Community > Politics, Current News & Events

Topic: 20 reasons NOT to attack Iran
HotRodDeluxe Joined Sun 05/06/12 Posts: 2743	Tue 08/28/12 03:42 PM Edited by HotRodDeluxe on Tue 08/28/12 03:44 PM
As for wwlll, 3 does follow 1 and 2, thereby more then possible. Your numeracy is impeccable, however, the current situation in the ME doesn't necessarily denote WW3 'is around the corner'. Please, let us not buy into the hysteria. Striking a sovereign country without provecation is a declaration of war. A given. Unlike the early 80s Libya, Iran has upgraded their military capabilities since the war with Iraq. Of which they held back the American backed Saddam Hussien and the Isreali support as well. Its shamefull that Isreal would strike knowing full well the implications. I think you overestimate the implications of Israel's supposed strike on Iran's enrichment facilities. Iran would not risk a war with the war machine that we and Nato and Isreal are, however their stand is obviousely defensive. Because anyone with common sence know that Iran is not going to attack anyone unless they are provoked. Iran is not known for its political stability and it has demonstrated in the past that it can be ruled by an extremist group (note: the bellicose nature of Khomeini's rule after the deposition of the Shah). Bombing their instalations is a declaration of war, if Isreal does carry out her threats, then Isreal will stand as the starter of a great war that can indeed escalate in to a great major war. It is a possiblity, however in light of what we know at this point in time, highly unlikely. Call it wwlll, or call it a hoedown, it will be big in that others will be involved. If Isreal is truly interested in war as a solution, they are morevthen capable of going it alone. If jews here or abroad feel strongly of having Isreal bomb Iranian instalations, thereby starting a war, then you go fight or send your boys to fight and die, for what? Because Isreal feels threatened. Iran is in no position to start a war, but if one thinks they have been sitting on their thumbs, ones mind must be on pause. They are indeed capable of defending, and will. This is about shifts in the balance of power in the ME. You need to appreciate current events in the correct context. Arab states are destabilising at the moment with the rise of Sunni influence in government; Iran, although not an Arab state is exploiting this turmoil in order to gain influence in the region; Israel sees this as a threat to her survival at the moment and will respond accordingly. With the threat of Hezbollah gaining power to the north and Iran developing nuclear capabilities to the west, her position is looking somewhat tenuous to certain factions within the Knesset. With history supporting this fear, Israel may strike at the nuclear facilities in order to stall the programme, and setback Iran's designs on regional supremacy. Again, there is no certainty that this will be a reality at the moment.

Ras427 Joined Wed 08/08/12 Posts: 1516	Tue 08/28/12 04:07 PM
Hotroddelux, you could interpret it as a rant or incoherant as you wish, but that facts and just plain logic would clearly suggest that attacking the instalations of a sovereign country is an act of war, in which common sence clearly would indicate a responce. How you interpret this as a rant or incoherant is beyond irrational, but down right foolish. Common sence also would suggest that Iran is indeed a strategic landlock, my military experiance indeed convince me of that fact. It would be even more illogical to think that the US would not aide Isreal, an ally, and more irrational is to think that a war would not pull China and Russia into a conflict that obviousely threaten or in the least undermine their own national security by a war in and around their boder. You call it rants, I call it common sence that actually requires some knowledge on foreign policy. Finally the situation IS NOT as complicated as you say. Just plain logic is required to understand the true essence of the middle east, he who controls that region, will be positioned to secure the most strategic peice of realistate in the world, not complicated at all.

