grymster2007
New member
What? With a Lorcin? Or for having such a caveman mentality?
Question about Iran..
- Thread starter Danzig
- Start date
What? With a Lorcin? Or for having such a caveman mentality?
grymster2007
New member
A lot of cavemen denied themselves a chance to contribute to the gene pool by failing to correctly decipher an implicit threat. That leaves us. Which is one thought to ponder. Meanwhile, scrubbing of the gene pool continues. Make your choice.
Complicated enough that many cavemen failed to do it.
Complicated enough that many cavemen failed to do it.
The only thing I'm worried about
is when ethanol/bio fuels finally replaces oil as a fuel source, and those 5000 acres of land I have in Peru, SA that at this time is being prepared to grow corn, starts to look like a "gold mine" to some future regime...a regime that will look for ways to invade South America under the guise of bringing democracy to an oh so oppressed peoples, whose corrupt leader (who ever that may be) is responsible for the terorist plot to destroy America's corn crop...yep....that's what I worry about...as for those folk in the middle east with all that oil...I say let them keep it...it is, afterall, theirs to begin with.
is when ethanol/bio fuels finally replaces oil as a fuel source, and those 5000 acres of land I have in Peru, SA that at this time is being prepared to grow corn, starts to look like a "gold mine" to some future regime...a regime that will look for ways to invade South America under the guise of bringing democracy to an oh so oppressed peoples, whose corrupt leader (who ever that may be) is responsible for the terorist plot to destroy America's corn crop...yep....that's what I worry about...as for those folk in the middle east with all that oil...I say let them keep it...it is, afterall, theirs to begin with.
The Saudi royal family is in a precarious position because they can be overthrown just like the Shah and they know it.If Iran gains enough power and influence they can facilitate this.And you could end up with that entire region controlled by religious zealots.So much for the 6.99%
On the other hand,their only source of income is oil revenue and at this time the US has most of the money.So,as their biggest and wealthiest customer it is unlikely from a business standpoint that they would cut us off.
Unfortunately logic does not drive anything they do.Stealing land and artificially carving out a country for Isreal(kind of like giving California back to the Indians) has caused unknown death and distruction ,but it is not going away and you would think the Middle East would eventually come to terms with it.Not so far.
Some of you are obviously not old enough to remember the oil embargo of the 70's if you think they can't throw a monkey wrench into things.
On the other hand,their only source of income is oil revenue and at this time the US has most of the money.So,as their biggest and wealthiest customer it is unlikely from a business standpoint that they would cut us off.
Unfortunately logic does not drive anything they do.Stealing land and artificially carving out a country for Isreal(kind of like giving California back to the Indians) has caused unknown death and distruction ,but it is not going away and you would think the Middle East would eventually come to terms with it.Not so far.
Some of you are obviously not old enough to remember the oil embargo of the 70's if you think they can't throw a monkey wrench into things.
Wildalaska
Moderator
LOL...so lets see, an expansionist Iran takes over Saudi Arabia, Iraq, the UAR, Kuwait and cuts us off, guess that would be more than a "slight recession", now wouldnt it. But hey thats just a rant.
But thats OK, I know your point of view.... Irans main enemy, besides ourselves, is Israel. No problem there for some folks. I'll say no more.
WildfreedomofspeechforeveryoneAlaska TM
FirstFreedom
Moderator
So your allegation is that they're "expansionists", meaning they'll invade other countries, right? So fine, if they do, then we'll defend the others, just like we did Kuwait. If they don't, then no need to bother them, right?
And WA, you are so ridiculoulsy disingenuous in your deception it's not even funny:
I stated QUITE CLEARLY that my position is Iran is NOT a threat to the U.S.A. and therefore NOT an enemy of the U.S.A.
And so then what do you do - you falsely characterize my position as:
I never said that. In fact, in my LAST POST, I said just the opposite - so where do you get off being so disingenuous/dishonest in your attempt to debate?
And WA, you are so ridiculoulsy disingenuous in your deception it's not even funny:
I stated QUITE CLEARLY that my position is Iran is NOT a threat to the U.S.A. and therefore NOT an enemy of the U.S.A.
And so then what do you do - you falsely characterize my position as:
I never said that. In fact, in my LAST POST, I said just the opposite - so where do you get off being so disingenuous/dishonest in your attempt to debate?
