Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 207

Thread: Iran

  1. #61
    Shadow Senior Member Kagemusha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Helsinki,Finland
    Posts
    9,298

    Default Re: Iran

    I dont understand why Russia keeps popping up in this conversation as a possible military ally of Iran. Its true that Russians make harsh statements all the time on their foreign policy.But the truth behind that is that those statements are infact aimed to Russian domestic policy. Its just a way of Russian politics to feed the sense of strength and honor of Russians and get some cheap points in the process. If Russia would really be hostile towards the West it would have escalated already few years back when the Baltic states entered NATO.At the moment there are NATO planes covering for example the Airspace of Estonia,only couple hundred kilometers from St.Petersburg.Back then the West entered really in the area that Russia thinks its part of its sphere of influence.And they didnt reacted anyway in the end.
    If Iran would be put on trade embargo or attacked,it would only benefit the Russia,becouse as one of the biggest countries in Oil business the increase of Oil prizes would just increase her profits. If you look at any reacent conflicts,some Russian politics always give very hard statements,but like i sayed in the start of the post,in the end it doesnt have anything to do with her foreign politics.
    Ja Mata Tosainu Sama.

  2. #62
    Feeding the Peanut Gallery Senior Member Redleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Denver working on the Railroad
    Posts
    10,660

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by BigTex
    Peaceful solutions are great. But the UN wont act, China and Russia wont allow that to happen. We're still trying to figure out how exactly we say "you cannot build nukes". EU is to busy with themselves. Personally I would much prefer the trade embargo. In fact it is probably the most effective answer, but again the China/Russia problem. But I would not like to be in a world with a nuclear iran. They've funded far to many terrorist groups and have a wonderful habit of chanting "death to Isreal... Death to USA" every sunday. The sad part is this will most likely happen, but bowing down and humiliating ourselves is not the answer.

    So would you rather have a war over the possiblity of nuclear weapons being built in Iran? Again the United States can posture and bluster about the status of the Nuclear Weapons in Iran. Just like Iran is posturing and blustering about the nuclear material.

    Committing troops against Iran will stretch our forces to the point that a national call-up will have to happen, (a draft along with a complete mobilization of all National Guard and Reserve forces.) Using Nuclear Weapons against another nation will also require the same call-up. Your kidding yourself if you don't think the use of nuclear weapons will not result in a heavy price to the United States.

    The point is that the United States has done exactly what you have stated about the Iran postion.

    Quote Originally Posted by BigTex
    Its about time we taught them that they cannot get away with building nukes, violating treaties, and being an arrogant arse.
    The United States has done all three. We are not in a postion of diplomatic strength to be demanding Iran behaves. We can demand they behave from a military strength standpoint, and even an economic one - but not from a diplomatic one.
    O well, seems like 'some' people decide to ruin a perfectly valid threat. Nice going guys... doc bean

  3. #63
    Senior Member Senior Member Ser Clegane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sleepless in the red pagoda
    Posts
    6,602

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by Redleg
    So you are advocating that every other nation just cave into Iran's posturing?

    Did the world not learn a valuable lesson back in 1938 about appeasement?
    Seriously - what can we realistically expect to do?

    If Iran is indeed planning to develop nuclear weapons - and personally, I see no reason to believe that they aren't - what can we (or the world) realistically do about it?

    Massive sanctions might work, however, sanctions imposed by the UN are completely unrealistic IMO as I have serious difficulties visioning a scenario in which China would support such sanctions (perhaps a guarantee by other security council members that they will replace the oil that China wouldn't get from Iran in case of an embargo - quite expensive and somewhat unlikely, but theoretically possible - and I guess China would insist on some other goodies on top of that).
    Problem: I think it is beyond any doubt that Iran would go the extra mile to e.g., further destabilize the situation in Iraq which would result in a quite messy situation (compared to which the current situation might actually look stable and safe).