HotRodDeluxe Joined Sun 05/06/12 Posts: 2743	Tue 08/28/12 04:20 PM Edited by HotRodDeluxe on Tue 08/28/12 04:26 PM
Hotroddelux, you could interpret it as a rant or incoherant as you wish, but that facts and just plain logic would clearly suggest that attacking the instalations of a sovereign country is an act of war, in which common sence clearly would indicate a responce. How you interpret this as a rant or incoherant is beyond irrational, but down right foolish. Common sence also would suggest that Iran is indeed a strategic landlock, my military experiance indeed convince me of that fact. It would be even more illogical to think that the US would not aide Isreal, an ally, and more irrational is to think that a war would not pull China and Russia into a conflict that obviousely threaten or in the least undermine their own national security by a war in and around their boder. You call it rants, I call it common sence that actually requires some knowledge on foreign policy. Finally the situation IS NOT as complicated as you say. Just plain logic is required to understand the true essence of the middle east, he who controls that region, will be positioned to secure the most strategic peice of realistate in the world, not complicated at all. Whatever Dude, clearly you have not comprehended my last post accurately. "This is about shifts in the balance of power in the ME. You need to appreciate current events in the correct context. Arab states are destabilising at the moment with the rise of Sunni influence in government; Iran, although not an Arab state is exploiting this turmoil in order to gain influence in the region; Israel sees this as a threat to her survival at the moment and will respond accordingly. With the threat of Hezbollah gaining power to the north and Iran developing nuclear capabilities to the west, her position is looking somewhat tenuous to certain factions within the Knesset. With history supporting this fear, Israel may strike at the nuclear facilities in order to stall the programme, and setback Iran's designs on regional supremacy. Again, there is no certainty that this will be a reality at the moment."

metalwing Joined Fri 11/14/08 Posts: 26218	Tue 08/28/12 04:35 PM
One reason to strike Iran's nuclear facilities... ... no other choice.

JOHNN111 Joined Wed 05/13/09 Posts: 9273	Tue 08/28/12 04:49 PM
One reason to strike Iran's nuclear facilities... ... no other choice. Unfortunatly, countries who are armed to the teeth think this way... shame. 90 days... everyday is 1% closer to an attack... God help us!

Ras427 Joined Wed 08/08/12 Posts: 1516	Tue 08/28/12 05:01 PM
Hotrod delux, I have no problem with comprehension, my mind works well. My post clearly indicated my responce was to your own incomprehension towards the "rant and incoherant " comment you made. As to your latest post of which I read after I responded was indeed understood, although I agree in that there is a dynamic of power shifting. However ill continue to stand firm in my position regarding the true essence of the historical strategic significance of the region. Iran already has a strategic dominance in that they and the Saudis share the rights to the Strait of Harmuz. This presents the same dynamics as did the vietnam conflict. Both encroach on Chinas national security and undermine border integrity. China backs Iran as they did N. Vietnam. America supported S. Vietnam as we do Isreal. Difference being our premise for war then was spreading democracy against the evils of communism, today the boogieman is Islam and Iran as was Russia and communism was. The pattern is the same.

JOHNN111 Joined Wed 05/13/09 Posts: 9273	Tue 08/28/12 05:11 PM
Indeed Vietnam... was Frances war! Americans just took it over... and paid a heavy price!

HotRodDeluxe Joined Sun 05/06/12 Posts: 2743	Tue 08/28/12 05:58 PM Edited by HotRodDeluxe on Tue 08/28/12 06:17 PM
Hotrod delux, I have no problem with comprehension, my mind works well. My post clearly indicated my responce was to your own incomprehension towards the "rant and incoherant " comment you made. Ok, slight misunderstanding as to which post you responded to. My original post stands, as the specific sentence I responded to was an emotional diatribe without any specific focus. I did not assign that status to the whole post. Is your phone's format making this difficult? As to your latest post of which I read after I responded was indeed understood, although I agree in that there is a dynamic of power shifting. However ill continue to stand firm in my position regarding the true essence of the historical strategic significance of the region. Iran already has a strategic dominance in that they and the Saudis share the rights to the Strait of Harmuz. I never said otherwise, but Iran is looking toward greater regional supremacy than it already enjoys, that much is clear. I made no reference to the Hormuz Straits as that is a given. Iran is clearly trying to extend its regional influence by exploiting the power shift in the countries affected by the Arab Spring-surely with your vast knowledge of foreign affairs this is self-evident? This presents the same dynamics as did the vietnam conflict. Both encroach on Chinas national security and undermine border integrity. China backs Iran as they did N. Vietnam. America supported S. Vietnam as we do Isreal. Difference being our premise for war then was spreading democracy against the evils of communism, today the boogieman is Islam and Iran as was Russia and communism was. The pattern is the same. A simplistic evaluation. The 'bogeyman' analogy ignores the fact that Israel's very existence may be challenged in this changing political landscape. In addition, the disruption in oil supply to the world produced by this scenario will be of enormous influence in finding a diplomatic solution. It is clear you and the OP believe in the region erupting into some form of apocalyptic inferno, whereas, I don't. I wonder, and don't take offence by this question, that if religious persuasions are influencing your stance?

