How dangerous is Iran?
- Thread starter tj_mlnr
- Start date
LightningJoe
New member
The consequences of Pakistan's bomb are not yet known. Pakistan's on the edge. When it goes, then we'll have have better idea.
The consequences of Iran's bomb are probably easier to know. It went over the edge a long time ago.
Bear in mind, Iran's got big problems: Japan's fertility and Cuba's economy. Oil isn't doing Iran much good. The mullahs are powerful, but they're not popular. Iran's government doesn't have all the time in the world.
What they do with the time they've got left remains to be seen, but honestly negotiating with with an endlessly patient West probably won't be it.
The consequences of Iran's bomb are probably easier to know. It went over the edge a long time ago.
Bear in mind, Iran's got big problems: Japan's fertility and Cuba's economy. Oil isn't doing Iran much good. The mullahs are powerful, but they're not popular. Iran's government doesn't have all the time in the world.
What they do with the time they've got left remains to be seen, but honestly negotiating with with an endlessly patient West probably won't be it.
???
So, AFTER the Iranians detonate a nuke, we can trace it back to where it came from? Isn't that just a bit late--AFTER a few million Americans or Israelis are vaporized?
If that line of reasoning makes sense to you, you must be a big fan of "microstamping". It's the same approach writ small.
There are some on this board who think Israel is perfectly able to stand on her own with no help from us, and whatever happens to the Israelis isn't our problem. Interesting that there are others--I presume they aren't the same ones--who are willing to hide behind the Israelis and depend on THEM to do the right thing about Iran.
We used diplomacy and negotiation with Hitler, too. Worked out well, did it?
Lesson #1 of the Holocaust: if someone tells you they're going to kill you--believe them!
If the Iranians take out Tel Aviv, they'll be the biggest heroes in the Middle East. Guess who would be next?
Don't let your visceral hatred of George W. Bush control ALL your thinking. Winston Churchill was derided as a crazy old man when he insisted that
Hitler was the most dangerous man in Europe. It was later pretty well determined that he was right, and now he is regarded as the greatest British PM in modern history. Bush is insisting that Islamofascism is the greatest danger to the world since Naziism, and is widely derided as a fool and a fascist himself, and the Islamist threat is dismissed as a phony "boogeyman" that's being hyped to boost his personal power (like that's going to matter after January 20, 2009, anyway).
I guess we'll find out who's right.
One more thing: No, the mullahs aren't popular; so what? Does Iran have a 2nd Amendment? What are the Iranian people going to do about it?
The time for war with Iran is not yet. When it WILL be time is not up to us, but to them. We weren't ready for WWII either, but when it was necessary, we rose to the occasion. I think we can again--and I also think it will happen.
Do you want peace? If so, what do you prepare for? Anybody remember?
So, AFTER the Iranians detonate a nuke, we can trace it back to where it came from? Isn't that just a bit late--AFTER a few million Americans or Israelis are vaporized?
If that line of reasoning makes sense to you, you must be a big fan of "microstamping". It's the same approach writ small.
There are some on this board who think Israel is perfectly able to stand on her own with no help from us, and whatever happens to the Israelis isn't our problem. Interesting that there are others--I presume they aren't the same ones--who are willing to hide behind the Israelis and depend on THEM to do the right thing about Iran.
We used diplomacy and negotiation with Hitler, too. Worked out well, did it?
Lesson #1 of the Holocaust: if someone tells you they're going to kill you--believe them!
If the Iranians take out Tel Aviv, they'll be the biggest heroes in the Middle East. Guess who would be next?
Don't let your visceral hatred of George W. Bush control ALL your thinking. Winston Churchill was derided as a crazy old man when he insisted that
Hitler was the most dangerous man in Europe. It was later pretty well determined that he was right, and now he is regarded as the greatest British PM in modern history. Bush is insisting that Islamofascism is the greatest danger to the world since Naziism, and is widely derided as a fool and a fascist himself, and the Islamist threat is dismissed as a phony "boogeyman" that's being hyped to boost his personal power (like that's going to matter after January 20, 2009, anyway).
I guess we'll find out who's right.