    Strikes that only target the nuclear facilities would be completely worthless IMO - they would at best buy time to delay the inevitable, at the cost of a destabilization of the region (see above). It might be worthwhile if such strikes buy enough time to delay the nuclear ambitions enough until a regime change takes place (quite a gamble - a too risky one IMO).


    A massive multinational invasion would be another option - I don't even think the US public would support such an endeavor that would dwarf the Iraq invasion in terms of costs in money and casualties - let alone any other Western nation. And apart from the extremely unlikely public support I also have some doubts that the massive loss of lives, the economic disaster and the resulting instability of the region would be justified by what could be gained by it (although Iran is currently one of the last nations I would like to see having access to nuclear weapons - objectively we already have a nation that could easily turn into a similar extremist state during the next 5 years and that already has nuclear weapons: Pakistan).

    I won't even go into pre-emptive nuclear strikes as I think that most sane people will not consider this to be an actual option - once this becomes a viable option, we are entering a new era that I would rather not witness during my lifetime.

    The bottomline seems to be that, in the end, all that the world seemingly can realistically do if Iran really is going after nuclear weapon technology, is to watch and hope that responsibility and the realization that nukes are a weapons that only gives you safety as long as you do not use it go hand in hand with the gain of power.

    Do I like that idea? No! (and this development could hardly come at a worse time, with a seemingly mad demagogue being in a powerful position in Iran).
    But unfortunately we will probably have to get used to the fact that Iran will not be the last nation that gains access to nukes (and which we would rather like not to have access).
    To use a quote from Babylon 5:
    "The avalanche has already started - it is to late for the pebbles to vote"
    Last edited by Ser Clegane; 04-24-2006 at 21:25.

  4. #64
    Feeding the Peanut Gallery Senior Member Redleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Denver working on the Railroad
    Posts
    10,660

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by BHCWarman88
    but you can't do this though Dipomacy. You think the Talibian Would have Handed Osama Bin Laden over in 2001,eh,no.How about Saddum Hussan giving himself up,eh no.
    You might want to study history. The Taliban was given several outs to the problem - they refused to comply or negotate with anyone concerning the issue. A direction Iran is chosing to go at this time, but not all diplomatic recourses have been exhausted at this time.

    Same situation with Iraq and Saddam Hussan - 14 times diplomacy was tried to resolve the issue, along with 12 years of conflict over the skies of Iraq. The failure of diplomacy can also be attribute to both sides (the United States, and Iraq). Are you wishing to go down this same path with Iran?

    Are you willing to face the consequences of another war in the Middle-East on the resources of the United States. (include young men in that resource).

    you think Iran Will give up this Nuclear Program by the Countries Saying "well,we don't want war,please stop...." oh ok, what we gonna do?? Boycott them? Ok go ahead, Iran will get even more mad,and it won't be looking good anyhow Redleg..
    Not at all - if Russia does not supply them with the material needed for futher research the cost raises dramaticly for Iran. If the European Union refuses to trade with Iran - the cost becomes high for Iran. Lots of ways to apply pressure without warfare that has not been done.

    The United States has a history of conflict with Iran. The United States can not negotate a settlement to the issue because of that conflict. To much "face" would be lost. However Iran can negotate a peaceful solution with Europe and the United Nations if it so wishes. One must allow this process to be attempted.

    While I think the UN is a worthless enity - it must be allowed to show wether it has truely become the useless enity I believe it is, or to prove itself still a player on the diplomatic stage of peaceful solutions to crisis.
    O well, seems like 'some' people decide to ruin a perfectly valid threat. Nice going guys... doc bean

  5. #65
    Member Member Taffy_is_a_Taff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,378

    Default Re: Iran

    if Iran weren't controlled by some scary people looking forward to the return of the twelfth imam I wouldn't be too concerned. Hell, I wouldn't even have a problem with people looking forward to a messianic figure appearing if it weren't that it sounds like a great conflict is needed for the Mehdi to put in an appearance.

    I'd say that a nuclear bomb could start such a great conflict.