Unregistered
Moderator
First Freedom, you say Iran is not an enemy of the US. But if Iran says we are the great satan, then I assume that in their eyes, we must be their enemy.
Do you not agree?
Do you not agree?
FirstFreedom
Moderator
I may be an enemy to a housefly. That does not mean I'm worried enough that it is MY enemy. But yes, to many over there, we are their enemy, indeed. But not the country as a whole.
repost from another thread
If we're not talking to Iran, does that mean we need to invade them (and every other country which is ruled by a nut and has or might get nukes)?
I'm just wondering what the war math will be.
We have over 150,000 troops engaged in the occupation of Iraq, trying to fashion a nation out of three tribes. I think the price tag is around half a trillion dollars so far.
Iran has 3 times the population. I'm guessing we'll need 450,000 troops and 1.5 trillion for the occupation/nation building phase of that invasion.
Korea has a population about equal to Iraq, so there we will need another 150,000 troops and half a trillion dollars.
A trillion here, a trillion and a half there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money. Can we afford to be the world's policeman?
Anyone?
If we're not talking to Iran, does that mean we need to invade them (and every other country which is ruled by a nut and has or might get nukes)?
I'm just wondering what the war math will be.
We have over 150,000 troops engaged in the occupation of Iraq, trying to fashion a nation out of three tribes. I think the price tag is around half a trillion dollars so far.
Iran has 3 times the population. I'm guessing we'll need 450,000 troops and 1.5 trillion for the occupation/nation building phase of that invasion.
Korea has a population about equal to Iraq, so there we will need another 150,000 troops and half a trillion dollars.
A trillion here, a trillion and a half there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money. Can we afford to be the world's policeman?
Anyone?
Unregistered
Moderator
Maybe, but we are the enemy of those who would be in control of the nukes.
I'm amazed at what a bunch of war-mongers are on this forum.
Because the president of Iran talks bad about the US, which has invaded and is occupying a Muslim country that was didn't attack us and which borders Iran, we should bomb it into oblivion? Iran said bad things about Israel too? Poor little defenseless Israel, which has plenty of ultra-modern weapons, including lots of not so "secret" nukes, and is quite capable of defending itself. While the US can't tolerate Iran and has destroyed Iraq, we're great buddies with Saudi Arabia, the main exporter and financer of militant Islamic fundamentalism worldwide. But who cares about that when they supply us with all the oil we want?
Most argue in this forum that the US is entitled to the oil of every other country on earth. Heaven forbid Americans should get used to driving gas efficient small cars in cities and suburbs. (My 1988 Dodge Colt always got over 40 mpg highway, and 34 city.) Or develop alternative energy...why bother when it's so easy to start wars that end up with hundreds of thousands of people being dead, displaced, and wounded, because we like cheap oil. All that talk about Iraq's WMD was just pure baloney, since invading countries because of pure greed doesn't sound so nice. Now Iran is next. Just like shooting Muslims in a barrel...what could possibly go wrong?
Has anyone here read the book "Imperial Hubris"? I suggest checking out at least the last couple chapters if reading the whole thing is too much trouble.
Because the president of Iran talks bad about the US, which has invaded and is occupying a Muslim country that was didn't attack us and which borders Iran, we should bomb it into oblivion? Iran said bad things about Israel too? Poor little defenseless Israel, which has plenty of ultra-modern weapons, including lots of not so "secret" nukes, and is quite capable of defending itself. While the US can't tolerate Iran and has destroyed Iraq, we're great buddies with Saudi Arabia, the main exporter and financer of militant Islamic fundamentalism worldwide. But who cares about that when they supply us with all the oil we want?
Most argue in this forum that the US is entitled to the oil of every other country on earth. Heaven forbid Americans should get used to driving gas efficient small cars in cities and suburbs. (My 1988 Dodge Colt always got over 40 mpg highway, and 34 city.) Or develop alternative energy...why bother when it's so easy to start wars that end up with hundreds of thousands of people being dead, displaced, and wounded, because we like cheap oil. All that talk about Iraq's WMD was just pure baloney, since invading countries because of pure greed doesn't sound so nice. Now Iran is next. Just like shooting Muslims in a barrel...what could possibly go wrong?
Has anyone here read the book "Imperial Hubris"? I suggest checking out at least the last couple chapters if reading the whole thing is too much trouble.
grymster2007
New member
I think we’ve twisted no arms and paid a fair price for the oil we’ve used. OK.. other than taking that belonging to the original Americans.
