quosego Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 If the USA attacks Iran, I would say they most likely have streched their luck a bit to far.... They are firstly financially not capable of doing that, and secondly without an good reason, the rest of the world will be pissed. The only option I see is that we should allow Iran to have nuclear weapons if they really insist. The only other possibility is that they'll do something very stupid, and the rest of the world agrees that Iran has to be neutralized. SO are you saying that we should wait for Iran to blow a few million ppl off the face of the world before ANY ONE steps in. I think this is where a lot of ppl from europe and America disagree. Americans like to take care of problems before they get too big. I would sleep better at nite knowing that Iran didnt have any nukes. I dont want to wait for them to blow up a city before any one dones something, remeber Hitler? Invaded half a dozen countries before war was formaly delcared... Dont let Iran getting nukes be the poland that started a world war of the 21st centery. Not quite true, Hitler didn't invade any country's except poland before war was declared. And if I can remember correctly America only joined WW2 because pearl harbor got bombed..... Not much of an pre emptive strike. So I would suggest that in this case we do the same. Wait untill Iran does something stupid and untill then hope that that stupid thing isn't nuking america. Although I can understand your reasoning, IMHO I'm not sure if an pre-emptive strike is an better alternative. There is an probablility that an WW either way is inevitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostShadow Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 Well, i like to error on the side of caution. I also like to think that War is never inevitable. And Geremany annexed austria before WW2, also hitler broke the treaty of versillies (dont remember how to spell that treaty). They are organizing an army, speaking of plans to blow other countries off the "face of the world". I dont know, i could be wrong, but doesnt it seem a littel like wishful thinking to hope that Iran wont attack anyone. dont get me wronge, war is bad. But it is a nessicary evil. And also i feel that it is our duty, not just the United states, but every one; as good world citizens, to remove the impending Iran nuclear threat before it gets out of hand, before the death toll gets to high. Beacuse believe me, the death toll will be much higher if Iran is allowed Nuclear weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostShadow Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 Also, I dont really think it is America that should be worried, the Nukes that Iran would be able to make would not be able to reach us here in the states. So if you want to wait for them to do something, then far be it for me to stand in your way, but in the interest of American safty, i say we attack them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quosego Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 Well, i like to error on the side of caution. I also like to think that War is never inevitable. And Geremany annexed austria before WW2, also hitler broke the treaty of versillies (dont remember how to spell that treaty). They are organizing an army, speaking of plans to blow other countries off the "face of the world". I dont know, i could be wrong, but doesnt it seem a littel like wishful thinking to hope that Iran wont attack anyone. dont get me wronge, war is bad. But it is a nessicary evil. And also i feel that it is our duty, not just the United states, but every one; as good world citizens, to remove the impending Iran nuclear threat before it gets out of hand, before the death toll gets to high. Beacuse believe me, the death toll will be much higher if Iran is allowed Nuclear weapons. It is true that the germans annexed austria, but the allies agreed with that. So yeah if you mean they should have taken their stance right there I agree. But war was inevitable, they just gave the germans some breathing room because they had been terrrorised for so long. But that wasn't what they wanted so it ended up in the second world war. And maybe like in this case, we will just have to hope it won't get to war.... Maybe it'll eventually come to that but I wan't to say that we did everything in our power to make sure it wasn't going to happen. American safety isn't helped by it, because with another invasion there will be a lot more terrrorists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 When all else fails, invade another country, eh? Sure it's not going to present any great military threat to the USA but it's probably going to totally screw America's economy, hell the whole world's. Bit much just because they're spouting the usual anti-Israel line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beawulf Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 Iran wont use a nuclear weapon to strike anyone first. They know it would be the end of them. Israel alone would be capable of totally wiping them out. It isnt realistic to keep saying they are going to be the ones to attack, it is just scaremongering. let them have a nuke and some peace of mind that the US isnt about to invade. That's all this is about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hilander72 Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 I've heard that the US forces are leaving Iraq by the end of 2007... Bush is thinking: Iran it's close... :cyclops: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrDad Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 What happened to the UN? Did it disband without me noticing? The Iran issue is being handled by the UN. All action taken so far is UN sanctioned. The IAEA, a part of the UN, is the agency which has decided to take action concerning Iran's nuclear ambitions. Britian, France, Germany and Russia are the ones dealing with Iran's government in this issue. The US is playing a relatively minor role in this debate. That could change but until it does, it's irrelevant. The real question is: How will the UN, especially the European community, handle this? Perhaps it is time for then to step out of the US' shadow, get over their past and take a larger role on the world stage again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostShadow Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Iran wont use a nuclear weapon to strike anyone first. They know it would be the end of them. Israel alone would be capable of totally wiping them out. It isnt realistic to keep saying they are going to be the ones to attack, it is just scaremongering. let them have a nuke and some peace of mind that the US isnt about to invade. That's all this is about. uhmm, ever hear of suicide bombers? they follow the same religion as the majority in Iran... Musilm. They dont care about life, as long as the get to kill a few infidels. And a nuke would kill a few million... Like I have