  6. #66
    Feeding the Peanut Gallery Senior Member Redleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Denver working on the Railroad
    Posts
    10,660

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by Ser Clegane
    Seriously - what can we realistically expect to do?
    Trade embrago's, diplomatic pressure, use the economic power of the EU to inform Iran about the wrongness of thier stated postion.

    If Iran is indeed planning to develop nuclear weapons - and personally, I see no reason to believe that they aren't - what can we (or the world) realistically do about it?
    Only the above - warfare is a last resort based upon the actions of Iran.

    Massive sanctions might work, however, sanctions imposed by the UN are completely unrealistic IMO as I have serious difficulties visioning a scenario in which China would support such sanctions (perhaps a guarantee by other security council members that they will replace the oil that China wouldn't get from Iran in case of an embargo - quite expensive and somewhat unlikely, but theoretically possible - and I guess China would insist on some other goodies on top of that).
    Problem: I think it is beyond any doubt that Iran would go the extra mile to e.g., further destabilize the situation in Iraq which would result in a quite messy situation (compared to which the current situation might actually look stable and safe).
    The west must be willing to stand up - or not. Appeasement is what Iran is after, is the west willing to appease Iran, or is it willing to stand up and do the right thing. The United States is not in a postion to make demands of Iran, however Europe is.

    Strikes that only target the nuclear facilities would be completely worthless IMO - they would at best buy time to delay the inevitable, at the cost of a destabilization of the region (see above). It might be worthwhile if such strikes buy enough time to delay the nuclear ambitions enough until a regime change takes place (quite a gamble - a too risky one IMO).
    war with Iran must be a total war - or not at all.


    A massive multinational invasion would be another option - I don't even think the US public would support such an endeavor that would dwarf the Iraq invasion in terms of costs in money and casualties - let alone any other Western nation. And apart from the extremely unlikely public support I also have some doubts that the massive loss of lives, the economic disaster and the resulting instability of the region would be justified by what could be gained by it (although Iran is currently one of the last nations I would like to see having access to nuclear weapons - objectively we already have a nation that could easily turn into a similar extremist state during the next 5 years and that already has nuclear weapons: Pakistan).

    I won't even go into pre-emptive nuclear strikes as I think that most sane people will not consider this to be an actual option - once this becomes a viable option, we are entering a new era that I would rather not witness during my lifetime.

    The bottomline seems to be that, in the end, all that the world seemingly can realistically do if Iran really is going after nuclear weapon technology, is to watch and hope that responsibility and the realization that nukes are a weapons that only gives you safety as long as you do not use it go hand in hand with the gain of power.

    Do I like that idea? No! (and this development could hardly come at a worse time, with a seemingly mad demagogue being in a powerful position in Iran).
    But unfortunately we will probably have to get used to the fact that Iran will not be the last nation that gains access to nukes (and which we would rather like not to have access).
    To use a quote from Babylon 5:
    "The avalanche has already started - it is to late for the pebbles to vote"

    Agree with the rest for the most part - however the question still remains.

    Did the world not learn a lesson about appeasement in 1938?
    O well, seems like 'some' people decide to ruin a perfectly valid threat. Nice going guys... doc bean

  7. #67
    Member Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Terra, Solar System, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, somewhere in this universe.
    Posts
    2,746

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by Watchman
    Uh... have I been on crack for the past week, or isn't he the Prime Minister ? I seem to recall Italy was one of those cases where the President is largely an ornament and the PM is the big shot...
    a-woops. I assumed that PM and President were one and the same

  8. #68
    Ming the Merciless is my idol Senior Member Watchman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    7,968

    Default Re: Iran

    You could say that in a sense that sort of proves my point...

    Did the world not learn a lesson about appeasement in 1938?
    Oh, Christ...

    Lions.
    "Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. --- Proof of the existence of the FSM, if needed, can be found in the recent uptick of global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters. Apparently His Pastaness is to be worshipped in full pirate regalia. The decline in worldwide pirate population over the past 200 years directly corresponds with the increase in global temperature. Here is a graph to illustrate the point."

