back.

    We need to wean ourselves off the oil teat.
    Signature
    Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
    So that blind people can hate them as well.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218828].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Killer Joe
      Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

      Any attack on Iran will raise the oil price to insane levels ($1000/barrel anyone?).
      The flip side to that coin is that the first time a terrorist attack takes out a fully loaded parked tanker ship the price of oil will plummet to unbelievably low levels as everybody scrambles to unload their liquid assets.

      Ironically, that is a far greater possibility than an attack on Iran.

      KJ
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1218841].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Michael Motley
      Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

      Any attack on Iran will raise the oil price to insane levels ($1000/barrel anyone?).

      Thus making it impossible for the west to win. Unless the west uses solar powered bombers, missiles, tanks, humvees, etc., etc..

      Iraq was taken over because Iraq couldn't fight back. Iran can, and will fight back.

      We need to wean ourselves off the oil teat.
      or...we could just go ahead and take what we want and not really be concerned about what iran does
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1219143].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
        Originally Posted by Michael Motley View Post

        or...we could just go ahead and take what we want and not really be concerned about what iran does
        Only if you are one of the troops that are sent in. Preferably in the first wave.
        Signature
        Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
        So that blind people can hate them as well.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1222822].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dave Patterson
    If they go ahead with their nuke plans I expect you-know-who to send Hillary whatshername to the UN and try and gather enough support to keep Iran out of future Olympics until they beg for mercy...
    Signature
    Professional Googler
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1219167].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author myob
      There are still several non-military sanctions such as financial and political that have not yet put in play. Iran is vulnerable because they import more than half of their food and consumer items. Also, if another major player such as Germany comes on board, their banking system can be crippled with the US, UK, France. The wild card is Russia, China, and the countdown pressure which is ultimately Israel. As locpic63 mentioned there are special ops there now ready to move. My bet is Iran backs down.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1219412].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
        Israel is not a country you really want to mess with, especially if you're arabic.
        [sigh] Iran is not an Arab country. Iranians are Persian. And yes, the difference is significant. Note that I'm not saying ANY culture is better or worse than another, but there are differences, and they matter in choosing effective ways to interact.

        The Iranian people are well-educated, and culturally and politically sophisticated. The oldest continuously inhabited human settlement in North America is believed to be the Hopi village of Oraibi, settled approximately 1000 years ago. Settlements in Tehran existed in 6000 BC.

        Those are deep roots. There are ways to communicate with them, and the Iranian people do not hate the west. They admire western culture more than probably any country in the region. What they dislike is our tendency to dictate how they will live. Based on our history, that's not a difficult thing to understand.

        It does not need to become a matter of military intervention. Iran has made overtures toward normal relations in the past, only to be rebuffed by western countries. They showed us the proper approach. We simply have to take the lesson.


        Paul
        Signature
        .
        Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1219936].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author gareth
          Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

          [sigh] Iran is not an Arab country. Iranians are Persian. And yes, the difference is significant. Note that I'm not saying ANY culture is better or worse than another, but there are differences, and they matter in choosing effective ways to interact.

          The Iranian people are well-educated, and culturally and politically sophisticated. The oldest continuously inhabited human settlement in North America is believed to be the Hopi village of Oraibi, settled approximately 1000 years ago. Settlements in Tehran existed in 6000 BC.

          Those are deep roots. There are ways to communicate with them, and the Iranian people do not hate the west. They admire western culture more than probably any country in the region. What they dislike is our tendency to dictate how they will live. Based on our history, that's not a difficult thing to understand.

          It does not need to become a matter of military intervention. Iran has made overtures toward normal relations in the past, only to be rebuffed by western countries. They showed us the proper approach. We simply have to take the lesson.


          Paul
          Is that "the iranian people" like I am "the new zealand people" and you are "the american people"

          Worthless generalization.

          Some Iranians are aszholes and some are OK just like people anywhere & your personal attitude determines who is what.

          Iran is a puppet of china & russia, as we will all be soon if we are not careful. Russia will have a stake in the security of Europe if they have a stake in the missile shield - but its they that have created the threat.