been saying, Green Berets go in first, place some C4 around the nuclear buildings and blow it up with all the scientist inside. That way they will not be able to continue work. Yes, afterwards America would be hated, but we are already hated so i say we have nothing to loose. This is one of thoes situations where doing nothing is worse than doing something. If we do nothing, there is a posibilty that there will be a large loss of life, and I dont want to see that happen. "One death is a tragidy, a million deaths is a statistic" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Contrary to what you seem to be saying, this is not an action movie where blowing up the reactor will somehow stop another one from ever being built. Not to mention the fact that you're of course making it sound like it's for the good of the world. If we're talking questionable regimes with nuclear programs - how about North Korea? The reason a lot of the world "hates" America is because for the past 50 years, successive American administrations have engaged in foreign policy that's got all the subtlety of a bull in a china shop and the worst part is - they just don't seem to learn. No doubt America has the most powerful military in the world but it's not one that can cope with a long term occupation in Iraq AND a campaign against Iran. The fact Iran is the 2nd largest oil producing country in the world would have a GLOBAL economic impact - pushing up the price of oil considerably... which is just about the last thing you want when you're going to war. Bottom line - America isn't even pushing for sanctions against Iran at the moment because thankfully, the administration isn't quite as naive as you and realise that if Iran decides to curtail its oil production, we'll all feel the pinch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostShadow Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Contrary to what you seem to be saying, this is not an action movie where blowing up the reactor will somehow stop another one from ever being built. Not to mention the fact that you're of course making it sound like it's for the good of the world. If we're talking questionable regimes with nuclear programs - how about North Korea? The reason a lot of the world "hates" America is because for the past 50 years, successive American administrations have engaged in foreign policy that's got all the subtlety of a bull in a china shop and the worst part is - they just don't seem to learn. No doubt America has the most powerful military in the world but it's not one that can cope with a long term occupation in Iraq AND a campaign against Iran. The fact Iran is the 2nd largest oil producing country in the world would have a GLOBAL economic impact - pushing up the price of oil considerably... which is just about the last thing you want when you're going to war. Bottom line - America isn't even pushing for sanctions against Iran at the moment because thankfully, the administration isn't quite as naive as you and realise that if Iran decides to curtail its oil production, we'll all feel the pinch. do you live in America? b/c every day I go out I hear on the radio that America is pushing for sanctions. Iran has been called to the secutiry councel and now sanctions will be imposed if they refuse to give up their nuclear program. I may be wronge here, but you think that America is just gonna sit on its fat rich ass while Iran gets Nukes that could possibly be launched at our large asses? now I call that Naive. And I am not talking about some action movie here. I am talking about ACTION. Launching a pre-emptive strike would be a good start. And dont you worry about your good old buddy Korea. Right now we gotta focus on a single problem here. We are in The middle east, our army is in the middle east and ironicaly so is Iran. NOT KOREA. Maybe if the europeans would like to help their "OFFICAL ALLIES" and support us insetad of impead our march then stuff might actuly go to plan, maybe. I give props to the French and their Nuclear threat to the terrorist. They seem to got the right idea here, lets just see how long they can focus. Seems to me that most Eurpean Countries have an attention span of about 5 min. This war is not even over and when talk about a second war in the middle east with Iran comes up, talk about Korea comes up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrDad Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Bottom line - America isn't even pushing for sanctions against Iran at the moment because thankfully, the administration isn't quite as naive as you and realise that if Iran decides to curtail its oil production, we'll all feel the pinch. Currently, Britian, France and the US are pushing hard for UN sanctions. Russia, and most likely China also, feel it would sanctions to be counterproductive at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beawulf Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 uhmm' date=' ever hear of suicide bombers? they follow the same religion as the majority in Iran... Musilm. They dont care about life, as long as the get to kill a few infidels.[/quote'] So you are essentially saying all muslims are suicide bombers. You must be reading the same racist rhetoric as the other americans who would rather see the mafia control US ports than a legitimate middle east based shipping company Like I have been saying' date=' Green Berets go in first, place some C4 around the nuclear buildings and blow it up with all the scientist inside. That way they will not be able to continue work.[/quote'] lets not forget the nuclear fallout that would ensue. The damage would go beyond destroying the facility and killing the scientists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Currently, Britian, France and the US are pushing hard for UN sanctions. Russia, and most likely China also, feel it would sanctions to be counterproductive at this point. They really aren't trying that hard. Everyone is hoping that somehow the IAEA is magically going to fix it and that sanctions won't be necessary. Trust me - sanctions against Iran are not in anyone's interests. China is going to drag its feet for any sanctions. Hey Ghostshadow - why don't you just get the CIA to topple the current Iran regime... oh wait, America already did change Iran's regime... which precipitated - indirectly - this whole situation, yet you're accusing Europe of having a five minute attention span. If you'd care to direct your attention to post-WW2 American foreign policy, not exactly consistent beyond some short sighted idea of "America's security". Honestly, North Korea has been a far greater threat to global stability for a lot longer than anyone else in the "axis of evil" and some might say, far more likely to have WMDs. At the end of the day, neither Iran, Iraq or North Korea have presented any clear or present danger to the USA. Hell, until the first Gulf War Iraq and the US were tight. It might be trite to trot out the old oil argument but if America invades Iran unilaterally, well let's just say if I was Saudia Arabia then I'd be looking to my borders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurion Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Honestly' date=' North Korea has been a far greater threat to global stability for a lot longer than anyone else in the "axis of evil" and some might say, far more likely to have WMDs.