HotRodDeluxe Joined Sun 05/06/12 Posts: 2743	Tue 08/28/12 06:11 PM Edited by HotRodDeluxe on Tue 08/28/12 06:12 PM
One reason to strike Iran's nuclear facilities... ... no other choice. Unfortunatly, countries who are armed to the teeth think this way... shame. 90 days... everyday is 1% closer to an attack... God help us! I'll place a bet against the 'apocalypse' happening if you're interested?

Ras427 Joined Wed 08/08/12 Posts: 1516	Tue 08/28/12 06:46 PM Edited by Ras427 on Tue 08/28/12 06:56 PM
Hotroddelux, yes my phone is the only device ill use for this median, as my computer needs desperate upgrading, funds limit that upgrading for now. As for my phone, its difficult as the keypad is indeed small, some times I dont bother correcting spelling errors, still learning this corny jack. Nevertheless, some of your points have validity. However religion plays some role, but history clearly indicate that the regions strategic position along with Americas medling and desire to control this region is the true reasons for the current climate, and Jews political clout here will insure our presence. Isreal has a right to exist, but calling for recognition from the region is only to then legitimize their own desire to dominate and control the region. Isreal need not be validated, denial of thier legitimacy will do little to prevent Isreals own quest to dominate,and all NATO COUNTRIES stand to gain from Isreals dominance, with no gsins if Iran is to dominate. To answer your question about religion influancing my stance, no not really. I understand that religion is but a smoke screen we exploit as to create a target for our masses so as to justify a crusade type envirement. Case in point is the climate of fear here in the states. Politicians mostly from the right continuasly push this fear of Sharia law. Im not saying America does not have legitimate enemies, but those enemies are directly do to our own foreign policy. Our country has only been overthrown and toppled once, and it was not Muslims or Arabs. Can we honostly say the America has not overthrown any? Of cours not, as you well know, we did overthrow the goverment of Mohammad Mossadegh and placed the Shah, I believe the premise then was not nuclear enrichment.

Ras427 Joined Wed 08/08/12 Posts: 1516	Tue 08/28/12 07:04 PM
Indeed Vietnam... was Frances war! Americans just took it over... and paid a heavy price! true John, the 2nd world war provided most colonial countries the opportunity to regain control of thier countries. Europe, especially France were forced to concentrate on the war in Europe.

