Will Bush bomb Iran?

Discussion in 'World Events' started by madanthonywayne, Sep 3, 2007.

  1. madanthonywayne Mourning in America Staff Member

    Messages:
    12,407
    The above was a wargame, run by the Heritage foundation and top US officials. It took four months.

    It's long been said that Bush would not leave office without "resolving" the Iranian Nuclear problem. Many have theorized that Bush was bent on war with Iraq because of Saddamn's attempt on his father's life and because he felt the continuation of the Hussain regime was a black mark on his father's record.

    Well, a similiar motivation may be at work with respect to Iran:
    Regardless of the motivation, plans seem to be in an advanced stage with US special forces already in place getting intel on potential targets.
    Why special forces and not the CIA?
    I'd also expect that special forces would be much better in terms of security as CIA seems to leak like a sieve.

    They have even lined up some allies:
    Still, this is not a sure thing. The costs of war with Iran would be huge:
    On the other hand, the administration thinks they have a solution:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/02/wiran102.xml&page=3
    So I'd say it's a matter of waiting for an appropriate casus belli, or definite proof of Iran giving up its nuclear ambitions (not likely, I'd guess).
     
  2. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    Why should Iran, a signatory of the NPT who has not invaded any country in the last 1500 years, not be allowed to develop a nuclear program, when the US which has attacked over 25 countries and has a constant history of 200 years of overt and covert invasions, and has dropped 2 atom bombs on civilian populations is allowed tens of thousands of nuclear weapons?

    In fact, even now, after the mess they have made of Iraq over imaginary WMDs, it is the US that wants to bomb Iran for possible nuclear weapons 10 years later.

    Should the US be boycotted by the world for its insanity?
     
  3. madanthonywayne Mourning in America Staff Member

    Messages:
    12,407
    Well, it's the nuclear weapons we're worried about. The fact that they've signed the NPT means they've basically promised to not develope them.

    So how can you use their signing it as justification for them to develope nuclear weapons?
     
  4. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    You'd have to show they were developing them first. Or do you think the Americans should just go around bombing people over imaginary weapons?
     
  5. madanthonywayne Mourning in America Staff Member

    Messages:
    12,407
    Oh, I'm sure they'll have good reason to go to war this time. A nuke test, pictures of the nukes, or maybe a US ship sunk by the Iranians. That crap Iran pulled with the British sailors would have probably been sufficient.
     
  6. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,071
    Shouldn't the USA bomb Israel instead? They have nukes.
     
  7. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    Why? The British ships were in their waters or close to them. The Americans are over there, not in their own country.

    What makes American and British economy so wonderful that Iraqis and Iranis should have to pay for it with their blood?

    Why don't they develop an independent economy, using their superior know how and technology, instead of constantly turning the people of the Middle East and Africa into corpses?

    Would you accept a system where your country's resources led to mass deaths and suffering in your own country while minting money for another country elsewhere?
     
  8. Oniw17 ascetic, sage, diogenes, bum? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,423
    I don't think Bush will bomb Iran. I have nothing to support my opinion.
     
  9. Zakariya04 and it was Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,045
    Dear all,

    unfortunately it appears that the imbercile bush will bomb Iran

    he is going for a two pronged approach on the propaganda front:

    1) Keep going on about the nuclear weapons which are always 3-10 years away friom being devleoped (regardless of whjeterh the iranians are actually devloping them or nto)
    2) keep going on about Iranaian weapns and "interference in Iraq"

    One thing i do know is that he is not going to invade iran to make the world a safer place.

    ~~~~~~~~
    take it e
    zak
     
  10. orcot Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,304
    I think Iran is a important country for pumping and transporting oil, Bush might get a sed back from India and China who would not want to see their supply's get in danger hell even putin is not agreeing with the US, I don't think it will ever get to a war but the US are proberly going to turn up the heath a little bid more and pray that Iran will make a snap so they can exploit it to yustify a war
     
  11. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,992
    I like your opinion
    but I fear it will be misfounded.

    Once the numbskull gets a nugget of thought into his tiny brain
    nothing will deter him.
    Have you ever tried to drag a dog away from sniffing a lamp-post?

    If he does get his way
    it will be a war that makes Iraq look benign.

    I still prefer your opinion.
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2007
  12. dixonmassey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,149
    Yup, USA will bomb, possibly nuke Iran. USA needs chaos in the world, it's the only way it can survive through impending crisis with minimum loses. Survive to impose neocolonial world #2 on the rest. Starving potential competitors of the energy sources is a good way to bring chaos, death and decline of the potential competitors. Neocolonial World #1 is crumbling, colonial rent is about to dry up, global leech can't exist without colonial rent, it needs chaos and decline to reign in survivors.
     
  13. Atom Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    928
    Beating female reporters to death while they are held in prison is something Ahmedinejad might want to clean up if he wishes to mingle in polite company, SAM.

    :shrug:
     
  14. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    I'm no fan of Maddenedjedi. But that's no excuse for distorting and misrepresenting what he says.

    Unfortunately, this is the reality. A crash of the dollar will be a death knell for the civilised world, permanently under the threat of the maniacs with their fingers on the red button.
     
  15. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    31,035
    Why not bomb itself, it has WMD's all over America!
     
  16. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    Not that US policy on Iran makes any sense:

    http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=618796&category=OPINION&newsdate=9/2/2007
     
  17. Challenger78 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,536
    The US wants to either force Iran to do business (oil) with it or take it by force. I think bush is just trying to get another war in order to get his party re elected again.

    I sincerely hope the world will not stand by as another sovereign country is invaded because of its resources, with people being nothing but statistics.

    the Arab Oil exporting nations need to UNITE and Punch the oil export prices so high, that the US will have to declare war on every one of them.. then, it'd be a fair fight.. i just hope its not like 1967 again .
     
  18. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    Its more than the oil now, Iran is transferring all its revenues to euro, other OPEC members are also bailing out or planning to. Its the very heart of the paper based economy the US runs on. A joint movement where all the oil producers get together and decide against the dollar as the petro currency, would essentially, under the present economic conditions of the US, make the dollar completely worthless.

    Hence this:

    http://www.alternet.org/audits/61328/

    Also, no Democrat in power will think or do any different.
     
  19. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    Putin has been waiting on it too, since 1998

    http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/crisis/2003/1010oilpriceeuro.htm

    And Iran would have implemented it last year, if not for the battleships in the gulf
    http://www.energybulletin.net/12463.html
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2007
  20. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    31,035
    By raising the oil base prices not only will America be adversely be affected but third world countries that have to import their oil will be devastated. Japan, Australia, England, Sweden, and others are also going to be adversely affected and the entire worlds economic infrastructure will degenerate into chaos. If this is what the OPEC members want to do, then the world is at their mercy but I don't think the world will standby and allow that to happen and there will be a MAJOR war erupt in the Mideast with millions of deaths there. So it is up to OPEC to consider their options at this time and ease up their increasing prices or face wars that will decimate them.
     

Share This Page