          China meanwhile is taking over the US economy yeah Google "Super 863 Program" - china has 1,000,000 intelligence operatives worldwide.

          US policy should be focussed on China / Russia & the economy but they are hitting at US with the terror front - active measures and next is meant to come the king hit against us.
          Signature
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1228971].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
            Gareth,
            Is that "the iranian people" like I am "the new zealand people" and you are "the american people"
            No. I am an American individual, and you are an individual citizen of New Zealand. When you're talking on the individual level, yes, such generalizations are worthless.

            On a country-wide scale, they can be valid and useful statistical measures.
            Iran is a puppet of china & russia
            Umm... Yeah. Right.

            They have closer ties in some ways, but they're hardly puppets. And, given American interference in their society (ref the American overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government and installation of the Shah as a dictator), it's not surprising that our relations with them might have suffered.


            Paul
            Signature
            .
            Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1228990].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Michael Motley
          Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

          [sigh] Iran is not an Arab country. Iranians are Persian. And yes, the difference is significant. Note that I'm not saying ANY culture is better or worse than another, but there are differences, and they matter in choosing effective ways to interact.

          The Iranian people are well-educated, and culturally and politically sophisticated. The oldest continuously inhabited human settlement in North America is believed to be the Hopi village of Oraibi, settled approximately 1000 years ago. Settlements in Tehran existed in 6000 BC.

          Those are deep roots. There are ways to communicate with them, and the Iranian people do not hate the west. They admire western culture more than probably any country in the region. What they dislike is our tendency to dictate how they will live. Based on our history, that's not a difficult thing to understand.

          It does not need to become a matter of military intervention. Iran has made overtures toward normal relations in the past, only to be rebuffed by western countries. They showed us the proper approach. We simply have to take the lesson.


          Paul
          Because you cant make 'overtures toward normal relations' down the barrel of a gun.

          Most of the countries in the middle east, with the exception of israel and India to a certain extent are social dinosaurs. They live in the dark ages and expect the rest of the world to respect their antiquated ways. It just doesnt work like that.

          They dont show us the proper approach, its the other way around. They are trying to join OUR club, they want OUR attention, we don't need theirs. If they want to be buddies, they have to do it on OUR terms, not us to theirs. The sooner they learn that, the better they will be.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1233194].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Killer Joe
            Originally Posted by Michael Motley View Post

            They live in the dark ages and expect the rest of the world to respect their antiquated ways. It just doesnt work like that.
            Are we talking about Pre-SideWiki days here?

            KJ
            Signature
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1234281].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
            Michael,
            Because you cant make 'overtures toward normal relations' down the barrel of a gun.
            The ones I'm thinking of were not anything like "down the barrel of a gun." They were made in a sincere desire to help, and the way they were rebuffed added to the resentment felt by the current Iranian authorities toward the US.

            The origins of the problem are very different from the things that keep it going today. It is simply not possible to discuss here the real reason we haven't made proper advances in this area. The knees would start jerking, the claws would come out, and the Offtopic section would explode in childish viciousness.

            Suffice to say, I don't think any side of this problem is entirely right or wrong.
            Most of the countries in the middle east, with the exception of israel and India to a certain extent are social dinosaurs. They live in the dark ages and expect the rest of the world to respect their antiquated ways. It just doesnt work like that.
            There are areas in which we in the west think of ourselves as more advanced, certainly. I tend to think we've traded some traditional abuses for more modern ones.

            A quote I read recently comes to mind. Paraphrased, it says that trying to understand history by reading the news is like trying to tell the time by focusing on the second hand on your watch.

            A lot of what we in the west think of as "backward" social customs in Iran, for example, are the result of a reactionary movement that was created in opposition to inexcusable American meddling in their country. In any case, referring to Iran as being in the dark ages is more than a little over the top.

            Not to mention that I could probably name 3 horrible aspects of US culture for every one you can name in Iran

            The most common western criticism of Iran socially is their treatment of women. Let me ask you, though... How big a trade in sex slaves do you think exists in Iran? Do you suppose it's as big as the trade here in the US?