    -Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

  9. #69
    Senior Member Senior Member Ser Clegane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sleepless in the red pagoda
    Posts
    6,602

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by Redleg
    Trade embrago's, diplomatic pressure, use the economic power of the EU to inform Iran about the wrongness of thier stated postion.

    The west must be willing to stand up - or not. Appeasement is what Iran is after, is the west willing to appease Iran, or is it willing to stand up and do the right thing. The United States is not in a postion to make demands of Iran, however Europe is.
    I completely agree that the West and especially the EU should try to put as much economic pressure on Iran as possible - however, I remain very sceptical that this will in the end be enough.
    If Iran would only be after the prestige of gaining access to nuclear energy without depending on supplies from other nations (i.e. Russia) this pressure might be enough (but then, if that was Iran's aim we would currently only witness a relatively harmless power game).
    However, if Iran is after nuclear weapons I fear pressure from Western nations will not be sufficient - China needs to be included - and persuading China to support an embargo might require concessions that the EU and the US might consider to costly.
    Not saying that it is impossible and shouldn't at least be tried, but I fear the chances are pretty slim - we will see if the West can create a scenario in which Iran's leadership gets the impression that China might buy into an embargo and which also allows Iran to gracefully accept a compromise.

  10. #70
    Feeding the Peanut Gallery Senior Member Redleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Denver working on the Railroad
    Posts
    10,660

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by Watchman
    You could say that in a sense that sort of proves my point...

    Oh, Christ...

    Lions.
    Remind me what your point was, I missed it given that I normally ignore your posts.
    O well, seems like 'some' people decide to ruin a perfectly valid threat. Nice going guys... doc bean

  11. #71
    Feeding the Peanut Gallery Senior Member Redleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Denver working on the Railroad
    Posts
    10,660

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by Ser Clegane
    I completely agree that the West and especially the EU should try to put as much economic pressure on Iran as possible - however, I remain very sceptical that this will in the end be enough.
    If Iran would only be after the prestige of gaining access to nuclear energy without depending on supplies from other nations (i.e. Russia) this pressure might be enough (but then, if that was Iran's aim we would currently only witness a relatively harmless power game).
    However, if Iran is after nuclear weapons I fear pressure from Western nations will not be sufficient - China needs to be included - and persuading China to support an embargo might require concessions that the EU and the US might consider to costly.
    Not saying that it is impossible and shouldn't at least be tried, but I fear the chances are pretty slim - we will see if the West can create a scenario in which Iran's leadership gets the impression that China might buy into an embargo and which also allows Iran to gracefully accept a compromise.
    Thats the answer I was after.

    If the west does not want to see Iran develop nuclear weapons it will have to be willing to pay a price. Wether that price be a deal with the China, or war. I prefer the peaceful solution, but appeasement now would only result in a higher price sometime in the future.
    O well, seems like 'some' people decide to ruin a perfectly valid threat. Nice going guys... doc bean

  12. #72
    Ming the Merciless is my idol Senior Member Watchman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    7,968

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by Redleg
    Remind me what your point was, I missed it given that I normally ignore your posts.
    I'm flattered. The point about not all presidents being equal.
    "Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. --- Proof of the existence of the FSM, if needed, can be found in the recent uptick of global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters. Apparently His Pastaness is to be worshipped in full pirate regalia. The decline in worldwide pirate population over the past 200 years directly corresponds with the increase in global temperature. Here is a graph to illustrate the point."

    -Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

  13. #73
    Shadow Senior Member Kagemusha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Helsinki,Finland
    Posts
    9,298

    Default Re: Iran

    I agree with Redleg and i think he is being a realist in this issue by pointing it out that everything else should be tryed before even thinking of military solution and also if there is no will from Our Western Nations to use all peacefull measures then we have to accept that Iran is a Nuclear power and also it must be made very clear to Iran so it understands in what kind of danger it has put its citizens by accuiring Nuclear weapons.
    Ser Clegane about the trade Embargo and China.If the case is that We can not create an Embargo against Iran without China?Doesnt it that then already mean that Chinas trading power has become so great that they can control the policy of West?
    I just hope that infact the case is not that we the West have just came so attached to our Economical profits that we choose loosing lives more happily then loosing profits.
    Ja Mata Tosainu Sama.