As for your 40mpg car, it really doesn't matter. As pointed out earlier, there is a growing demand for petroleum. You need a 300mpg car to make a difference in the long run.
No… I would not go through the trouble of reading the West-hating trash published in the Imperial Hubris.
Bomb the warmongers!
As for your 40mpg car, it really doesn't matter. As pointed out earlier, there is a growing demand for petroleum. You need a 300mpg car to make a difference in the long run.
No… I would not go through the trouble of reading the West-hating trash published in the Imperial Hubris.
Bomb the warmongers!
LightningJoe
New member
If you were aware of only the past 10 days or so, you might be able to ignore Iran. But anyone who's been paying attention for the past few decades is going to see Iran's current shenanigans in their proper context.
Iran has been fighting the United States since 1979. We just haven't been fighting back. When it comes to Islamofacist terrorism, Iran is where it's all coming from. The stakes continue to go up. The next milestone is a nuclear detonation in Manhattan. Not a problem? Just need to love each other more? Whatever?
But superimposed on top of this is another dynamic. Iran is imploding demographically and economically. The government increasingly rules by force and fear. The leadership consists of radical Muslims but the common man doesn't show up at the mosque anymore. Iran has two exports, oil and prostitutes. The oil decreases every year; the prostitutes increase. Women in Iran don't get married and make babies. They emigrate to Europe and turn on the red light.
Where is the authoritarian, radically Muslim leadership of Iran going to go? They've been fighting the West for 30 years. The Islamic Republic is running out of gas and they've lost the hearts and minds of Iranians. But, they've still got a few ideas and a little more time to do what they want.
Iran has been fighting the United States since 1979. We just haven't been fighting back. When it comes to Islamofacist terrorism, Iran is where it's all coming from. The stakes continue to go up. The next milestone is a nuclear detonation in Manhattan. Not a problem? Just need to love each other more? Whatever?
But superimposed on top of this is another dynamic. Iran is imploding demographically and economically. The government increasingly rules by force and fear. The leadership consists of radical Muslims but the common man doesn't show up at the mosque anymore. Iran has two exports, oil and prostitutes. The oil decreases every year; the prostitutes increase. Women in Iran don't get married and make babies. They emigrate to Europe and turn on the red light.
Where is the authoritarian, radically Muslim leadership of Iran going to go? They've been fighting the West for 30 years. The Islamic Republic is running out of gas and they've lost the hearts and minds of Iranians. But, they've still got a few ideas and a little more time to do what they want.
I guess if there was an easy answer, this problem would be behind us. There's only so much "pre-emption" you can get away with before everyone looks at you as the bad guy. If Iran is to be dealt with, and made to play nice, the world community needs to get on board and see it in their interest to do so. In addition to military action we need to get on the "diplomatic stick" so to speak so that other western countries will see Islamic fascism is real and we shouldn't lay down and die because we are too lazy to do something about it.
Unregistered
Moderator
Why weren't you riding a bicycle???
How many people are generally riding with you?
Last edited:
Exactly. Which is what worries me most. It's not a nation we'd need to invade and fight on the ground, I think...in fact, that'd be counterproductive. Precision strikes to remove the leadership would likely suit the people just fine as long as we didn't set foot on their soil. They'd resent that just like we'd resent a nation invading us. Lots of secular people there, too.
But the leadership is getting increasingly more desparate. They have mach 3 Sunburn missiles that could even cost us a carrier or two. Scary things, able to jink at wave level on final approach, then pop up and slam down through the deck, and the Phalanx guns can't track them...we know that. SeaRAM can, but it's not on most of our ships. Any of our ships in the immediate area would have less than twenty seconds from launch to impact to react to a Sunburn fired from well inland. They also have hundreds of Exocets that could turn the Straits into an impassible corridor of blazing tankers.
My worry is that their insane, extremist leadership decides to let all fly and go out in a blaze of glory, since they actively WANT to end the world and "go to paradise".
At this point, I see it like a police standoff where the crazed maniac won't give up. If we ignore them, yes, they will eventually set off a nuke in Tel Aviv or elsewhere. They can't be negotiated with. And at some point, the snipers need to be called in.
Unregistered
Moderator
No I mean how many people were generally riding with you in the Dodge Colt?