America getting ready for Iranian strike?

Discussion in 'World Events' started by Undecided, Jan 16, 2005.

  1. skywalker 3 @ T M 3 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    994

    Monkey, I haven't seen an iranian straping a bomb to himself and blowing. Can you pleae back up your claim?

    Thank you.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    The US fucking annihilated Iraq in the "war" just as it would do Iran.

    Thanks for the Yawn...who cares?

    In Iraq we actually only lost one person during the war.

    Why lie?

    Undecided, if the US did go to war with Iran/Syria, do you really think it'd be a total ground war? Come on man.

    I don't see how else the US can effectively deal with the situation. Attacking from the air is fun and all, but it doesn't produce the results one would expect.

    In the grand scheme of things, we really haven't lost many people at all. It is our new mentality, deaths are becomming nearly unnacceptable. It definitely won't be a ground war. The tanks and troops will only roll in to clean up like they did in Iraq, but we can be pretty damned sure they wouldn't be staying there this time around.

    I agree with those statements, but let's not forget what happens when you leave a lying dog lie...Germany post WWI. It was left to its own devices as well...defeated in war but the scar was left to fester on for two decades until she came back with a vengence. Same situation here, yay American won another battle but it seems like its losing the war. If I were an American, I wouldn't be so jingoistic but Iran and Iraq are merely large battles in a larger and invisible war.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    There is a difference between having the "Islamic Bomb", and being able to deliver it effectively. Even if Iran had a tested weapon and a tested delivery system (of which they have neither), they've never demonstrated that they could deliver it on target.

    I assume you haven't heard of the Shahab III?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    They seem to have the capability with GPS guidance.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. skywalker 3 @ T M 3 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    994
     
  8. blackmonkeystatue Unregistered User Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    174
    Who, then, have you seen strapping a bomb to themselves and blow themselves up? Probably heard on the news about some random insurgant. Well, they're not all Iraqis. That mentality is shared throughout that region. It's not like they're ever able to identify who those people were. I mean shit, it's not like Iraq and Iran are completely different worlds. As if Iraqis have the only extremists in the Middle East and Iran is full of docile gentlemen who cringe at the thought of having to fire a weapon, let alone strap a bomb to their chests.

    If the US launched a "preemtpive" war in Iraq to find WMDs that didn't exist, do you really think that the US would let that happen?

    It's actually true. The whole situation was talked about on 60 minutes last night. People didn't start dying until after the "war" was over and the charity began.

    ---

    I think it'd be kind of funny if they came out with another WMD claim again.

    Seriously though. If the US wanted to annihilate the whole Middle East and take the oil, would anyone be able to stop us? We'd pummel them first thing from a thousand miles away and tens of thousands of feet up. We wouldn't care about civilian casualties, so we'd have a lot more freedom. The cost of it wouldn't matter at all since we'd be taking all of the oil. Who would stop us though? The thing is that we wouldn't do that.
     
  9. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    The Middle East is a shithole.

    So is Nebraska...but we tolerate them...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Some of those people are fucking crazy. They may not be clinically insane, but their religious beliefs are so extreme compared to what is now "normal" that they can be regarded as crazy.

    From a bias western perspective yes, remember we were that crazy too back in the Crusader days. The Japanese as well were considered crazy back in WWII with their kamikaze missions. But you must understand that it is their "fanatical" devotion to their cause that is their greatest weapon. Americans have no such devotion, yes they are wiling to die for their country, but are they wiling to kill themselves for it? I doubt it...are dead American sons and daughters seen as martyrs or dead in a meaningless war?

    If they will strap a bomb to themselves and blow themselves up, you know they're going to use whatever they have.

    Exactly...that's exactly why these people are a new enemy. They have no compulsion to save innocent life it means a greater goal. Americans are seen as infidels and murders, and the death of their children will be avenged. That is why America's little war games in the region make no sense.

    If it goes our way, the whole world will end up "westernized".

    As you even said yourself...if. That's what this battle is about to get rid of that "if".
     
  10. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    If the US launched a "preemtpive" war in Iraq to find WMDs that didn't exist, do you really think that the US would let that happen?

    Yes using your argument it has no other option. If the US isn't there for the long haul, and just attacks and belittles the Iranian conception of themselves, then Iran will seek revenge, and 9.11 showed you don't need missiles or an army to do it.

    It's actually true. The whole situation was talked about on 60 minutes last night. People didn't start dying until after the "war" was over and the charity began.

    Link would be nice...because that seem unbelievable.

    Seriously though. If the US wanted to annihilate the whole Middle East and take the oil, would anyone be able to stop us?

    Yes the American public...I don't think the American people have the stomach for another war, and if this administration starts doing that I think for the first time in American history you could have a serious threat of civil strife that may lead to an overthrow of the government. I've always maintained that the only army that can defeat the jingoistic American government is the American people.

    We'd pummel them first thing from a thousand miles away and tens of thousands of feet up.

    Pummel as much as you can...it doesn't change a thing, frankly it makes the US into a isolated, shithole of country, abusing its power, and will surely pay the consequences of her actions.