[/quote'] Which is why North Korea will remain untouched and why Iran also wants to have some nukes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyberbob Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 The situation over there is much more complex than all of the Middle East and parts of Asia against us. For one thing, neither India or China will be turning against us within the next 3 years and I don't think that India will EVER turn away from us. Both of them are getting a TON of money from us right now. For the first time ever India has got a decent sized middle class. Even then, 90% of them live off of a dollar or less a day. Still, for the over 300 million people currenttly occupying their middle class (which is more than the population of the US), a lot of them get their jobs from US corps that setup shop over there and our new nuclear deal with them AND our semi-scolding of Pakistan will keep us on their good side for quite a long time to come. China on the other hand is much different. They have setup a strong alliance with Pakistan for developing more nuclear power (China has at least 12 more nuclear power plants planned to start working on for their country this year) and have turned a bit of a cold shoulder to India. Their economy is growing by leaps and bounds and to be honest with you, rather than adapt and learn fast enough to stay on top...we have been kinda stagnating. With that said we can now look at the fact that China is producing more Engineers and scientists than us and EVERY SINGLE major computer software and hardware company is setting up a facility over there. Just to put things in persepective, China has traditionaly had a very very poor area that lives outside of the cities. In these rural areas are people who have usually had contaminated water from local area power and manufacturing plants, bad food and no money. The gov. is now stepping in to create better roads, hospitals and shools in these areas. China's military spending has also been rising very quickly over the last couple of years. In 2006 they are expected to increase military spending by 14.7%. The US gov. has got every last reason to fear them but we will not stay on top as the world's greatest superpower as long as we continue to ignore math and science the way that we have been. At this point I am thinking that we need to very strongly rethink invading Iran. We would most likely not garner the support of China (and if we did it would be very reluctant) and if we were to invade Iran we would most likely see the current leader of Pakistan fall in favor of a new and much more radical government (who would then have control over their nukes). It would take Iran quite some time to get enough enriched uranium to build a nuke anyways and frankly, we have our hands full already. N Korea is finishing testing on their first 3 stage rocket which would give them the range for their nuclear missles that they desire (they would be able to hit mainland US). In S America we have got governments (Chile, Venezuala and one other that I can't think of now) that are extreme left (as far as S American standards go) and who hate us. France is pissed at us, the Northern Europeans don't want to do another pre-emptive strike...I mean....it just wouldn't be smart for us to do this right now. "With great power comes great responsibility" but you know what, we can't police the entire world and to be honest, we dont have much of a track record anymore to claim that we have any right to. With a huge deficit, not the greatest economy we have ever had and Iraq to clean up....we just don't need to be picking any more fights right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhug666 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 hasn't Israil implied that they might pre-emtively strike iranian nuclear facilities? what would we do then ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick Posted March 13, 2006 Author Share Posted March 13, 2006 I've heard that the US forces are leaving Iraq by the end of 2007... Bush is thinking: Iran it's close... :cyclops: it doesnt really mean anything anyway. the area has been turned over to mercenary companies to keep the peace. thats what they dont say on the news. LATEST JUST IN: the american governmaent today decided to make it look like their being nice to the Iraqi people, by leaving. what they didnt mention is that instead of soldiers tho the american government is hiring mercenaries to keep security while the us government plunders oil supplies to pay the mercenaries. well done the mercenaries and, nice one mr bush you fooled the world again:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick Posted March 13, 2006 Author Share Posted March 13, 2006 the issue is that iran has signed a non-proliferation treaty. korea and india (i think) have not. so the technicality is that iran is in breach of treaty. that coupled with an unstable government and doubt about whether the facilities that the iranians are bui;ding are for refining not just power generation. there SEEM to be real issues here. it also seems that iran is using the iraq invasion to try and nulify the worlds interest and sayung that they are being ganged up against. i no longer know what to think. this is a sad day because i feel unable to trust our leaders and have no clear reason to believe either side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Hahaha leave Iraq by 2007 - unlikely. Things are worse than they were a year ago. A lot of people are saying Iraq is in a state of civil war - for invading powers to leave would be a deriliction of the Geneva Convention... but the USA only seems to like these international treaties when they let them do what they want, when they want. Additionally, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty entitles Iran to nuclear technology for power generation. Whether they ARE trying for nuclear weapons... well, I don't think you can believe anyone. There is a dearth of information that is reliable. To be honest - the last person I'm going to believe are the USA government when it comes to accusations of WMDs. It's a public secret that Israel - in all likelihood - has the bomb and 3 guesses who would help them with that... vs. Iraq where the reason for war changed seemingly on a daily basis. I can understand why Iran would use America's actions against Iraq to strengthen their case. America's actions in the Middle East are just so capricious. I just hope China and Russia can save the situation going to hell. And if you can't see the irony of that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now