| Author | Message | ||
     Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2992 Registered: 5-2004  |
FvF, any chance you might answer ANY questions put to you? It's the same on every single message board you post on. What do you see as the outcome of us attacking w/r/t the political, economic, military, and literal fallout. | ||
| Elgato Citizen Username: Elgato Post Number: 49 Registered: 2-2004 |
Interesting, but so far have the Iranin Sh'ias and Sunni's haven't had their own civil war, nor has their country been divided in the past along these lines as has Iraq (which pulled itself back together and was held together under Saddam and hopefully will again despite our meddling/destruction)? Iran is still years away from developing the bomb, has good relations with Russia and China who are both working to keep it from development and seem to be having more success on the diplomacy/trade front than is the USA. Europe, as you say could be hit by their missiles (that won't exist for years) but does not seem to be reacting as fearfully as the US goverment. Many European countries have the bomb and Iran has nothing to gain by attacking them. They, like Israel, are on the doorstep as far as retaliation/fallout are concerned. Terrorism strikes around the world have increased substantially since the Iraq war/invasion/occupation. Nothing GWB has done has prevented this, only increased it. It stands to reason that it will increase even more if the same thing happens again. Bombing Iran does not seem to be a win/win option. | ||
| Foj Citizen Username: Foger Post Number: 1260 Registered: 9-2004 |
FvF, is it fair to say that what you have described is the Christian fundamentalist, or Dominionist version of the Rapture? "As I stated at an earlier point in the thread Ahmadinejad is a believer in the messianic strain of shi'a islam that believes the 12th mahdi will come, essentially at the end of the world, to restore a benevolent islamic paradise. The conflict with the US is part of this religious view as is bringing about the return of the mahdi. These believers will do whatever is necessary to bring this about, including use of a nuke." After taking some editorial license, "As I stated at an earlier point in the thread Bush is a believer in the messianic strain of Christian fundamentalism that believes the Rapture will come, essentially at the end of the world, and the true believers will be taken to heavan. The conflict with the Mulims is part of this religious view as is bringing about the return of Jesus. These believers will do whatever is necessary to bring this about, including use of a nuke." George said God told him to do it. We have a President who talks with God, tells the public, that he talks to God. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 219 Registered: 4-2006 |
Rastro- What the Iranians do largely depends on the quality and nature of a pre-emptive strike itself, and the extent to which their leadership, communications, and millitary are targeted and affected. I would think that whatever US planning has gone on to this point intends it to be comprehensive, and contingency planned to prevent them from being able to close the straights. One benefit of the fiasco in Iraq is that the millitary has had the opportunity to learn from its mistakes. The Iranians will respond with attempted terrorism against US, Israel, and European targets, most probably outside the U.S.. They have been funding and planning anti-US and Israel terrorism for years. We are and have been, essentially at war with these people for years, if one wants to be honest. A nuclear option would only make them more so secure in feeling they could avoid retaliation for terrorism in the future, assert control over the region's oil producers, and be able to threaten Europe with nukes. By not taking action against Iran, we are simply delaying what is to come, at far greater cost in life and risk, I am afraid. I haven't been reading too many " anti-muslim" web sites. Some people have lived in the region, and concentrated on it at university. Radical fundamentalism in the region runs in cycles, with opposing force historically being a catalyst to ending the then cycle. I am not a dem or republican kool-aide drinker, nor do I agree with all of Bush's policies. I question the need for preemption in Iraq, but not Iran. Even if he is a "fundamentalist" we live in an open democratic society which guarantees certain rights and has checks and balances. The Iranians don't, and the majority of the people did not vote for the mullahs who are driving this confrontation to the bitter end. People who say we could nuke Iran if they use a nuke are essentially saying it is ok to kill millions of Iranians, but not to launch a pre-emptive attack which at most might cause a few hundred casualties ( dead and wounded) if only nuke sites are hit. Weird logic. The problem will not go away and we can't bury our heads in the sand. I wonder what would happen if Americans at WWII took the same approach? I would think America would be speaking German. The Iranians might be right in thinking we are too weak to do anything, given the rationalizations to do nothing made in these posts. | ||