  14. #74
    Ming the Merciless is my idol Senior Member Watchman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    7,968

    Default Re: Iran

    I think the main point is the simple fact the embargo would be rather hollow if China didn't deign to go along with it. The point isn't China's trade with the West, but with Iran.

    'Course, if the embargo has to go through the Security Council there's the little issue of a permanent-member veto too...
    "Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. --- Proof of the existence of the FSM, if needed, can be found in the recent uptick of global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters. Apparently His Pastaness is to be worshipped in full pirate regalia. The decline in worldwide pirate population over the past 200 years directly corresponds with the increase in global temperature. Here is a graph to illustrate the point."

    -Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

  15. #75
    Feeding the Peanut Gallery Senior Member Redleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Denver working on the Railroad
    Posts
    10,660

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by Watchman
    I think the main point is the simple fact the embargo would be rather hollow if China didn't deign to go along with it. The point isn't China's trade with the West, but with Iran.

    'Course, if the embargo has to go through the Security Council there's the little issue of a permanent-member veto too...
    Which would go about once again proving what I think about the UN.
    O well, seems like 'some' people decide to ruin a perfectly valid threat. Nice going guys... doc bean

  16. #76
    Senior Member Senior Member Ser Clegane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sleepless in the red pagoda
    Posts
    6,602

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by Kagemusha
    Doesnt it that then already mean that Chinas trading power has become so great that they can control the policy of West?
    Ultimately, I think the answer is yes. The economic power of the Western nations (and their allies in Asia) would still be strong enough to significantly hurt Iran - however, IMO China alone would be a strong enough trading partner to keep an Iran that is determined to get what it wants "alive" (and the Chinese economy has become too powerful and interlinked with Western nations that it could be "bullied" into supporting a boycott by threatening to boycott it as well if China continues trade with Iran)
    Last edited by Ser Clegane; 04-24-2006 at 22:17.

  17. #77
    Ming the Merciless is my idol Senior Member Watchman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    7,968

    Default Re: Iran

    Well, it was built during the Cold War...

    'Sides, it's better than nothing.
    "Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. --- Proof of the existence of the FSM, if needed, can be found in the recent uptick of global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters. Apparently His Pastaness is to be worshipped in full pirate regalia. The decline in worldwide pirate population over the past 200 years directly corresponds with the increase in global temperature. Here is a graph to illustrate the point."

    -Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

  18. #78
    Senior Member Senior Member Ser Clegane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sleepless in the red pagoda
    Posts
    6,602

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by Watchman
    'Course, if the embargo has to go through the Security Council there's the little issue of a permanent-member veto too...
    If Western nations can start an invasion of Iraq without security council approval an embargo without security council approval probably isn't unthinkable either.

  19. #79
    Shadow Senior Member Kagemusha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Helsinki,Finland
    Posts
    9,298

    Default Re: Iran

    To be honest i agree that im very pessimistic about UN solving the problem. And when you look at the measures taken by EU.It seems more like that EU is just negotiating for the sake of negotiating. So the most possible scenario is just that if Iran wants its Nuclear capacity,Iran gets it.Lets just hope that Iran also aknowledges the responsibility what possessing weapons of mass destruction brings along.
    Ja Mata Tosainu Sama.