Ras427 Joined Wed 08/08/12 Posts: 1516	Tue 08/28/12 07:27 PM
No country spreads hate more consistently than Iran. Perhaps.... But, not one country has spreads WAR as much as good ol USA huh? 1947-49 - U.S. helps command extreme-right Greece party in Civil War. Death toll: about 70,000 contributed by US-backed forces 1948-54 - CIA directs war against Huk Rebellion in Philippines. Death toll: about 11,000 1950 - Independence movement crushed in Ponce, Puerto Rico Death toll: conservative historians estimated about 8,000 peasants 1950-53 - Korean War Death toll: about 1,776,000 1952 - CIA overthrows Democracy in Iran, installs Shah Death toll: about 20,000 1954 - CIA directs invasion of Guatemala after new Democracy there nationalized U.S.-occupied lands Death toll: about 140,000 missing and dead 1958 - In Lebanon, marine occupation against rebels Death toll: about 2,000 1960-75+ - Vietnam War including Cambodia and Laos Death toll: about 4,502,000 including civilians and resulting famines (conservative estimates) 1961 - Cuba's Bay of Pigs Invasion fails Death toll: about 4,000 1963 - In Iraq, CIA organizes coup against President and agrees to back formerly exiled Saddam Death toll: about 7,000 including civilians 1964 - In Panama, troops kill protesters against US-owned canal Death toll: about 1,000 1965 - CIA assists Indonesian coup Death toll: about 900,000 1966 - Troops and bombers threaten pro-communist parties in Dominican Republic Death toll: about 3,000 1966-96 - Green berets in Guatemala against rebels, US backs pro-American forces in country until 1996 Death toll: about 200,000 1970 - Directs marine invasion of Oman Death toll: about 2,000 1973 - CIA directs coup to oust elected Marxist president in Chile Death toll: 30,000... 3,000 later disappeared under US-installed dictator 1976-92 - CIA assists South-African rebels in Angola Death toll: median estimate at 550,000 1981-90 - CIA directs Contra invasions in Nicaragua Death toll: median estimate at 30,000 1982-84 - Marines expel Lebanese rebels, aided by Israel Death toll: 40,000 1987-88 - US intervenes for Iraq against Iran Death toll: about 150,000 during time-frame, 100,000 during Desert Storm, 350,000 from resulting famine 1989 - US invades to oust CIA-installed Panamanian government gone rouge Death toll: 2,000 1992-94 - US-led occupation of Somalia during civil war Death toll: 50,000 in combat, 300,000 by starvation 2001+ - US Occupies Afghanistan Death toll: 120,000 including civilians and combatants and resulting Opium Wars 2003+ - Iraqi War Death toll: 665,000 also by starvation, displacement TOTAL: 10,431,000 These examples are but a few of the many of which present a consistant patern of our involvment in international gangsterism. Unfortunatly these and other examples are often deemed as America bashing. As opposed to seeing it as is. I on the other hand have no problem eccepting the reality that we are an empire. And empires always need to replenish its ranks. And will continue to, at least until we crash, greed, and the quest for power always crash,. And our children will inherit the fall out. Our names today eill reek of stench to our children tomorrow who will call us dumb cowards who didnt have the courage to stand up to their own country. All empires must fall, eventually, only ours will leave a huge crater that will take much of the world with us.

Ras427 Joined Wed 08/08/12 Posts: 1516	Tue 08/28/12 07:31 PM
One reason to strike Iran's nuclear facilities... ... no other choice. Unfortunatly, countries who are armed to the teeth think this way... shame. 90 days... everyday is 1% closer to an attack... God help us! I'll place a bet against the 'apocalypse' happening if you're interested? If I was a betting man, id take you up on that offer.