| Elgato Citizen Username: Elgato Post Number: 50 Registered: 2-2004 |
"I don't know what weapons World War Three will be fought with, but World War Four will be fought with sticks and stones." Albert Einstein | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 223 Registered: 4-2006 |
Elgato- He also used to forget where he was and sometimes pee in public when he was in Princeton. | ||
| Phenixrising Citizen Username: Phenixrising Post Number: 1598 Registered: 9-2004  |
Taking down Iran would gain respect and maybe negative verbalization, not attacks. That is the most IDIOTIC quote thus far, besides straw's simpleton solution.  The Iranians might be right in thinking we are too weak to do anything, given the rationalizations to do nothing made in these posts. fvf, huh? If they (Iran) FELT that way, why are they threatening retribution if they are attacked? The USA WEAK? I doubt that VERY much! They saw what happened in Iraq when we illegally invaded that country. Add on to the continual death, destruction, the various opposition groups and the homebase for many insurgents. And now pretty much…civil war. Who would want THIS for their country? | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 1260 Registered: 10-2004  |
fvf - you now convinced me that you are a kool aid drinker. Your arguments are all specious. You get credit for sounding like you know more then you do but you fail to convince because your points are all based on fear. Lets break down your response to Rastro - What the Iranians do largely depends on the quality and nature of a pre-emptive strike itself, and the extent to which their leadership, communications, and millitary are targeted and affected. So if they are attacked with conventional weapons and we dont destroy their whole military they will attack both Israel and the US using whatever terror organizations that can fund. Sounds like a poor decision. If we attack with a nuclear weapon we become world pariahs, murder millions of innocents and quite probably destroy our own way of life. Sounds like a poor decision. I would think that whatever US planning has gone on to this point intends it to be comprehensive, and contingency planned to prevent them from being able to close the straights. Sure and the planners will definitely be listened to. The administration will take into account what our military needs are primarily no matter what the politics call for? The track record shows otherwise. In fact no plan goes as planned and as you say we have little intelligence on the ground in Iran so what we think we know is not what is real necessarily. One benefit of the fiasco in Iraq is that the millitary has had the opportunity to learn from its mistakes. The Iranians will respond with attempted terrorism against US, Israel, and European targets, most probably outside the U.S.. Attempted terrorism? Or do you mean actual attacks on us and our allies. So really all of us are now truly involved in a shooting war where the world is a far more dangerous place. They have been funding and planning anti-US and Israel terrorism for years. We are and have been, essentially at war with these people for years, if one wants to be honest. A nuclear option would only make them more so secure in feeling they could avoid retaliation for terrorism in the future, assert control over the region's oil producers, and be able to threaten Europe with nukes. By not taking action against Iran, we are simply delaying what is to come, at far greater cost in life and risk, I am afraid. At the end of the day that is the issue. You are afraid. I dont share your vision or your point of view. } | ||
| Phenixrising Citizen Username: Phenixrising Post Number: 1599 Registered: 9-2004 |
I would guess that their main 'crime' would be to be selling oil to China and Russia and threatening (as did Saddam) to set up an oil bourse trading in Euros as opposed to $$s. Elgato, BINGO! You touched on a very good point. The setting up of oil trading using euros in opposed to dollars. Here's an article I saved. The Real But Unspoken Reasons For The Iraq War From Independent Media Center 2-3-3 Summary Although completely suppressed in the U.S. media, the answer to the Iraq enigma is simple yet shocking - it an an oil CURRENCY war. The Real Reason for this upcoming war is this administration's goal of preventing further OPEC momentum towards the euro as an oil transaction currency standard. However, in order to pre-empt OPEC, they need to gain geo-strategic control of Iraq along with its 2nd largest proven oil reserves. This lengthy essay will discuss the macroeconomics of the "petro-dollar" and the unpublicized but real threat to U.S. economic hegemony from the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency. Read more here: http://www.rense.com/general34/realre.htm Very interesting article. This was published right after illegally invading Iraq. "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." "The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State." - Joseph Goebbels, German Minister of Propaganda, 1933-1945 Sounds like the American people were bamboozled by into Iraq. Unfortunately, you have some of folks and certain MOL posters who still believe the LIE–illegally invading Iraq. | ||
