Iran

Indrid Cold

New member
Well, it just hit the CNN front page that the US found a link between Iran and the deaths of ~170 U.S Soldiers in Iraq. Iran denies it, says that the US fabricated evidence, yadda yadda...

Needless to say, this bothers me. I know I'm in the minority of opinion here, being fairly liberal in a lot of my views, but I know these forums aren't a place of political bashing either way and I'm totally open to hearing both sides. Here's my take:

I'm not against war. I think it's one of those things that has to happen every once and a while to right the wrongs of the world. Is it a good thing? No, I don't think you're going to justify war as being good. It's one of those "better of two evils" situations. I was completely for going into Afghanistan. Not as much for Iraq, but I'll support the troops, and I'm not advocating pulling out immediately as I think that's a horrible plan both for Iraq and the U.S. It's a surefire way to throw Iraq into civil war and leave us with a horrible reputation and a massive debt (both financial, and in terms of loss of life) for an idea that wasn't realized.

Iran presents a new trouble for us. I *really* dislike Iran right now, and a host of other Iran-supporting countries. The be quite frank, their conduct is pissing me off. They're the temper-tantrum throwing little kid that just wants to make a lot of noise. Unfortunately, as the news has reported (correctly or incorrectly, but that's a whole other story) they've started to actively/indirectly kill our soldiers instead of blow smoke. Now, I see that as a full on declaration of war if it's true. But... This is one situation where I would really hate to see us get involved. Not only is Iran better armed than Iraq (Although we're more than capable of bombing them to oblivion), but I think they've got a lot more support from the Muslim world and outside of it. I think if we got involved with Iran, it would be a s***storm of epic proportions. Too many people would see it (incorrectly) as an assault on a religion and a people, and not a retaliatory measure in response to one country's agression. To be blunt, this is a mess - It's kicking a hornets' nest. I'm not saying that we shouldn't do anything, but I don't think it should involve troops. At this point, I'm for working with other nations to financially cut Iran off from everything we possibly can and send them back to pre-stone age. If they want to rot in the desert as a pariah nation, fine. Let them.

Let me throw this out on the floor though - I'm not saying that I don't think Iran's involvement in Iraq doesn't justify the use of force. I'm saying that for our own financial and political interests, and the stability of the political world as a whole, I think we should play the bigger power and let this one go without full-on retribution.

Thoughts? I'm not sure I articulated all of my thoughts on the issue fully, so if something comes up that I hadn't thought of at the moment, I'll be sure to post. Looking forward to hearing your views.
 
Conducting activities against Iranian operatives in Iraq would be for the best. As for Iran itself, their economy isn't so good right now, and their recent local elections were swept by parties against the current ruling party. All we need to do is keep the price of oil low and keep our heads down so we don't get turned into a big "unite behind us or the Great Satan will rain fire down on us all!" for their ruling party, and the problem should take care of itself. Let them moderate themselves, and keep both those carrier battle groups over there just in case.
 
Iran has been openly supplying Hammas for years. That is a group recognized by the US and most European nations as a terrorist organization. Then there are the comments by the current PM about Israel.

The best thing the US can do at this ponit is stay in line with the Europeans. There is a unified front against the Iranians. The russians don't give a damn but if we keep with the Europeans on this we look much more reasonable . The Iranian PM has managed to even piss off his own people. Religous leaders are saying he is unneccessarily pissing off the west with his lack of diplomacy. The masses in the streets are po'ed at him that he's spending so much energy on a pissing match and not dealing with domestic problems in Iran like their economy. The worst thing we can do is stir it up or the people will rally behind him.
 
I think you both bring up great points, and I agree. Let Iran screw itself over - it's doing an awesome job without our help. And yeah, stick with the Europeans on our actions. It helps that the front against Iran is unified and not split up and all over the place.
 
The masses in the streets are po'ed at him that he's spending so much energy on a pissing match and not dealing with domestic problems in Iran like their economy. The worst thing we can do is stir it up or the people will rally behind him.

Bears repeating.
 
Iran is building nukes. No one in Europe is going to do a thing about it. When they get the bomb I fear Israel and/or the US will be hit. Whether by them directly or their terrorist proxies is irrelevant. Now we have the excuse that we need to finish their program for good. As for the Iranian people doing it for themselves.....I just don't see it happening. I know they are Persians and not Arabs but I haven't seen too many governments change for the better in that part of the world lately. All I hear on the radio and TV are 'experts' telling us how much the common man on the street likes America and hates their government. That's nice but they are still supporting militias that are killing our soldiers. DOW and be done with it. If we don't now then my children may have to fight them and who knows what state our people will be in then, my guess judging trends is that we will be able to produce even fewer warriors than we can now.

Oh wait but then the world will hate us! Guess what, they already do and have for much longer than Bush has been in office. We cannot let our security lie in the hands of foreigners who despise us. However unpopular it may be this situation must be dealt with and it must be delt with before they are a nuclear power. What will you say if an American city is destroyed by Iranian made nukes. It will be too late then. Fear mongering....perhaps but realize this is entirely possible.

Just one man's opinion of course.

Shawn
 
Well for one we've never even claimed to know Iran is building nukes. We're just very worried because they're the kind of crazies who would want them and would threaten to use them.

As for supporting the militias in Iraq, it's because for a lot of people they're the only stabilizing influence there. Of course, that doesn't mean they like us either... (Over a year ago, the approval rating for attacks on US troops was 47%.)
 
Iran is not a new threat. On the contrary, Iran, through its state suported group Hizbollah, were responsible for more US deaths than any other group before 9-11.
Iran has been needing its a*s kicked for a long time. However, now is a bad time to start a 3rd front.
 
We all know that the Bush administation is lying. Iran is not seeking nukes, nor have they provided anything to insurgents which have resulted in the deaths of American soldiers. Bush is a liar.






There, just had to say that to cover for some other people.:D
 
Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said yesterday that he has no information indicating Iran's government is directing the supply of lethal weapons to Shiite insurgent groups in Iraq.

"We know that the explosively formed projectiles are manufactured in Iran," Pace told Voice of America during a visit to Australia. "What I would not say is that the Iranian government, per se, knows about this."

Pace's comments came a day after U.S. military officials in Baghdad alleged that the "highest levels" of the Iranian government have directed use of weapons that are killing U.S. troops in Iraq. No information was provided to substantiate the charge

Crap. General Pace didn't get the memo...
 
Back
Top