HotRodDeluxe Joined Sun 05/06/12 Posts: 2743	Tue 08/28/12 07:46 PM Edited by HotRodDeluxe on Tue 08/28/12 07:50 PM
No country spreads hate more consistently than Iran. Perhaps.... But, not one country has spreads WAR as much as good ol USA huh? 1947-49 - U.S. helps command extreme-right Greece party in Civil War. Death toll: about 70,000 contributed by US-backed forces 1948-54 - CIA directs war against Huk Rebellion in Philippines. Death toll: about 11,000 1950 - Independence movement crushed in Ponce, Puerto Rico Death toll: conservative historians estimated about 8,000 peasants 1950-53 - Korean War Death toll: about 1,776,000 1952 - CIA overthrows Democracy in Iran, installs Shah Death toll: about 20,000 1954 - CIA directs invasion of Guatemala after new Democracy there nationalized U.S.-occupied lands Death toll: about 140,000 missing and dead 1958 - In Lebanon, marine occupation against rebels Death toll: about 2,000 1960-75+ - Vietnam War including Cambodia and Laos Death toll: about 4,502,000 including civilians and resulting famines (conservative estimates) 1961 - Cuba's Bay of Pigs Invasion fails Death toll: about 4,000 1963 - In Iraq, CIA organizes coup against President and agrees to back formerly exiled Saddam Death toll: about 7,000 including civilians 1964 - In Panama, troops kill protesters against US-owned canal Death toll: about 1,000 1965 - CIA assists Indonesian coup Death toll: about 900,000 1966 - Troops and bombers threaten pro-communist parties in Dominican Republic Death toll: about 3,000 1966-96 - Green berets in Guatemala against rebels, US backs pro-American forces in country until 1996 Death toll: about 200,000 1970 - Directs marine invasion of Oman Death toll: about 2,000 1973 - CIA directs coup to oust elected Marxist president in Chile Death toll: 30,000... 3,000 later disappeared under US-installed dictator 1976-92 - CIA assists South-African rebels in Angola Death toll: median estimate at 550,000 1981-90 - CIA directs Contra invasions in Nicaragua Death toll: median estimate at 30,000 1982-84 - Marines expel Lebanese rebels, aided by Israel Death toll: 40,000 1987-88 - US intervenes for Iraq against Iran Death toll: about 150,000 during time-frame, 100,000 during Desert Storm, 350,000 from resulting famine 1989 - US invades to oust CIA-installed Panamanian government gone rouge Death toll: 2,000 1992-94 - US-led occupation of Somalia during civil war Death toll: 50,000 in combat, 300,000 by starvation 2001+ - US Occupies Afghanistan Death toll: 120,000 including civilians and combatants and resulting Opium Wars 2003+ - Iraqi War Death toll: 665,000 also by starvation, displacement TOTAL: 10,431,000 These examples are but a few of the many of which present a consistant patern of our involvment in international gangsterism. Unfortunatly these and other examples are often deemed as America bashing. As opposed to seeing it as is. I on the other hand have no problem eccepting the reality that we are an empire. And empires always need to replenish its ranks. And will continue to, at least until we crash, greed, and the quest for power always crash,. And our children will inherit the fall out. Our names today eill reek of stench to our children tomorrow who will call us dumb cowards who didnt have the courage to stand up to their own country. All empires must fall, eventually, only ours will leave a huge crater that will take much of the world with us. So, you follow the 'America as an Imperialist' power rhetoric. Be that as it may, it is not true and if you understood the meaning of the term you'd realise that. The gangsterism claim ignores the role the US plays in the UN and on the Security Council. All that considered, the language of your posts suggests an emotional response as opposed to an analytical stance. Good luck with that, but I feel like I'm trying to discuss the issues with fundamentalists, therefore, there's nothing for me here.

HotRodDeluxe Joined Sun 05/06/12 Posts: 2743	Tue 08/28/12 07:47 PM
One reason to strike Iran's nuclear facilities... ... no other choice. Unfortunatly, countries who are armed to the teeth think this way... shame. 90 days... everyday is 1% closer to an attack... God help us! I'll place a bet against the 'apocalypse' happening if you're interested? If I was a betting man, id take you up on that offer. So, would I. I'll remind you of this in 3 months.

Ras427 Joined Wed 08/08/12 Posts: 1516	Tue 08/28/12 07:54 PM
Way more concerned about the repercussions of a unilateral strike on a non-nuclear by a nuclear state. Withdraw your unwavering support and watch peace unfold for the US. Your paranoia is getting the best of you mate Every Iranian knows... 1 launch... and it's lights out for them. What every Iranian knows doesn't matter. It is what the ruling few plan to do and how many of their people they are willing to sacrifice that matters. During the Iran/Iraq war, Iran would send hundreds of thousands of barely armed soldiers into fields of machine gun fire, apparently just to use up Iraq's ammunition. I read an article a while back that said Iran might be willing to sacrifice between one and two thirds of their population just to rid the Earth of Israel, knowing that if they did so they would be leaders of the Muslin world. Israel could not withstand a single strike by a nuke. They would immediately be overwhelmed.