  20. #80
    Texan Member BigTex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Arlington, Texas, United States of America.
    Posts
    1,187

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by Ser Clegane
    Ultimately, I think the answer is yes. The economic power of the Western nations (and their allies in Asia) would still be strong enough to significantly hurt Iran - however, IMO China alone would be a strong enough trading partner to keep an Iran that is determined to get what it wants "alive" (and the Chinese economy has become too powerful and interlinked with Western nations that it could be "bullied" into supporting a boycott by threatening to boycott it as well if China continues trade with Iran)
    China's to dependant on Europe and the US it doesnt hold all the keys. If the EU and US were to come to the agreement of an embargo against iran then China could be muscled in with a little thing called tariffs. Granted it would hurt everyones economy for a bit, but China would eventually agree if they didn't, they'd eventually be broke. We arent so dependent on china that it would crush our economy's either. There are many countries that are developing now that would quickly fill their place, think philipines and india.

    Originally posted by Redleg
    If the west does not want to see Iran develop nuclear weapons it will have to be willing to pay a price. Wether that price be a deal with the China, or war. I prefer the peaceful solution, but appeasement now would only result in a higher price sometime in the future.
    I'm in total agreement, except I have very little faith in the diplomatic solutions. I'm fully aware that war will cost tens of thousands of US/EU soldiers lives, and it would last for over a decade more then likely. Appeasement is a means to no end, it just escalates, look at what the Huns did to the Byzantines, bribery led to bigger bribery. Thats is what appeasement is though, bribery to not build nukes.

    Iran is a difficult animal, every new option leads to a bigger struggle, and every struggle will lead to pain. Iran just doesnt understand Pax Atomica, if they get the bomb they wont use it to create peace. They will use it to create a jewish holocaust. Whatever we do with Iran, we must not back down from that route, we have to stick to it. We can't let the Cindy Sheehans of the world dissuade us when we are halfway down the road, we can't turn back then.
    Last edited by BigTex; 04-24-2006 at 23:39.
    Wine is a bit different, as I am sure even kids will like it.
    BigTex
    "Hilary Clinton is the devil"
    ~Texas proverb

  21. #81
    karoshi Senior Member solypsist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    New York New York
    Posts
    9,020

    Default Re: Iran

    who does everyone always say "invasion" ?? there's no need to invade - all it would take is a bombing run to set their nuclear program back to the stone age. totally winnable. they have no nukes again and mission accomplished.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ser Clegane
    A massive multinational invasion would be another option - I don't even think the US public would support such an endeavor that would dwarf the Iraq invasion in terms of costs in money and casualties - let alone any other Western nation. And apart from the extremely unlikely public support I also have some doubts that the massive loss of lives, the economic disaster and the resulting instability of the region would be justified by what could be gained by it (although Iran is currently one of the last nations I would like to see having access to nuclear weapons - objectively we already have a nation that could easily turn into a similar extremist state during the next 5 years and that already has nuclear weapons: Pakistan).

  22. #82
    Ming the Merciless is my idol Senior Member Watchman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    7,968

    Default Re: Iran

    Whatever we do with Iran, we must not back down from that route, we have to stick to it. We can't let the Cindy Sheehans of the world dissuade us when we are halfway down the road, we can't turn back then.
    You know, parts about that sound really, really creepy. They ring uncomfortably close to some excerpts from rhetoric I've seen from some, oh, fifty-sixty years ago.

    Just thought I'd point that out.
    Last edited by Watchman; 04-24-2006 at 23:49.
    "Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. --- Proof of the existence of the FSM, if needed, can be found in the recent uptick of global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters. Apparently His Pastaness is to be worshipped in full pirate regalia. The decline in worldwide pirate population over the past 200 years directly corresponds with the increase in global temperature. Here is a graph to illustrate the point."

    -Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

  23. #83
    Member Member KrooK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Kraj skrzydlatych jeźdźcˇw
    Posts
    1,083

    Default Re: Iran

    Warman don't watch american news
    they are being CENSORED
    Iran don't want attack nor USA nor IRAQ.
    Furthermore this is only 1 really democratic coutry on middle east and they don't support terrorist. In Afghanistan they silently helped americans. Now they simply want be independent.
    John Thomas Gross - liar who want put on Poles responsibility for impassivity of American Jews during holocaust

  24. #84
    Texan Member BigTex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Arlington, Texas, United States of America.
    Posts
    1,187

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by KrooK
    Warman don't watch american news
    they are being CENSORED
    Iran don't want attack nor USA nor IRAQ.
    Furthermore this is only 1 really democratic coutry on middle east and they don't support terrorist. In Afghanistan they silently helped americans. Now they simply want be independent.


