Iran is run by an insane religious mafia who believes that martyrdom is a noble cause and may be infact extended to a whole people and not just individual suicide bombers. their insistence on pursuing with their nuclear program will soon meet counter-action by one or several parties. those parties include US, Israel, UN, EU. the counter-action includes diplomatic sanctions, economic sanctions, military action. the latter can be as simple as a couple sabotage operations, or as complicated as a full bombing campaign or even an occupation. the latter is remote, but "no option is off the table". it is inevitable that Iran will keep doing what it's doing, and it is inevitable that something will be done about it. the question is what will the Iranian religious mafia/junta do when something is done to stand up to them? the question is not whether any action against them is "moral" or "legal", or anything like that. i'd just like to discuss their possible actions, and repercussions it will have on the rest of the world (balance of power, new conflicts, economic effects, etc.) and on us personally (i.e. higher gas prices at the pumps, etc.) ..... personally, i just hope all the mullahs will die of aids next week so elections can be held.. but that's not going to happen... so, discuss
"Iran is run by an insane religious mafia who believes that martyrdom is a noble cause and may be infact extended to a whole people and not just individual suicide bombers." any proof or is that another opinion? lets stop spraying ignorance onto other countries ... if the above sentence some how justifies what america is planing to do in iran someone deserves a slap. 1. maybe the people like their government if they didnt a revolution would have changed it. 2. iran has the same system iraq just elected so whats so wrong with iran's way of life cvompared to that of iraq, and please dont say "free elections" because it will make me throw up my lunch with laughter. WAIT here is an idea of what to do, leave them alone... from now on no one bothers anyone else or continues accusing them of somthing that hasnt happened yet. maybe their making the nukes to protect themselvs from opinions like the one above. "it is inevitable that Iran will keep doing what it's doing, and it is inevitable that something will be done about it." no shit because the world dosnt like muslims now-a-days, :m:
Ah yes, so much easyer to be a cowboy when troublesome things like morality and legality don't factor into the decision making process.
And from the Iranian side the view is one of a US administration of fundamentalist Christians which believe war against nations like Iraq is divinely instituted Holy writ On what legal grounds ? Seeing the EU and the IAEA have said Iran is not pursuing an Atomic Weapons programme . Only the USA and Israel , which is typical as Israel is the only nation in that region which actually has Atomic weapons . Again on what legal grounds does the US have to implement such sanctions and on what authority would the US act on with which to attack Iran ? First the US must prove that Iran has a nuclear weapons programme and is actually developing such weapons . And since America has been caught lying red handed over the Iraq WMD what credence can we place on American evidence against Iran . What is exactly Iran doing and what will it keep doing ? “the Iranian religious mafia/junta” what an infantile assertion . Thereby excusing yourself from having to actually back up your ridiculous claims . If Iran is invaded and occupied by America nothing will happen as Iran is not an important cog in the global economic machinery life will go on . The US only wants to invade Iran to prevent the EU from securing a foothold in Iran thereby outflanking US oil corporation control of mideast oil which consequently is Europes main supply . And I hope the Israeli leadership all die of food poisoning from eating lox contaminated with pork product .
thats exactly what i posted points 1 and 2 about sort of... I think if iran is removed israel will be even more out of control in the middle east, also if you look at iraq and kuwait , during the gulf war oil prices rose, so if you take iran the 2nd largest natural gas exporter , if a war breaks out the prices of gas will rise.
no man. your points 1 & 2 were "Iran has a government that is liked by its people (not true, and even if it was, it's irrelevant to this topic) and doesn't deserve to have any actions taken against it (also an irrelevant argument) this is what i really want to discuss: this Starit of Hormuz is a little bottleneck in the Persian Gulf only 2 miles wide, thru which at least 40% of the world oil passes via oil tankers. Iran can blockade it and cause a repeat of the '73 scenario. it was revealed recently that in '73 the US gov't was ready to send soldiers to oil installations in the Arab countries since it considered the OPEC boycott an act of war. i'm sure they have a back up plan such as this in place. ... to confirm my original assertion from the 1st post, here are news from today: they're ALREADY threatening EU with a boycott... and EU is the "good cop". so, can anybody on sciforums that can read and understand English contribute their 2 cents?
The problem is that Iran isn't quite as cocky as Iraq was. They might actually prepare. In case they feel threatened... they try everything. Their leaders will begin trying to stir up the public about these crusaters from the west and how they will destroy every mosque, rape your children, and eat their flesh in a recipe made for pork. Fathers will probably cut the throats of each of their own familymembers before rushing out to combat American forces with nothing more than some 50 year old rifle. The majority of their armed forces will probably break quickly once the area bombing has begun, but they might do what Saddam did in '91. Set oilwells on fire and probably do the same to whole cities minutes before they are captured. Yeah... That sounds like Iran.
Please ask youself this question before asking others the same. You accused Iran of "run by an insane religious mafia who believes that martyrdom is a noble cause and may be infact extended to a whole people and not just individual suicide bombers." then followed up with "the question is not whether any action against them is "moral" or "legal", or anything like that" My suggestion: Revise before posting.
Cant you construct a straight forward post which just asks that question instead of adding unnecessary predjudiced statements which invites answers .
i knew this would happen.. i mean, i am on sciforum after all.. fine. let's straighten this out for the ESL people in the house: the question is not whether any action against them is "moral" or "legal", or anything like that by writing this, i stated that i did not want to debate whether any action against Iran's government is "moral" or "legal" because that can be discussed in another thread. fine? everything clear? Jesus, if you don't want to answer the questions or debate the topic at hand why be asshole and spew bullshit anyway???
Hmmm... so far I am the only one to actually give a straightforward post on the topic provided. Thats funny...
Why shouldn't Iran have nuclear weapons when their rather unfriendly neighbour does? It has also got the US running around shooting up the middle-east with a policy of hair trigger preemption. Iran is relatively non-aggressive; she has not made the foreign interventions of countries like the US or Iraq, keeping largely to itself since the revolution. I would like to suggest that Iran possessing nuclear weapons would add to the stability of the middle east by discouraging US intervention and encouraging Israel to quell regional tensions by withdrawing from palestine.
I agree with Voodoo child. Pakistan is the world's only muslim country to have nuclear weapons and it has its hands full with India. Iran "going" nuclear is probably going to stabilize the situation in the ME. Iran is a democracy. The fact is, its just not on the western concept of democracy.
and this, Iran is a democracy. The fact is, its just not on the western concept of democracy. the people are free to choose in Iran but their choices have to be approved before and after they are made by the Guardian Council. some democracy, eh? and executing retarded 16 year old girls for being raped ("seducing men")? LET'S GIVE THEM NUCLEAR WEAPONS!
Don't play dunce. In America the choises are screened beforehand by the political partys, and afterward by the electoral college.
the political parties choose their candidate. sounds pretty democratic to me. and the electoral college? tell me, does Iran have the electoral college? a Republican system would be infinitely better than what they have there now. to tell you the truth at first i thought you were sarcastic.. to compare Iran's system to US's system. and you don't have to compare everything to US. try...Sweden for example