One more thing: No, the mullahs aren't popular; so what? Does Iran have a 2nd Amendment? What are the Iranian people going to do about it?
The time for war with Iran is not yet. When it WILL be time is not up to us, but to them. We weren't ready for WWII either, but when it was necessary, we rose to the occasion. I think we can again--and I also think it will happen.
Do you want peace? If so, what do you prepare for? Anybody remember?
RedneckFur
New member
There has been fighting of one sort or another going on in the middle east for as long as we've had written history. I think in the end, we'd all be much better off if we didnt get involved in their affaris, and just let all those radicals fight it out amongst themselves.
If/when they attack us, I feel that we should bomb whoever is responsible flat. No rebuilding, no reconstruction, no putting a goveremnt in place. Repeat as needed until no more attacks occur.
If/when they attack us, I feel that we should bomb whoever is responsible flat. No rebuilding, no reconstruction, no putting a goveremnt in place. Repeat as needed until no more attacks occur.
grymster2007
New member
Well put sir!
Yes they are a danger. But it's not because they are going to give a nuclear bomb to terrorists. Iran is not involved with Al-Qaeda or any other group that wants war with the US, the terrorists that they support are mainly concerned with Israel.
Iran is not going to risk nuclear war for the sake of a few million Palestinians. That's ridiculous. Ahmadinejad is a politician and he says the things he says about Israel to get elected.
If they were going to give WMD to Hizbollah, they could have done it a long time ago. They have had the ability to make biological and chemical weapons for many years and they may already have them.
But I haven't seen any evidence that they are trying to build nukes. I have seen many things that make me think that they are not trying to...
First of all, we need to stop threatening Iran. That only makes the extremists more popular. What happened to Bush's popularity after 9/11? He was very popular because he was talking about protecting us. Why would it be any different in Iran?
After that, the chances that someone more friendly to the US will be elected in Iran will greatly increase.
OPEC might refuse to sell us oil or Iran could bomb oil tankers in the Straits of Hormuz... $20 gasoline... it would cause a global economic crisis.
I do, but I don't think the US government does...
There is more....
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0118/p99s01-duts.html
mr kablammo
New member
I find it discouraging that the study of mentality of the 'utopian destroyers' has not been followed up. The goal of the Imams and Pakistani Islamo-supremacists are not rational as we now think of 'rationality'.
The reports of the IAEA on Iran, which are not ususally publically available, make clear that Iran is dissemulating about the nuclear research program. The parallel to Nazi Germany co-operating with the USSR in the 1930s is compelling.
For interesting reading:
http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=2330&l=1
http://www.state.gov/t/us/rm/33909.htm
http://www.nti.org/e_research/e3_48a.html
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/cw.htm
http://www.csis.org/component/option,com_csis_pubs/task,view/id,1325/type,1/
There are others, but this is a start.
The reports of the IAEA on Iran, which are not ususally publically available, make clear that Iran is dissemulating about the nuclear research program. The parallel to Nazi Germany co-operating with the USSR in the 1930s is compelling.
For interesting reading:
http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=2330&l=1
http://www.state.gov/t/us/rm/33909.htm
http://www.nti.org/e_research/e3_48a.html
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/cw.htm
http://www.csis.org/component/option,com_csis_pubs/task,view/id,1325/type,1/
There are others, but this is a start.
I'm serious about $20 gasoline. It could actually get much worse than that. During the the oil shocks of the 1970's the supply of oil was reduced by about 5% but the price of oil increased by 400%. About one fifth of the world's oil passes through the Straits of Hormuz. How would you like a 1200% increase in the price of oil and gasoline?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/23/AR2005062301896.html
^ Now, THAT is why Iran is dangerous.
So why haven't they tried anything yet?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/23/AR2005062301896.html
^ Now, THAT is why Iran is dangerous.
So why haven't they tried anything yet?
mooreshawnm
New member
Rob, I disagree with pretty much everything you're saying, however..
So why haven't they tried anything yet?
That's a darn good question. Seriously. I figure its gotta be one of four reasons:
1) .gov is on top of things. I find this highly unlikely as the back door is still wide open (border).