    Take a break from the coffee, and turn off the X-Files for awhile.
    Wine is a bit different, as I am sure even kids will like it.
    BigTex
    "Hilary Clinton is the devil"
    ~Texas proverb

  25. #85
    Ming the Merciless is my idol Senior Member Watchman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    7,968

    Default Re: Iran

    Well, it's true that not counting India Iran is pretty much the exact one nation that can be considered democratic in the south-central part of Asia between Turkey and... wait, which is the first SE Asian democratic country counting from the west...?
    "Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. --- Proof of the existence of the FSM, if needed, can be found in the recent uptick of global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters. Apparently His Pastaness is to be worshipped in full pirate regalia. The decline in worldwide pirate population over the past 200 years directly corresponds with the increase in global temperature. Here is a graph to illustrate the point."

    -Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

  26. #86
    BHCWarman88
    Guest

    Unhappy Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by BigTex
    Peaceful solutions are great. But the UN wont act, China and Russia wont allow that to happen. We're still trying to figure out how exactly we say "you cannot build nukes". EU is to busy with themselves. Personally I would much prefer the trade embargo. In fact it is probably the most effective answer, but again the China/Russia problem. But I would not like to be in a world with a nuclear iran. They've funded far to many terrorist groups and have a wonderful habit of chanting "death to Isreal... Death to USA" every sunday. The sad part is this will most likely happen, but bowing down and humiliating ourselves is not the answer.

    UN Won't Act on Anything if it involes War,The UN Troops run away like Panizes when they get shot at.



    That Cindy Sheenan needs to Understand that, Her son jonied the Army. What do you expect when your kid jonis the Army?? that he or she will stay here?? not if there a War like in Iraq. When you join a Army,before or During a War, you taking a Risk that, if it before a war, that a War can happen anytime,and if it during a War, you taking a risk that,you may or may not be deploy on the Front Lines,and if you are, you taking another Risk of getting Killed. But when you join the Army, you Defending your Country, War or No War,and if you die defending your Country, you should be Honored like the rest of the US troops who died for the US Nation, not to have some Mommy whine about it God almigty.




    and Krook

    "Warman don't watch american news
    they are being CENSORED
    Iran don't want attack nor USA nor IRAQ.
    Furthermore this is only 1 really democratic coutry on middle east and they don't support terrorist. In Afghanistan they silently helped americans. Now they simply want be independent."


    but Iran Wants to take Irsreali Off the Map,Period .
    and that's a Ploblem. Starting their "nuclear" program just as they saying that Krook,Really doesn't say much. Well, Afghanistan and Iraq Needs to get on their Feet,we can baby them for years to Come, or it Will Become Another Vietnam,it just can'y..

  27. #87
    Texan Member BigTex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Arlington, Texas, United States of America.
    Posts
    1,187

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by Watchman
    Well, it's true that not counting India Iran is pretty much the exact one nation that can be considered democratic in the south-central part of Asia between Turkey and... wait, which is the first SE Asian democratic country counting from the west...?
    From west to east.

    Egypt, Turkey, Cyprus, Isreal, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq, Georgia, Armenia, Iran, Azerbalian, Kuwait, Qatar, URE, Turkmenistan, Oman, Afghanistan, Pakistan.

    Here's a map, its a big one.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Last edited by BigTex; 04-25-2006 at 00:14.
    Wine is a bit different, as I am sure even kids will like it.
    BigTex
    "Hilary Clinton is the devil"
    ~Texas proverb

  28. #88
    Member Member Lord Winter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,978

    Default Re: Iran

    The Iranians have UN treaty on there side, the NPT guarantees each state the right to nuclear power, and unless if the West can prove Iran is building weapons, Iran can keep saying that they are being denied there rights.