            From a historical perspective, the differences in social advancement are trivial.

            As has been mentioned, India is not in the Middle East. There are areas of India that seem almost western in their values, until you look really closely. There are others that would be as foreign to us as we are to them.
            They dont show us the proper approach, its the other way around. They are trying to join OUR club, they want OUR attention, we don't need theirs. If they want to be buddies, they have to do it on OUR terms, not us to theirs. The sooner they learn that, the better they will be.
            The arrogance of the west, summed up in so few words. Well done.

            Tragically wrong, but well done.


            Paul
            Signature
            .
            Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1235649].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author David Maschke
    Iran will not just silently take an air strike and let it go.

    We already know Iran's response will be to cut of the straights of Hormuz and stop all oil traffic in the region, and to launch a missile strike at Israels nuclear facilities. So any air strike would have to take out Iran's navy, air force, command and control centers, ect.

    There would be tens of thousands of innocent people killed.

    Israel would alse face retaliation from Iran's allies. Syria would try and take back the golan hights (which they want back in a really bad way), Hezbollah would attack from lebanon, and the Palestinians would start a terror campaign from Gaza.

    A strike on Iran would not be a local conflict by any stretch of the imagination. Over night it would engulf the entire region.

    I would suspect Iran's last warning will be when two or three air craft carrier groups move into the gulf. They would have to protect the oil tankers and keep the price of oil from sky rocketing.

    Dave
    Signature

    I

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1220015].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      David,
      A strike on Iran would not be a local conflict by any stretch of the imagination. Over night it would engulf the entire region.
      It wouldn't even take a strike. Anything that provoked Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to call for action against the US by the Faithful would push things in that direction quickly. The conservative Iranian clerical leadership has a great deal of influence with terrorist groups.

      Fortunately, the Supreme Leader is not the Supreme Idiot that Ahmadinejad seems to be.

      That said, I agree that any armed conflict with Iran has the potential to blossom into something much bigger, and very quickly. Given the proximity to 5 nuclear armed states, one of which is extremely fragile at the moment, this isn't a particularly good plan.

      If Pakistan becomes involved, which is rather likely in the event of a military strike on Iran, everything over there could go to hell in a matter of hours. A destabilized Pakistan sets off every alarm in India, which makes things tricky for China on two fronts. And that's just one example of how things could go real wrong, real quick.

      That ignores the Israeli situation, or the risks to Russia and other former Soviet republics. Anyone know how many of those republics still house Soviet nukes? Georgia and Kazakhstan seem to be likely candidates, but I'm not really up on that end of the issues over there.


      Paul
      Signature
      .
      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1220075].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    I don't see any point in looking at the logic behind Iranian actions when they have a luniacal testosterone fest in power. That dude is just plain insane and you just can't tell what he will do. Seeing that the US was the one that brought that regime into power, it seems it should be our responsibility to rectify our greed and idiocy.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1224276].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author myob
      Actually Ahmadinejad was elected by the Iranian people in 2005, and re-elected in June 2009, beating out the US party of choice which was led by Rafsanjani. But ever since Ahmadinejad first came in power, he began squandering record oil profits on his military and nuclear ambitions and now their economy is running at 20+ percent inflation, compounded by low crude oil prices. Ironically, they have to import nearly all of their gasoline because they were building nuclear weapons plants rather than oil refineries. Over half of Iran's food supplies are imported, their financing is in shambles, and the populace is getting impatient. Iran's idiots are only blustering right now trying to save face. It's a good bet Iran will back down as they are running out of options.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1224344].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author seasoned
        Originally Posted by myob View Post