2) They are bidding their time. Possible I suppose.
3) You are correct, they really are not the danger some of us imagine them to be. I'll admit this is a possiblity, but I don't think it's correct.
4) They are watching us self destruct all by ourselves, any action on their part at this moment would have the possibility of unifying us. Yep this is the one that I believe is the case.
So why haven't they tried anything yet?
That's a darn good question. Seriously. I figure its gotta be one of four reasons:
1) .gov is on top of things. I find this highly unlikely as the back door is still wide open (border).
2) They are bidding their time. Possible I suppose.
3) You are correct, they really are not the danger some of us imagine them to be. I'll admit this is a possiblity, but I don't think it's correct.
4) They are watching us self destruct all by ourselves, any action on their part at this moment would have the possibility of unifying us. Yep this is the one that I believe is the case.
mr kablammo
New member
What would be the point of the Hidden Imam coming out the state of occultation before the weaponry/arsenal that is equal to his mission has been developed? World conquest requires a world-conquering arsenal: 'weapons of apocalyptic destruction'. None of this is a mystery for the true believer. Stop thinking like the disbelieving victim and start thinking like the believing victimizer. Check out David Cook's books. Didn't you follow up the mahdiwatch link? Perhaps you did and did not believe. Perhaps, my friend, you are pre-destined for eradication...
No, but I promise that I will if you will look at my links:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091807G.shtml
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0420,perlstein,53582,1.html
http://www.azstarnet.com/news/206857
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1586978,00.html
http://www.theocracywatch.org/bush2.htm
Do you see why I'm not very concerned about Muslim Fundamentalist Fanatics?
I not concerned by anything Ahmadinejad has to say,because he has no authority to do except what Grand Ayahtollah Khoemeni specifically allows.
Iran wants a bomb for one reason. Once they have a nuclear deterent capability they are to dangerous confront directly. And they free export the revolution in a more direct way than they have been. They can also act on some of the territorial claims they made.
There is one problem Khoemeni probably hasn't considered. He can call it an "Islamic" bomb all he wants to. But to his neighbors its a Persian bomb or a shia bomb. This is probably going to set off a nuclear arms race in the middle east. If I had to guess which Arab state was going produce one first I'd say either Egypt or Suadi Arabia.
Iran wants a bomb for one reason. Once they have a nuclear deterent capability they are to dangerous confront directly. And they free export the revolution in a more direct way than they have been. They can also act on some of the territorial claims they made.
There is one problem Khoemeni probably hasn't considered. He can call it an "Islamic" bomb all he wants to. But to his neighbors its a Persian bomb or a shia bomb. This is probably going to set off a nuclear arms race in the middle east. If I had to guess which Arab state was going produce one first I'd say either Egypt or Suadi Arabia.
I spent a year attached to the Imperial Iranian Army (Shah's) in a crack unit. I found that Iranians are very good at talking the talk but not walking the walk. However they are very short on common sense and cannot comprehend that anything non - Iranian can be of any value. In a conventual warfare situation I find them laughable, however with nukes available they are frightening, they would sell them to anyone, especially to anyone opposed to the "Great Satan" Amrika (not misspelled, just the Iranian pronounciation. They would also not hesitate to scatter them around like confetti. Incidentally the correct pronounciation of Iran is Ear-on not Eye - rain-i - ann.
mr kablammo
New member
Hey Rob, rather than trot out the specious and lame libels on the Jewish-Freemason-Neocon-Christiantheocrat cabal, go research the Shi'ite and Sunni versions of 'Battle at the End of Time'. Also, note the difference of seriousness of our sources of information. The "Village Voice" versus the NTI. Come on dude, get real and grow up. You are wasting your time and the time of those that you afflict that non-sense.
A good start for you would be "The Iranian Revolution, Thanatos on a National Scale", by Gholam Afkhami (sp).
A good start for you would be "The Iranian Revolution, Thanatos on a National Scale", by Gholam Afkhami (sp).
armoredman
New member
They did. In 1988. Referance Operation Preying Mantis. We kicked thier can up between thier teeth, and they haven't forgotten it. Yes, that was IRAN, not IRAQ.