| Dr. Winston O'Boogie Citizen Username: Casey Post Number: 2072 Registered: 8-2003  |
of course the Bush supporters will sneer that this is "tin foil hat" talk. but considering the bogusness of the 23 publicly stated reasons for war in Iraq, this at least deserves discussion. | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 4850 Registered: 5-2001 |
I also wonder if the Personality Cult members want a war because it'll improve Fearless Leader's poll numbers, and improve the chances for Republicans to keep control of both chambers this November. It's a little harsh, but a lot of conservatives have demonstrated that they'll drink the kool-aid no matter what it's served in. | ||
| Rip Van Winkle Citizen Username: Rip_van_winkle Post Number: 1 Registered: 5-2006  |
I've been away from the board for awhile, but I was particularly struck by this thread. I'm very much in agreement with all of you who want to get tough. I especially agree with those of you making the important parallels to Hitler and Chamberlain. Never again can we appease evil. But I am puzzled by the error that you are all making over and over. We're standing up to Iraq, not Iran. Saddam is the threat, and we must deal with him with force if necessary. We cannot have WMD in the hands of madmen. | ||
| Phenixrising Citizen Username: Phenixrising Post Number: 1603 Registered: 9-2004 |
Saddam is no longer a threat, he's in jail. Now go back to sleep. I'll wake you when GWB is out of office. | ||
| ae35unit Citizen Username: Ae35unit Post Number: 45 Registered: 2-2006  |
Rip- Are you on one of those Ambien highs? I haven't read anything so incoherent since I translated one of Southerner's posts into Italian. Maybe it was CJC. Seriously, when you wake up, have some coffee before you post, don't hit the crackpipe! | ||
| ae35unit Citizen Username: Ae35unit Post Number: 46 Registered: 2-2006 |
Elgato- "He also used to forget where he was and sometimes pee in public when he was in Princeton." Fatvsfiction, while I'm at it, that's a classic non response. Why bother? Are you trying to say you're smarter than Einstein? Are you sniffing Rip's crack? I meant smoking... | ||
| Rip Van Winkle Citizen Username: Rip_van_winkle Post Number: 2 Registered: 5-2006 |
I apologize. I seem to have made an error. But before my nap I had been talking about the need to stand up to Saddam and Iraq. Then I come here and read all the same arguments, but it appears you're all talking about Iran. Puzzling indeed, until I realized that I appear to have been napping for four years. It also appears from what I've read that President Bush was re-elected while I was away! Huzzah! | ||
| Foj Citizen Username: Foger Post Number: 1263 Registered: 9-2004 |
Thats nearly as funny as GOP man. LOL- | ||
| Montagnard Citizen Username: Montagnard Post Number: 1948 Registered: 6-2003  |
I doubt if the Russians want a neighbor with nuclear weapons and a government full of religious fanatics. Nor would they want to see a U.S. nuclear attack on that neighbor - any more than the U.S. would want to see a Russian nuclear attack on Canada, Mexico or Venezuela. | ||
| Rip Van Winkle Citizen Username: Rip_van_winkle Post Number: 3 Registered: 5-2006 |
one more thing - do any of you know how much it costs to travel to Baghdad? If we locked up Saddam as you say, it might be worth it to take some vacation there. I'd love to visit so many of the ancient historic sights now that Iraq is a free country. I'll bet by now it's a paradise. perhaps as many of you are saying, we can accomplish the same in Iran! | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 250 Registered: 4-2006 |