        Actually Ahmadinejad was elected by the Iranian people in 2005, and re-elected in June 2009, beating out the US party of choice which was led by Rafsanjani. But ever since Ahmadinejad first came in power, he began squandering record oil profits on his military and nuclear ambitions and now their economy is running at 20+ percent inflation, compounded by low crude oil prices. Ironically, they have to import nearly all of their gasoline because they were building nuclear weapons plants rather than oil refineries. Over half of Iran's food supplies are imported, their financing is in shambles, and the populace is getting impatient. Iran's idiots are only blustering right now trying to save face. It's a good bet Iran will back down as they are running out of options.
        I forget if he was elected, but he certainly wasn't RE elected. Oh SURE, they had a "VOTE", but people that would vote against him were THREATENED!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1233625].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      Sal,
      I don't see any point in looking at the logic behind Iranian actions when they have a luniacal testosterone fest in power. That dude is just plain insane and you just can't tell what he will do. Seeing that the US was the one that brought that regime into power, it seems it should be our responsibility to rectify our greed and idiocy.
      The President of Iran has very little power in military affairs. That area belongs to the Supreme Leader and the Revolutionary Guard. There's some question right now about how much control even Khamenei has in the matter. The IRGC has always been harder to get intelligence on than most foreign militaries.

      Ahmadinejad is a kook, but he's not the kook who controls foreign policy.


      Paul
      Signature
      .
      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1228821].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Yeah sure he was elected -- Just like Bush was. Go figure.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1224353].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author myob
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      Yeah sure he was elected -- Just like Bush was. Go figure.
      Yes, Sal you know that and I know that. That is why I bolded elected and re-elected. You should know my little hidden tongue-in-cheek subtlies by now.

      Seriously, though, as you also remember, any outside election commentary was considerd by the clerics to be illegally influencing and interferring in their internal affairs, and the Iranian people suffered terribly for it.

      Neither the US nor any other country had anything to do with bringing the regime into power. It was all done by the Iran's top authority, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and all the leading clerics.

      The outcome of the elections are now a mute point, however, and the Iranian people who elected and then re-elected Ahmadinejad are now betting with their future, their hopes and dreams, and even their very lives on the success of non-military international sanctions.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1224441].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1227888].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author valerieSONORA
    How can the US go to war with Iran while we are still in Iraq and Afghanistan? How many wars can the US fight at one time? No one wants to see the draft come back.
    Signature

    siggy taking a break...

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1228706].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Phnx
    Here's a cut 'n' paste from Paul Craig Roberts. He seems to be of the opinion that war is on the cards. Certainly the M.O. is the same as before. A full on war, which is what this one would be, has always been a good standby when the economy is in serious trouble.



    September 28, 2009
    Another War in the Works

    By Paul Craig Roberts

    Does anyone remember all the lies that they were told by President Bush and the "Main Stream Media" about the grave threat to America from weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? These lies were repeated endlessly in the print and TV media despite the reports from the weapons inspectors, who had been sent to Iraq, that no such weapons existed.

    The weapons inspectors did an honest job in Iraq and told the truth, but the mainstream media did not emphasize their findings. Instead, the media served as a Ministry of Propaganda, beating the war drums for the US government.

    Now the whole process is repeating itself. This time the target is Iran.

    As there is no real case against Iran, Obama took a script from Bush's playbook and fabricated one.

    First the facts: As a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty, Iran's nuclear facilities are open to inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which carefully monitors Iran's nuclear energy program to make certain that no material is diverted to nuclear weapons.

    The IAEA has monitored Iran's nuclear energy program and has announced repeatedly that it has found no diversion of nuclear material to a weapons program. All 16 US intelligence agencies have affirmed and reaffirmed that Iran abandoned interest in nuclear weapons years ago.

    In keeping with the safeguard agreement that the IAEA be informed before an enrichment facility comes online, Iran informed the IAEA on September 21 that it had a new nuclear facility under construction. By informing the IAEA, Iran fulfilled its obligations under the safeguards agreement. The IAEA will inspect the facility and monitor the nuclear material produced to make sure it is not diverted to a weapons program.

    Despite these unequivocal facts, Obama announced on September 25 that Iran has been caught with a "secret nuclear facility" with which to produce a bomb that would threaten the world.