Go look at what many Christians beleive about the 'Battle at the End of Time' and then look at the links I provided.
Why should I be worried about Fundamentalist Muslims when there may be someone who believes similar things in control of our government and our massive nuclear arsenal? Do you feel comfortable knowing that our president is making foreign policy decisions based on bible prophecy?
Yep... there is nothing weird going on here.
It's not 1988 anymore. The price of oil is much higher, the value of the US dollar is much lower, and Iran hasn't been at war with Iraq for seven years.
LightningJoe
New member
Rob308:
It's intuitively a bit silly to compare Islam to Christianity. Christians don't all agree with each other, but the more devout they are the more likely they are to peacefully coexist with others. Anyone who has any experience with Christians will be amply aware of this. Christians do dislike certain behaviors (murder, rape, arson, etc.) and tend to be useful in tight situations (battles, SHTF situations, other crises). Anybody who's ever needed someone to save their butt will probably be aware of that.
Islam is generally associated with repression, violence, and fecklessness. Very different from Christianity.
A Christian with a gun in his hand promotes peace and good order. Anybody else, very doubtful. This last is probably one reason Liberals are opposed to gun rights. Guns are a bad thing in the wrong hands.
It's intuitively a bit silly to compare Islam to Christianity. Christians don't all agree with each other, but the more devout they are the more likely they are to peacefully coexist with others. Anyone who has any experience with Christians will be amply aware of this. Christians do dislike certain behaviors (murder, rape, arson, etc.) and tend to be useful in tight situations (battles, SHTF situations, other crises). Anybody who's ever needed someone to save their butt will probably be aware of that.
Islam is generally associated with repression, violence, and fecklessness. Very different from Christianity.
A Christian with a gun in his hand promotes peace and good order. Anybody else, very doubtful. This last is probably one reason Liberals are opposed to gun rights. Guns are a bad thing in the wrong hands.
Rob308:
So you're more worried about Christians than about Islamists?
Can we consider a few differences between those groups?
Let's see; they both want everyone to believe like they do. Pretty much true of every religion I ever heard of, other than Judaism--but how do they seek converts? Hmmm. Christians talk to people. Islamists threaten to kill them, and often do.
How do they respond to art or public statements that they find offensive? Christians write letters to editors; Muslims take to the streets, burn things and kill people.
How do they seek to influence their governments? Christians lobby, vote and campaign. Islamists murder people who oppose them.
How do they oppose cultural practices that they find abhorrent? Christians write letters, editorials, and speak out (and explicitly denounce extremists who commit violent acts); islamists blow up nightclubs and murder filmmakers.
I looked at your sites. TruthOut is about as far left as it gets, and is not incidentally rabidly anti-gun. The Guardian has been anti-American for decades--and I don't believe that report of Bush's words for an instant. There wasn't even a confirmation of it in the article itself; without some corroboration, it sounds like a fabrication to me. Bush has explicitly said that God doesn't speak to him directly, only that he prays for guidance. And "Theocracywatch"? Please. Hysterical paranoia at the thought that a person who actually holds religious views might hold public office--or, worse, that religious people might actually try to organize, vote, and influence public policy! As if freedom OF religion means freedom FROM religion...
I find the perception that there's too much Christian influence in America a little puzzling. When I look at popular culture, it looks to me like we could use a good deal more. I'm not talking about porn and gangsta rap; if you look at popular TV shows and movies, with very few exceptions indeed, it appears that no one believes in God at all and that there IS no significant religious aspect to American life.
BTW, I'm Jewish.
Rob, with all due respect, what are you doing HERE? Wouldn't you be more at home on the Counterpunch or TruthOut forums? I can only speak for myself, but it seems to me that relatively few gun enthusiasts or 2nd-Amendment fans are flaming leftwingers or antireligious fanatics.
Just a thought. Believe what you want and post what you want, but don't be surprised if you encounter some, er, resistance.
So you're more worried about Christians than about Islamists?
Can we consider a few differences between those groups?