a3- My point was that Einstein's considerable intellectual abilities were science specific and not necessarily in the area of world affairs. I recall reading a biography that some of his non-scientific ideas were a bit quirky. Kennedy was a " c" student at Harvard, and Truman was quite average and a business failure. Both men were extremely astute however and successful in world affairs. We will, whoever is left in the world, will be waging war, if there is one, with rocks if Iran is permitted to develop a well stocked nuclear arsenal though. Hoops- Considering your post I would have to write a 20 page tutorial, and I simply don't have the time or patience. The situation we face with Iran is not a normal international relations issue that involves rational give and take and compromise based on self-interest. There is a religious extremist element in Iranian goals that substitutes for the rationality that you would encounter in negotiating with say, the Russians. You could say it has the effect of counter-rationality, as the Iranians could already have had a very Iran-friendly agreement on nuclear development based on the Russian proposals. They simply want unsupervised nuclear weapons. A pre-emptive attack on Iranian nuke sites will spur terrorism, but it will be attempted anyway, given that Iran is already at war with us, and an Iran with nukes will increasing use such acts to force us out of the Middle East with less fear of retailiation. Iran is the largest state sponser of terrorism and was apparently behind the attack on the Marine Compound in Lebanon years ago killing 200 plus Marines, and many other acts affecting US lives and interests. It would be hundreds of times worse if they have nuclear weapons. It doesn't matter whether your President is Bush or Hillary Clinton, any U.S. presence whatsoever in the Middle East is against Iranian interests. However as long as we need to fill up our SUVs, and the developed world needs oil to run its industries, we have to be there. We are the only real superpower left in the world (subject to China's rise) and the Iranians know the Russians cannot project power in their area. They are caught up with the problems of the former Soviet republics. Russia knows it can always work a deal with Iran. So the Iranians want us defeated and out of the Middle East as the first step, and then a world shi'a caliphate under their control as the second step. The Iranian leadership responsible for this international crisis have a completely different mindset then you. Not to sugarcoat it, you and the rest of us are deviants to them in our cultural, religious, and societal values. As such the destruction of our country, in addition to Israel, would be well-justified. In fact to some Iranian mullahs we are lower forms of life as non-muslims. The American religious right are fanatical lightweights in comparison to this bunch. Preventing Iran from developing a nuclear arsenal is the correct step, but one that will have costs. We will have terrorism but by attacking we will evade the greater harm. We have had a free ride in terms of tough times and needed sacrafice as a country for a number of years and now unfortunatly that run is over. If America is to weak to take steps necessary to preserve world and American security than we are clearly on the road to decline and ruin. | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 1265 Registered: 10-2004 |
fvf - then your whole point is to attack because we are afraid. Afraid of the leaders of Iran. Afraid of fanaticism. Afraid period. I could pick apart and parse your post with all its inflamatory statements and inacuracies but its not worth the effort. | ||
| Southerner Citizen Username: Southerner Post Number: 975 Registered: 2-2004 |
Hoops, I agree about making the effort. On a public board like this I laugh at posters who act as if they can "win" a debate. We all have opinions and believe our opinion is right. Now getting back to my normal posts - that is why winning elections are really the most important thing either of the sides can do. For me, I disagree with your opinion. Therefore, I am extremely glad that your philosophy is not in the position to make the call on Iran and my side is. So our little meaningless debates on MOL don't make much of a difference. If the Dems and your philosophy win in 2008 then you can call the shots and I can rant and rave for 4 years (actually I wouldn't because to the victor go the spoils). Whether a Repub or Dem is running the show, we still have some problems with a nuclear Iran. I'm just glad I don't live in the target zone. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 257 Registered: 4-2006 |
Hoops- Fear has nothing to do with it, common sense does.The Iranians have stated very clearly what they intend to do. Westerners applying their form of thinking, see it merely as rhetoric, while occidentals, on the other hand, see it as a mission statement. Such ignorance and misapplied views on other cultures and religions at the level of our government may be the downfall of us all. | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 1270 Registered: 10-2004 |
...but fear had nothing to do with it... Common sense tells you to blow Iran up? alrighty then go right ahead. Dont you worry about anything, I'm sure the Iranian people will be happy with your decision to murder, maim and destroy their lives. | ||