Ras427 Joined Wed 08/08/12 Posts: 1516	Tue 08/28/12 08:04 PM
No country spreads hate more consistently than Iran. Perhaps.... But, not one country has spreads WAR as much as good ol USA huh? 1947-49 - U.S. helps command extreme-right Greece party in Civil War. Death toll: about 70,000 contributed by US-backed forces 1948-54 - CIA directs war against Huk Rebellion in Philippines. Death toll: about 11,000 1950 - Independence movement crushed in Ponce, Puerto Rico Death toll: conservative historians estimated about 8,000 peasants 1950-53 - Korean War Death toll: about 1,776,000 1952 - CIA overthrows Democracy in Iran, installs Shah Death toll: about 20,000 1954 - CIA directs invasion of Guatemala after new Democracy there nationalized U.S.-occupied lands Death toll: about 140,000 missing and dead 1958 - In Lebanon, marine occupation against rebels Death toll: about 2,000 1960-75+ - Vietnam War including Cambodia and Laos Death toll: about 4,502,000 including civilians and resulting famines (conservative estimates) 1961 - Cuba's Bay of Pigs Invasion fails Death toll: about 4,000 1963 - In Iraq, CIA organizes coup against President and agrees to back formerly exiled Saddam Death toll: about 7,000 including civilians 1964 - In Panama, troops kill protesters against US-owned canal Death toll: about 1,000 1965 - CIA assists Indonesian coup Death toll: about 900,000 1966 - Troops and bombers threaten pro-communist parties in Dominican Republic Death toll: about 3,000 1966-96 - Green berets in Guatemala against rebels, US backs pro-American forces in country until 1996 Death toll: about 200,000 1970 - Directs marine invasion of Oman Death toll: about 2,000 1973 - CIA directs coup to oust elected Marxist president in Chile Death toll: 30,000... 3,000 later disappeared under US-installed dictator 1976-92 - CIA assists South-African rebels in Angola Death toll: median estimate at 550,000 1981-90 - CIA directs Contra invasions in Nicaragua Death toll: median estimate at 30,000 1982-84 - Marines expel Lebanese rebels, aided by Israel Death toll: 40,000 1987-88 - US intervenes for Iraq against Iran Death toll: about 150,000 during time-frame, 100,000 during Desert Storm, 350,000 from resulting famine 1989 - US invades to oust CIA-installed Panamanian government gone rouge Death toll: 2,000 1992-94 - US-led occupation of Somalia during civil war Death toll: 50,000 in combat, 300,000 by starvation 2001+ - US Occupies Afghanistan Death toll: 120,000 including civilians and combatants and resulting Opium Wars 2003+ - Iraqi War Death toll: 665,000 also by starvation, displacement TOTAL: 10,431,000 [/qu ote] HOTRODDELUX, the above is accurate, and still fall short. Yes this leads me to believe as I do. And you never had legs nor will, as denial impedes sound reasoning. You are correct, you are done .

HotRodDeluxe Joined Sun 05/06/12 Posts: 2743	Tue 08/28/12 08:07 PM
HOTRODDELUX, the above is accurate, and still fall short. Yes this leads me to believe as I do. And you never had legs nor will, as denial impedes sound reasoning. You are correct, you are done . I thought you understood foreign affairs? My mistake.

Ras427 Joined Wed 08/08/12 Posts: 1516	Tue 08/28/12 08:19 PM
The above is clearly imperialism if thats what you want to call it. However covert operations is the proper term used today. Any which way, its international gangsterism, if one does not understand that, then perhaps another subject is better suited for dialogue, as this one seems well above comprhension to many. Especially the masses hooked on reality tv.

Ras427 Joined Wed 08/08/12 Posts: 1516	Tue 08/28/12 08:28 PM
HOTRODDELUX, the above is accurate, and still fall short. Yes this leads me to believe as I do. And you never had legs nor will, as denial impedes sound reasoning. You are correct, you are done . I thought you understood foreign affairs? My mistake. im sure your post has a point, although obviousely pointless, im sure you will expound. More then foreign affairs, I understand power and its effect. Those dates listed above is foreign affairs, gangsterism is foreign affairs. They are foreign, and affairs of self interests backed by military. Quite simple if one would remove the blinders.