Let's see; they both want everyone to believe like they do. Pretty much true of every religion I ever heard of, other than Judaism--but how do they seek converts? Hmmm. Christians talk to people. Islamists threaten to kill them, and often do.
How do they respond to art or public statements that they find offensive? Christians write letters to editors; Muslims take to the streets, burn things and kill people.
How do they seek to influence their governments? Christians lobby, vote and campaign. Islamists murder people who oppose them.
How do they oppose cultural practices that they find abhorrent? Christians write letters, editorials, and speak out (and explicitly denounce extremists who commit violent acts); islamists blow up nightclubs and murder filmmakers.
I looked at your sites. TruthOut is about as far left as it gets, and is not incidentally rabidly anti-gun. The Guardian has been anti-American for decades--and I don't believe that report of Bush's words for an instant. There wasn't even a confirmation of it in the article itself; without some corroboration, it sounds like a fabrication to me. Bush has explicitly said that God doesn't speak to him directly, only that he prays for guidance. And "Theocracywatch"? Please. Hysterical paranoia at the thought that a person who actually holds religious views might hold public office--or, worse, that religious people might actually try to organize, vote, and influence public policy! As if freedom OF religion means freedom FROM religion...
I find the perception that there's too much Christian influence in America a little puzzling. When I look at popular culture, it looks to me like we could use a good deal more. I'm not talking about porn and gangsta rap; if you look at popular TV shows and movies, with very few exceptions indeed, it appears that no one believes in God at all and that there IS no significant religious aspect to American life.
BTW, I'm Jewish.
Rob, with all due respect, what are you doing HERE? Wouldn't you be more at home on the Counterpunch or TruthOut forums? I can only speak for myself, but it seems to me that relatively few gun enthusiasts or 2nd-Amendment fans are flaming leftwingers or antireligious fanatics.
Just a thought. Believe what you want and post what you want, but don't be surprised if you encounter some, er, resistance.
I see. So Iran only supports terrorists who blow up innocent women and children in Israel.
Well that makes me feel much better about Iran.
IEDs in Iraq that blow up our troops which are made in Iran, Iranian troops training terrorists in Iraq. Why worry, right? :barf:
Nah, nothing to worry about from Iran.
The bad thing is we started this mess our selves! Under the Shaw control we taught them to fly F-4's in about 1979. We sort of educated a rather subdued nation into a more modern people. Some of the information took and some of the old ways stayed! They are in conflict with them selves. The old schooled religious leaders don't want to loose the power and control and the Young and educated want to spread there wings and move on.
In my thinking, We did the damage by not letting them progress in a normal manner and short cut the learning progress. They went from Camel jockeys to Jet jockeys! They didn't have the opportunity to learn the stuff that keeps it all together in between!
Know it appears they want to build Nuclear Fire crackers!
Giving their lack of social skills, and apparent need for control, I fear they would use them!
The young and becoming educated people of the nation do not hate us! They want what everyone else wants. Jobs, House, toys, and peace in life.
Then there is the controlling elite, that will not relinquish power, all covered by the religious umbrella!!
I lived in Turky in 1965 as a military brat and it was a trip! No TV, Radio, Water that you could drink without boil, bleach or iodine! Yet they was flying F-86 Sabre's. They would fly over our house shooting .50 bmg raining brass down on us shooting towed targets. I think they missed a few chapters!
In my thinking, We did the damage by not letting them progress in a normal manner and short cut the learning progress. They went from Camel jockeys to Jet jockeys! They didn't have the opportunity to learn the stuff that keeps it all together in between!
Know it appears they want to build Nuclear Fire crackers!
Giving their lack of social skills, and apparent need for control, I fear they would use them!
The young and becoming educated people of the nation do not hate us! They want what everyone else wants. Jobs, House, toys, and peace in life.
Then there is the controlling elite, that will not relinquish power, all covered by the religious umbrella!!
I lived in Turky in 1965 as a military brat and it was a trip! No TV, Radio, Water that you could drink without boil, bleach or iodine! Yet they was flying F-86 Sabre's. They would fly over our house shooting .50 bmg raining brass down on us shooting towed targets. I think they missed a few chapters!