| Darryl Strawberry Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 7138 Registered: 10-2001  |
Hoops, two questions.. Do you hate Jews? Do you hate Israelis? | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 1272 Registered: 10-2004 |
No. No. Do you? | ||
| Darryl Strawberry Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 7139 Registered: 10-2001 |
My feeling is that you do not care for Jews since you are unwilling to do anything at all that could possibly prevent Israel from being destroyed. Crying shame.. | ||
| Oldstone Citizen Username: Rogers4317 Post Number: 686 Registered: 6-2004  |
if you cared about people of jewish faith you wouldn't call them jews. | ||
| Darryl Strawberry Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 7140 Registered: 10-2001 |
The above post is by far the dumbest post in the history of MOL..Beyond stupid. For the record, I assume you would prefer we call them "kikes".... holy ignorance. | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 1273 Registered: 10-2004 |
...things that I can do that would prevent the destruction of Israel... hmmm - let me think about that for one minute. Ok, I have it. I could contribute to the JDL. Or I could post some nonsense on a message board or two calling for Israel to be protected at all costs. Or I could write my senator and congressman expressing how important I consider Israel as a nation. Or I could bluster and foment anxiety among jewish people who really want to see Israel succeed as a nation but arent sure why. Or I could help to invent a force field that would immediately deflect all people who have any evil intentions towards Israel. Or I could show my support for a Israel by moving there and joining a Kibbutz. Or I could live a responsible life and call for peace among all nations. Or I could call for the destruction of Iran by nuclear war. Yeah thats it... | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 3010 Registered: 5-2004 |
OldStone, what would you have us call Jews? Unenlightened Christians? | ||
| Darryl Strawberry Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 7143 Registered: 10-2001 |
Hoops, you're right!..As a "Jew" I'd be happy if you did any of the above. | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 4856 Registered: 5-2001 |
As though nuking Tehran is the least a fellow could do. | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 3011 Registered: 5-2004 |
I think we should nuke Iran, then airlift all the Palestinians to the irradiated section. I bet that would do wonders to ensure the security of Israel. | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 4857 Registered: 5-2001 |
unimpeachable logic from TPM
File it under unintentional honesty. | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 1274 Registered: 10-2004 |
So Straw, I take it that you are no longer questioning whether I hate jews or Israel because I - ...live a responsible life and call for peace among all nations. right? | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 1275 Registered: 10-2004 |
I call for endless congressional investigations! Its my right dammit! | ||
| dave23 Citizen Username: Dave23 Post Number: 1727 Registered: 5-2001 |
By Straw's logic, people who advocate invading Iran want Israel destroyed because doing so would put Israel in greater danger. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 261 Registered: 4-2006 |
Actually while everybody is busy talking about it I expect Israel will do something about it. Israel can protect itself quite well. And Israelis have not gone as soft as Americans. Most of you would not accept the loss of life that Israel has experienced from the Palestinian intifada. Imagine security guards at our shopping centers, coffee houses, and movie houses due to suicide bombers. Would our society collapse if we were them? Sadly the American foreign policy establishment led by Miss Condi has tied their hands. So far- | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4299 Registered: 12-2001  |
The last people who thought Americans had gone soft were Hitler and Tojo. It was a fairly significant judgement error on their part. With regard to Israel, there is a certain mythology about the quality of the IDF. Certainly, the IDF is very good and some of the achievements of the IDF such as recovering from the surprise attacks of the Yom Kippur War and then prevailing in battle rank among the greatest exploits of any military ever. Nevertheless, it is equally true that their opponents have always been 3rd and 4th rate armies. That the Syrians failed to cross the Jordan in October of 1973 is as much a testament to Syrian military ineptitude as it is to Israeli aptitude. I know that Israel has nuclear weapons and can guarantee more than MAD if necessary. However, I do not believe that Israel can completely disrupt the Iranian nuclear program. They can buy time, but they can't turn back time. |