    The Obama regime's claim that Iran is not in compliance with the safeguards agreement is disinformation. Between the end of 2004 and early 2007, Iran voluntarily complied with an additional protocol (Code 3.1) that was never ratified and never became a legal part of the safeguards agreement. The additional protocol would have required Iran to notify the IAEA prior to beginning construction of a new facility, whereas the safeguards agreement in force requires notification prior to completion of a new facility. Iran ceased its voluntary compliance with the unratified additional protocol in March 2007, most likely because of the American and Israeli misrepresentations of Iran's existing facilities and military threats against them.

    By accusing Iran of having a secret "nuclear weapons program" and demanding that Iran "come clean" about the nonexistent program, adding that he does not rule out a military attack on Iran, Obama mimics the discredited Bush regime's use of nonexistent Iraqi "weapons of mass destruction" to set up Iraq for invasion.

    The US media, even the "liberal" National Public Radio, quickly fell in with the Obama lie machine. Steven Thomma of the McClatchy Newspapers declared the non-operational facility under construction, which Iran reported to the IAEA, to be "a secret nuclear facility."

    Thomma, reported incorrectly that the world didn't learn of Iran's "secret" facility, the one that Iran reported to the IAEA the previous Monday, until Obama announced it in a joint appearance in Pittsburgh the following Friday with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

    Obviously, Thomma has no command over the facts, a routine inadequacy of "mainstream media" reporters. The new facility was revealed when Iran voluntarily reported the facility to the IAEA on September 21.

    Ali Akbar Dareini, an Associated Press writer, reported, incorrectly, over AP: "The presence of a second uranium-enrichment site that could potentially produce material for a nuclear weapon has provided one of the strongest indications yet that Iran has something to hide."

    Dareini goes on to write that "the existence of the secret site was first revealed by Western intelligence officials and diplomats on Friday."

    Dareini is mistaken. We learned of the facility when the IAEA announced that Iran had reported the facility the previous Monday in keeping with the safeguards agreement.

    Dareini's untruthful report of "a secret underground uranium enrichment facility whose existence has been hidden from international inspectors for years" helped to heighten the orchestrated alarm.

    There you have it. The president of the United States and his European puppets are doing what they do best-lying through their teeth. The US "mainstream media" repeats the lies as if they were facts. The US "media" is again making itself an accomplice to wars based on fabrications. Apparently, the media's main interest is to please the US government and hopefully obtain a taxpayer bailout of its failing print operations.

    Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, a rare man of principle who has not sold his integrity to the US and Israeli governments, refuted in his report (September 7, 2009) the baseless

    "accusations that information has been withheld from the Board of Governors about Iran's nuclear programme. I am dismayed by the allegations of some Member states, which have been fed to the media, that information has been withheld from the Board. These allegations are politically motivated and totally baseless. Such attempts to influence the work of the Secretariat and undermine its independence and objectivity are in violation of Article VII.F. of the IAEA Statute and should cease forthwith."

    As there is no legal basis for action against Iran, the Obama regime is creating another hoax, like the non-existent "Iraqi weapons of mass destruction." The hoax is that a facility, reported to the IAEA by Iran, is a secret facility for making nuclear weapons.

    Just as the factual reports from the weapons inspectors in Iraq were ignored by the Bush Regime, the factual reports from the IAEA are ignored by the Obama Regime.

    Like the Bush Regime, the Middle East policy of the Obama Regime is based in lies and deception.

    Who is the worst enemy of the American people, Iran or the government in Washington and the media whores who serve it?

    Paul Craig Roberts [email him] was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan's first term. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider's Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow's Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.
    http://www.vdare.com/roberts/090925_another_war.htm
    Signature
    In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane. ~ Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900)

    Easy Weight Loss
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1231749].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author myob
      The possibility of war with Iran is extremely remote. Iran's nuclear saber rattling is taking attention away from their fragile economy, and a simple threat of a blockade for essential imports such as gasoline and foodstuffs will cause the blustering idiots to back down.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1232208].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bozz723
    They will beat the war drums until they get their wish. To say attacking Iran is asinine is an understatement.


    It would spell the end to America as we know it, and can not happen at all costs.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1232494].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rondo
    India isn't in the middle east.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1235310].message }}

Trending Topics