    If the west does not want to see Iran develop nuclear weapons it will have to be willing to pay a price. Wether that price be a deal with the China, or war. I prefer the peaceful solution, but appeasement now would only result in a higher price sometime in the future.
    Completly agree, but the question is will there be enough public support to stop Iran from gaining nuclear weapons or will we set the dangerous president that if you make the cost for the united states to high you can kick them around.



    war with Iran must be a total war - or not at all.
    Only if we come in with the goal of making sure Iran never pursues nuclear weapons again. But there are options were we could maybe initiate a regime change. Besides total war would just inflame the people of Iran and extremist muslims like al quida, not to mention complicate the post war situation.
    When it occurs to a man that nature does not regard him as important and that she feels she would not maim the universe by disposing of him, he at first wishes to throw bricks at the temple, and he hates deeply the fact that there are no bricks and no temples
    -Stephen Crane

  29. #89
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    12,434

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by Haruchai
    I think I misunderstand. Are you suggesting that the EU would go to war with the USA?
    I'm not going to quote everyone on what I said. I said nuke happy, i.e. they threatan to start blowing people up willy-nilly, in that case the EU, China and probably Russia, would have to invade. However the proposition is slightly less likely than the US actually trying to blow up the planet.

    As to actually fighting America, the only real problem is getting there, which is a big problem.

    As I said Iran aquiring Nuclear weapons would seriously upset the balance of power and destabalize the region. That alone should be enough reason to invade. Bear in mind, the Strategic objective would be to remove Iran's nuclear capability. A smart commander would initiate a WWII level bombing campaign on all the cities and instalations involved in the refinement of Urananium and then repulse the Iranian land army when they moved into Iraq. Once said Army is rendered inoperable and the nuclear capability is removed you can pack up and go home.

    That would be the way to achieve the strategic objective, because the objective doesn't require you to hold the country or change the regime. Its not nice, it wouldn't be popular but it would be smart.

    Using Nukes is just stupid, WWII was probably the only time using Nukes was ever clever.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  30. #90
    Feeding the Peanut Gallery Senior Member Redleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Denver working on the Railroad
    Posts
    10,660

    Default Re: Iran

    Quote Originally Posted by Destroyer of Hope
    The Iranians have UN treaty on there side, the NPT guarantees each state the right to nuclear power, and unless if the West can prove Iran is building weapons, Iran can keep saying that they are being denied there rights.
    The west also have the same treaty on their side. So both sides can continue to site the other as attempting to violate the treaty.

    Completly agree, but the question is will there be enough public support to stop Iran from gaining nuclear weapons or will we set the dangerous president that if you make the cost for the united states to high you can kick them around.
    An even dangerous one will be set - that the world community will always appease those who are aggressive in pursueing their own agenda. I see how everyone focus only on the United States in that aspect. The European Union has just a big a stake in this as the United States. The United Nations has just a big of a stake as the United States also.

    Only if we come in with the goal of making sure Iran never pursues nuclear weapons again. But there are options were we could maybe initiate a regime change. Besides total war would just inflame the people of Iran and extremist muslims like al quida, not to mention complicate the post war situation.
    If the nations of the world decide that Iran must be stopped by means other then diplomacy - if thier not willing to face war on its most destructive level - then the world just better let Iran do what it wants.

    Any military option will intiate some type of warfare beyond a simple bombing strike against Iran to halt their production/research of nuclear weapons. If one goes to war without using every resource that is at their disposial - then they are setting themselves up for failure. If one disregards the lessons of Vietnam and Iraq in that aspect - then they deserve what will happen when it esclates beyond the abilities of the forces alreadly committed.
    Last edited by Redleg; 04-25-2006 at 02:46.
    O well, seems like 'some' people decide to ruin a perfectly valid threat. Nice going guys... doc bean

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO