Iran next

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Ahmad_4_lyfe, Jul 18, 2004.

  1. Ahmad_4_lyfe Registered Member

    Messages:
    14
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. guthrie paradox generator Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,089
    Even if it is true, it is problematic 'cos the uSA doesnt seem to have half amillion spare troops and gear.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. anu Banned Banned

    Messages:
    215
    nonsense. thats nothing a draft cannot fix real quick. i say we abandon iraq (been there, done that) and move onto iran. no point flogging a dead horse, ja?

    guthrie, we expect you guys to tag along.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. otheadp Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,853
    the current regime in Iran is the biggest threat to world peace... even more than NK. they are a relatively rich country with a strong army, strong military, and an insane brutal government with aggressive and expansionary ambitions.

    Israel has already prepared a strike against their nuclear installations, and a US gov't official gave an interview saying that if Bush is re-elected, there will be much bigger, albeit non-military, interference with Iranian affairs

    the youth in Iran is angry at the ayatollas. an internal resistance movement has been groomed for years by expatriates and the US.

    i predict within less than 4 years the regime there will be severely destabilized.
    furtheremore, when (not if) Israel carries its strikes on the nuclear installations, regardless on whether they're successful or not, there will be wild retaliation which will meet with counter-retaliation moves by Israel and possibly other players

    the ayatollahs are not stupid though... i give them much credit and respect despite the fact that they are lunatics... they've been busy bees preparing for "Jihad", building up special suicide-bomber brigades and collecting intelligence on important western targets.

    i suspect that because of the ayatollah's handling of the Kazemi case and other things which they handle with gentle ayatollah fashion, there will be more and more nations imposing diplomatic sanctions on Iran which may
    1) increase internal opposition, and/or
    2) force Iran to decrease or abandon its fanatical ambitions
     
  8. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    As in Castro's Cuba, the more the US antagonizes, the more they will help perpetuate authoritarianism. Direct confrontation will not be justifiable in the US public eye by any stretch, in the wake of the Iraq quagmire.
     
  9. guthrie paradox generator Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,089
    Hang on, is a destabilised Iran a good idea or a bad one? remember the fruits of all the rpevious meddling in its affairs? An Islamic republic!
    Do we all agree we have something like a ticking bomb here?

    Anu- our brave treasury is planning to cut the armed forces by tens of thousands, to save money. So you can expect about a battalion to help. Plus an old Sea king helicopter and soem dud tornados.
     
  10. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    the current regime in Iran is the biggest threat to world peace...

    No, the biggest threat to Israel, the world could really give less of a shit. Really Russia, China, and NK have helped foster the growth of Iran’s nuclear, and missile facilities. So really this fear is only expressed in the imaginations of the Zionist/Neo-Conservative cabal.

    As for Iran, the country is very unstable politically the country like Saudi Arabia is going through a Malthusian disaster. The population of Iran has more then doubled since the revolution of 1979, and with the war with Iraq much economic development was lost. I can fully understand why Iran wants a nuclear weapon; she is surrounded by belligerent and clearly unstable states. Israel to the west, Pakistan and India to the East. Although I am not buying this recent machination of the Neo-conservative cabal just yet, Iran has little to worry about from the US. If the US cannot even control Iraq a country significantly smaller, less nationalistic, and is flat topographically the US would fail horridly in Iran. Even if a draft the US would fail in Iran, it would the largest invasion the US has ever done. Should Israel attack Iran (which would be very hard to do) the Iranians can attack Israel in return with her Shahab- 3 missiles. So unlike Iraq in 1981 the chances of retaliation is real, also the target most accessible to Israel has many Russians so it would also cause many problems with Russia as well. Let Iran destroy itself, the regime in Teheran is thoroughly corrupt, rigid, and Sovietesqe in style. Iran imo will collapse ideologically into a real democracy eventually. Leave Iran alone…
     
  11. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    Part of the Iran rumblings in Washington could be another wild petroleum crap shoot, however irresponsible it may seem. Big Oil has tossed the fateful dice in Saudi and Iraq with dismal results, and are likely to go for broke, because they, and the present US economy, literally can't stand losing. Oil barons and their political underlings may try another desperate gamble, this time Clinton-style with standoff weapons and sanctions on Iran, before the game is completely up. They will pray for a miracle to compensate for coming up losers with the Arab World. The corporate interests running Washington are armed, dangerous, have a serious gambling problem, and are very, very sore losers- Which means dangerous times ahead.

    Edit: and not to disagree with the above, of course Israeli and Christian zionist lobbies have the ears of both parties. That's why the priority for thinking Americans should be to tip the oil barons off balance first, by firing their Bush Administration flunkies. Extricating our foreign policy from it's infatuation with zionism will be more complex, but if the US can slow what "Bring It On" is bringing, there may be time for clarity, I hope.
     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2004
  12. bandwidthbandit Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    55
    This report just adds to my growing suspicions that Bush is beginning the propaganda war that will lead to a military confrontation with Iran. It's like Iraq all over again. First they are making a big deal about Iran’s potential nuclear weapons program. Second they are trying to suggest ties between Iran/911 and Al Qaeda. Third, the eventual elections, if they occur, in Iraq will bring the Shiite majority to power there and they have ties to Iranian Shiites. Iran will be a real competitor in influencing the future of Iraq. It would be easy for the US to claim Iran is making hostile efforts to destabilize the democratic regime in Iraq and use it along with the issues I mentioned above to justify military action against Iran.

    The signs are obvious and mounting. Mark my words; if Bush were reelected I would surmise that within 24 months the United States would invade Iran.

    While I have always thought Iran was a bigger threat to our security and a bigger supporter of terrorism than Iraq by a long shot, invasion of Iran is a very bad idea. Younger Iranians are already pushing for reform in Iran. If we invade it will play right in to the hands of hardliners who will be able to mobilize the large Iranian population to hunker down and make any occupation of Iran impossible. While many Iranians may be tired of the corruption and repression of their theocratic government they will not trust us. They know we've interfered in their affairs before in an unjust manner when we put the Shaw in power. They are not going to support us once we are there. Invasion/regime change in Iran would make Iraq seem like child's play in comparison. It would stretch an already exhausted US military to its breaking point. If we do this we are inviting disaster.
    And Bush has decided to do it. Just like he decided to go in to Iraq and he'll figure out the reasons and forget the consequences until after thousands of American soldiers and Iranian civilians are dead.
     
  13. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,845
    To presume the president of the US does not appreciate the cost of war is simply ridiculous. This man is sending men to their deaths, you can be damned sure it weighs on his conscience. I would think in light of potential failure, this aptly illuminates his conviction of the threat at hand. It is evident that he's determined that sacrifice now will save lives in the long run. I earnestly admire a man who can and must bear the impossible weight of impossible decisions. Certainly like anyone he'll keep some of the consequences of his actions in denial (not to mention the sheer scope of the impact of his decisions and that some of the repurcussions won't be known for a while, or never), but I cannot help but think his burden is as much or more than my own. I can't imagine the weight of it. It's staggering.

    Finally, I see no evidence that Bush has already decided to invade Iran. Perhaps just the threat is the intention.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2004
  14. OliverJ Banned Banned

    Messages:
    349
    Iran next


    Tick Tock Tick Tock
     
  15. CounslerCoffee Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,997
    You're a 100% right. Of course, there is no evidence to support the claim, and six months ago every one was talking about the coming war with North Korea; but you’re completely right. Iran is next.
     
  16. skywalker 3 @ T M 3 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    994

    when you say next.............i say next 4 years atleast. Then take those tards out. Wait......but didn't we try that before? in 80s?
     
  17. otheadp Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,853
    there are some people in the US government that want to start a confrontation with China (or at least wanted last year)
    they think this is the best way to promote democracy
    they want to send troops to Taiwain to protect against invasion
    they want to impose diplomatic sanctions
    they want to stop trade
    they are morons

    communist China in the past year has legalized "personal property"
    relations now are warm and getting warmer

    this shows that there are other options besides war to achieve national objectives
    a war with Iran would be tough. not militarily. they have a mighty military but it's no match to US power
    it won't be as easy as Iraq but it won't be that hard.

    after all it's not guerilla warfare, it's good ol' fashioned nation vs. nation warfare... and nowadays it's the easiest type.

    the thing is, to occupy such a huge country would be very hard.
    i have no doubt that the Americans are capable of this physically, but these things cost money. if Iraq costs $100B (and most of it is from the occupation, not the overthrow), Iran will cost much more. at least double.
    i know socialists often think so, but money does not grow on trees. if there's no money, there's no invasion.

    however the heat on Iran is on anyway. like that song goes "clowns ot the left of me, jokers to the right", US is in Afghanistan, US is in Iraq, the ayatollahs are shaking in their boots by now

    i don't believe there will be a military intervention of US forces, but there will be more CIA involvement (psychological warfare and covert operations)
    also, expect an Israeli or an American strike on Iran's nuke reactors

    the IDF has released a statement (too lazy to look for the link) that an operational plan to do so has already been developed

    add on top of everything the frustration of the Iranians with the ayatollahs, the opressed youth movement, etc, and you've got a nice pressure pot

    while there will be no military intervention, there will be a destabilized (or a completely different) regime in Iran in the next 4 years
     
  18. guthrie paradox generator Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,089
    You have a wee door into the back of his head? I always get worried when people who dont know other people suggest things they cant know at all.



    I'd agree there, for now.
     
  19. anu Banned Banned

    Messages:
    215

    no, it is just blind obedience to one's leaders and a empatic refusal to consider that they could possibly be traitors. every excuse in the book will be offered up as to why their leaders can do no wrong.

    for instance...."he is the president of the us". laughable but very real. it is as if mere status confers legitimacy to one's actions

    the condition is known as cognitive dissonance and mr morris has this affliction.
    most grunts do due to brainwashing
     
  20. otheadp Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,853
    for instance...."he is the president of the us". laughable but very real. it is as if mere status confers legitimacy to one's actions

    1) he is the elected leader. that gives him legitimacy
    2) he does not have absolute powers. congress has to back him up. when congress does, that gives his initiatives further legitimacy

    you don't have to agree with what he does, but his actions have legitimacy unless he violates some US laws.
    he has no full authority. he FBI or CIA disagree with him on something he can't just bomb whatever he wants.
     
  21. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    Will Iran be next? I personally don’t see it, what I do see is Iran buying a nuclear weapon from NK within the next couple of years should she not be able to build one on her own. Once Iran gets a nuke its all over, no attack although Iran would suffer even more international isolation but how much isolation can 100 billion…sorry…Iran get? Iran will implode of her own accord America get your hands out the pie, you usually screw things up. Also this:

    the IDF has released a statement (too lazy to look for the link) that an operational plan to do so has already been developed

    Give credence to the Iranians, and supports the idea that Israel is indeed the biggest threat to peace in the region.
     
  22. guthrie paradox generator Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,089
    Uumm, Otheadp, did Congress give him permission to invade Iraq and Afghanistan? I seem to recall a fair number of what would be called right wingers getting their knickers in a twist about the lack of attention being paid to the constitution etc.
     
  23. anu Banned Banned

    Messages:
    215
    sweet
    the israeli is playing on my team. what a twist.
     

Share This Page