    Who would stop us though? The thing is that we wouldn't do that.

    Don't be too cocky...I remember that in the book of revelations "New Babylon" which is surely the US is destined to be destroyed in one hour...
     
  11. skywalker 3 @ T M 3 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    994

    Doesn't mean they are iranians. There is small group of people who enjoys straping bombs to them self but as far as i know, no one ever accused of iranians of that. You talk about insurgents, heck, no one knows who they are, first we said that there were only 6000, then 20000 and now upto 200,000, and you are telling me that we now know their nationalities? I don't think we will ever know for sure.
     
  12. towards Relax...head towards the light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    640
    I have seen no signs that the U.S. is interested in invading Iran, and Iran has shown no signs that it believes it will be inevitably invaded. Iran's cooperation with the U.N. on its nuclear program would be nonexistent if it felt an attack was just around the horizon. They would be desperate to create a nuclear arnsenal in order to protect themselves.

    Secondly, I see no signs from Bush that an attack of Iran is in their sites. While Bush has strengthened his cabinet with "loyalists", it is more because of the future fight with the GOP and Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas). Bush's moves as of late indicate that he is moving more towards a cooperative position with the rest of the world, rather than unilateral. Here is an article by Aljazeera (hardly a lover of Bush) stating as much.

    http://english.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/review/article_full_story.asp?service_id=6318

    "During the first term, Bush’s neoconservative-driven foreign policy generally meshed with DeLay’s beliefs. But given the realities of the international scene and domestic budgetary pressure, Bush’s recent moves indicate the president is returning to a traditional foreign policy, based on international cooperation"

    Some believe the fact that Bush is in his second term will allow him to continue his unilateral stance without fear of political repercussions. The opposite, however, may be true since he no longer has to count on the support of the far right (like Delay) too help him get reelected.

    Bush is more interested now in stengthening what he believes is his legacy. That includes bringing peace to Iraq and a restructuring of social security. While Iraq is and always was an impossible cause, social security may be easier to fix. Despite some dire predictions for the future, social security if left untouched, will remain solvent until 2042.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/01/13/opinion/meyer/main666840.shtml

    "Is there a Social Security crisis? Mr. Bush says yes, the Democrats say no. They say the system as is can deliver the promised benefits until at least 2042. And they say minor revenue increases and benefits made soon can safeguard Social Security for much longer. They say the "crisis" is made up so the administration can start experimenting with private Social Security accounts. "

    While the Bush plan is not that bad, it may cause problems if the stock market lowers in the future. Considering the foreign investment problem in the nations budget debt, why not put some of that money into U.S. treasury bonds to allow americans to own the liability?

    Bush will be more concerned about fixing domestic problems than starting another war with Iran. Sorry to dissapoint the american-haters, but a future attack is extremely unlikely.
     
  13. blackmonkeystatue Unregistered User Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    174
    I'll count that as us agreeing, I've got some yard work to do.
     
  14. marv Just a dumb hillbilly... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    743
    The Iranian mullahs are already despised by the Iranian people. They remain in power only because they carefully control the government and military. In fact, most common citizens in most ME Islamic countries would love to get rid of their repressive regimes.

    I also suspect that there is already a lot of work being done behind the scene getting those common Iranian citizens ready for a "regime change".
     
  15. River Ape Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,152
    I have just run a "find" on this page, and there is a word barely mentioned: OIL.
    Iran is the world's fourth or fifth largest producer.
    Please factor that into your assessments!
    Including the need to sustain a stable and friendly Saudi Arabia - the loss of whose oil supplies to terrorism is probably the biggest economic threat facing the world at present.
     
  16. marv Just a dumb hillbilly... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    743
    You're right. Oil is barely mentioned. That's because Iran's oil barely needed! Especially by the US. As to Saudi Arabia, it's Europe that would suffer. That also explains Europe's position in this whole ME thing. European nations, even the EU as a whole, is hardly in a position to confront the Saudi royal family.
     
  17. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    The Iranian mullahs are already despised by the Iranian people.

    Yes and they would get quite a boost if the US invades.

    In fact, most common citizens in most ME Islamic countries would love to get rid of their repressive regimes.

    True, but most of those states save Syria is propped up the US.

    I also suspect that there is already a lot of work being done behind the scene getting those common Iranian citizens ready for a "regime change".

    Better they do it then you...
     
  18. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    IF Europe and Japan suffer as does the US, also we forget something more important then oil...Natural Gas, Iran has anout 20% of the world's reserves, by far the world's second largest. If you want to know more about the potential power of Iran you can read this thread:

    http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=43235
     
  19. River Ape Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,152
    Those are very fair points, Marv. But the oil market is global. No country is going to supply the US indefinitely at $45 per barrel if European and Far Eastern demand for a diminished supply has driven the market price up to $75.
     
  20. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    Where does such hubris come from? Simple the stunning election of this administration, yes sadly the administration has taken it that the election of GWB is an affirmation of his blighted, and pointless strategy in the Middle East. 59 million Americans have pretty much said to Bush and his administration “go ahead do your worst”…at least in their minds. Afghanistan and Iraq are only part of the war, and they are right it is only part of a war that the US is losing. Let’s continue:

    What happened to the notion that America was a nation of laws? Well that seems laughable now, like America the nation of the free (Patriot Acts). This president is a proto-fascist for a reason ladies and gents, he is consolidating power more and more into his hands, starving the once extensive myriad of decentralized controls which secured there was little abuse of executive powers. But not anymore, the country is descending into some rich third world state.

    This administration by not negotiating weakens the hand of the EU, and thus the Iranians will have less momentum to get to an agreement, the US instead of waving a big stick should be waving its carrot, which would probably accomplish much more. Once Iran reaches a certain threshold like NK has, the chances of getting rid of her military programmes are pretty much dead because too much time and investment has been poured in. Unlike NK, you won’t see sanctions placed on Iran from Japan, the EU, or China. Frankly China is destined to become Iran’s protector like the US is with Saudi Arabia.

    Indeed since any UN resolution would be vetoed by Russia and China who both have a vested interest in keeping the Iranian government in place, and their relative open access to the underexploited Iranian energy industry. Without the US behind the three European powers its not strong enough to make any real headway because it’s not the EU which is threatening Iran, it’s the US.



    Covert or “Shock and awe?” The Israel factor is also fairly obvious, Israel is directly under the Iranian threat envelope and will surely support is not even assist in attacking Iran. If that occurs the possibility for a even greater Middle Eastern war is very real, with the US and Israel overtly supporting each other in a strike would only prove Osama right, that the Israeli state is there to patrol the region for the US, and making the Arab world weaker.



    Exactly, the Iranian x factors are very great, we cannot forget that the Israeli and American forces albeit powerful will most likely not get all the possible targets, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Iran attacked Israel’s Diamona nuclear facility, something the Iranians have promised to do if they were attacked. Iran has the Shahab III missiles, and now the Shahab III-B which has a accuracy of about 50 m, coming very close to superpower CEP, so Israeli nuclear facilities are truly under great threat. Also the Hezbollah factor, we know that drones have been flying over Israeli air space, that have been given enough time to drop bombs on Israeli cities. Also the drones are believed to have come from submarines off the coast, which is probably a Iranian super quiet Kilo class sub. If the US and Israel think they will have no response to their bellicose actions they are totally wrong.

    So there are three things going on:

     US is getting support from Pakistan to determine the locations of Iran’s facilities.
     US special ops are in the region
     US is recruiting local agents to do the work for them

    Afghanistan is the base for these operations, which only goes to show how the US works.

    But this is of particular interest:



    Although its only a contingency plan thus far, it is ominous none the less that invasion isn’t that far off. It’s not like the US would actually be able to win a full fledged Iranian invasion, but you got to give the Americans credit for their tenacity. But now here comes the most idiotic of all the logics presented in this essay, one that sent my eyes rolling for some minutes:

    Are these people on crack? If so, I know some ppl who would love to get their hands on it. The hallucinogenic thoughts pervading through these idiots minds are truly mind-boggling. Attacking Iran would do the exact opposite of what these people think. The Iranians have problems with their government to be sure, but attacking Iran will only prove to the people that the US is indeed the devil, and is out to destroy their nation, and no matter who is in power in Tehran nationalism will abound. If the Mullah’s are able to attack Israel and the US back then if anything it would strengthen the hand of the Mullah’s, if you against the Mullah’s you are for the enemy mentality which exists in the US today. What these idiots seem to forget is that East Germany did not collapse by a US attack, but by her own struggles, if the US had attacked her do you think East Germany would want to join the west? It’s absolutely amazing…as this commentator said about this:


    Indeed…there is no question a American attack will be completely counterproductive.

    Here’s the rest of the article…

    http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?050124fa_fact
    I dare America to attack Iran…should be fun to watch.
     
  21. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,285
    Sure it makes sense - if you want FREEDOM. You have to get in there and somehow get at that FREEDOM. Like tricking Iraq into invading Kuwait and then charging Saudi Arabia and Kuwait a bunch of money to get that FREEDOM out of the ground OR putting a dictator in charge of Iraq to get that sweet-crude-freedom AND if he should turn away then install one that doesn’t.

    So it does make sense.

    That oil isn’t just going to jump out of the ground and freely fall into your lap. You HAVE to get in there and emancipate it from it’s Muslim oppressors and let the sweet trick of liberty be heard at gas-pumps around the world

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    THAT only occurs when you have a little something called LIBERATION.

    So see, it does make sense.

    AND as to Iran, when that Iraqi oil is fully freed, then it will be time to set free Iran’s oppressed oil/NG. And anything short of a powerful ally like China and/or Russia is not going to stop the American-Liberators from helping those subjugated oil-gobbets from their desert shackles.
     
  22. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    Yes Freedom is oppression, love is war, and liberation is serfdom. The double world of the two faced.
     
  23. marv Just a dumb hillbilly... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    743
    Why are Europeans such wimps? Why do Europeans roll over at the first gun shot or aircraft hijacking?

    Ah! The spirit of Chamberlin is alive and well.
     

Share This Page