IRAN - What would you do?
POSTED BY: Jongsstraw
UPDATED: Wednesday, January 8, 2025 06:49
VIEWED: 6354
PAGE 2 of 8
Quote:
The best option is to embargo gasoline shipments. Despite their large amount of oil, Iran has no refining capacity. This would cause the immediate collapse of their economy. Military action would be limited to sinking the Iranian Navy, destroying their Air Force, and bombing their surface to surface missile bases using our stealth aircraft. Losses would be minimal on our side.
That strategy certainly worked in Iraq!
Oh, wait.
Seems you haven't learned a single thing since March 2003. "It'll be easy, and it won't cost us a penny! There's no WAY this could go wrong!"
Mike
Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
I hate the whole f'ing Middle East.
Starting from a position of hate seems no better than what you accuse Iran of.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think Iran needs to have nukes, it will settle the entire region down. Having nukes and using them are two entirely different things, this will provide counter balance to Israels policy of destabilizing anyone they can't control.
If I were President, and I had a 3 am call from Israel... I'd say hey fine, don't involve us, don't cross any territory under our control and it is none of our business... then the next call would be to alert the airforce in Iraq, and NATO to shoot down anybody violating that airspace.
Same goes for Iran...
I think all the media hype and sanction regimes and other associated bullshit has nothing to do with Nukes at all, and will not stop a determined effort anyway ( look at North Korea )
Lets just put an end to the sound bytes and the we're so tough speechs and quit making enemies. As much as Iran has talked tough, so has both the West, and Israel... so let it drop... maybe without the outside bluster and threats moderates in all the involved countrys will have more room to move, and tensions will decrease.
Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists
Lets party like its 1939
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Thanks for giving a straight answer on Israel...you say they get the green light from President NOBC if they decide to attack Iran.
"Por nada."
Always have been, probably always will be, pro-Israel. It may by only 60- 40, or, Hell, 51-49, but they're still the best choice.
Who danced in the streets on 9-12-01 ? vs. who offered to send Search and Rescue teams? and that's only the latest defining moment to ask that question about.
And the threat to them IS real. We have no duty to help them in advance, but if they feel the need to take some action, we do have a responsibility to support them. Not absolutely, and not without criticism, but ultimately, to support them.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The region is unsettled due to different tribal conflicts and the way tribes have been grouped into ridiculous nonsensical countries through the efforts of people who don't have the slightest clue.
The first thing to do is to understand these conflicts. For one, you should never, ever call an Iranian an Arab. Arabs invaded Iran way back in the 10th century and Iranians haven't ever quite gotten over it. Hence the current anti-semitism you see now. Which is not NECESSARILY due to Judaism, but since right now it's convenient for their government to blame much of the region's unsettledness on the presence of Isreal, well... In any case, it's propaganda to gain the support of followers easily manipulated through religion.
I doubt Iran would ever overtly attack Isreal, even with nuclear weapons. They'd still probably get their asses kicked... Assuming Isreal can hold onto its allies, support is increasingly diminishing because of Isreal's own extreme actions. Even so.
One thing I will say in Isreal's favour is that if they haven't used a nuclear weapon, they probably aren't ever going to. Though they'll certainly use other horrific chemical warfare.
The question is if Iran knows this, I think they do. I see this situation as similar to India and Pakistan, when both of them got nukes. I don't think any country is dumb enough to (officially) launch a nuclear missile into another country, which is why India and Pakistan have mostly been in a sort of cold-war sort of stalemate for the past decade.
Proxy groups like terrorist cells, on the other hand, maybe not so much.
So the second thing you do is cut off FBI/CIA support into the drug trade and terrorist cells. I'm going to operate on the assumption here that the FBI and CIA are involved with these cells ONLY in the sense of undercover operations to route out the most dangerous terrorists. I have my doubts that's the case and that terrorist cells are being used internally for manipulation of the public back in America, but maybe that's irrelevant for right now. You cut off the drug money to these terrorist cells (maybe also by legalizing some drugs?), put a stop to the black market weapon and guns trade to the Middle East, and you've done a lot right there to starve these cells.
How do you stop some douchebag got his grubby hands on a nuke you don't want him? You don't send in an army, you send in a team. Frankly, I've been appalled by how unsuccessful we've been at this in the last few decades despite far superior technology, and it makes me wonder if it isn't on purpose.
So, like Frem, I'd say there's really not a whole lot here you can do to discourage Iran, kind of like with North Korea, because ultimately they can argue that they're enriching uranium for energy needs, which means proposing an aggressive response in the international community is humped.
But you can do stuff about the terrorist cells, and a lot more efficiently than sending in the troops.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Kwko, isn't there a significant difference between Iran of today versus Pakistan of 30 years ago?
Is there? What is the "significant difference"?
Quote:
The President of Iran and the religious mullahs are Holocaust deniers.
Well, Ahmedinejad is a denier, but so far as I've heard, the mullahs and the Ayatollah aren't. And Ahmedinejad is a figurehead; the real power in Iran isn't his.
Quote:
They call for Jihad against the West.
So? We (or in this case, Bush) called for "a crusade" against Islam. Is it somehow better when it's YOUR holy war?
Quote:
They have threatened time and again to wipe Israel off the map.
No they haven't. That was a mistranslation that the right-wing media grabbed onto and ran with. Ahmedinejad never said it. What he SAID was that he thought Israel would be lost to the pages of history. Quite a different thing. If I say the Cold War will be consumed by the dust of history, that's not QUITE the same thing as saying that we'll be launching all our missiles in five minutes, is it? Do you see the subtle difference?
Quote:
They have also threatened all Western nations.
No more than "all Western nations" have threatened them. By the way, WE threatened every nation on Earth after 9/11, when "we" (in this case, Bush, again) said, "Either you're with us, or you're against us." That's not even a veiled threat; it's an overt one.
Quote:
They have armed and trained militias in Lebanon and Palestine.
Who hasn't?
Quote:
They also pose a big security threat to friendly-to-the-US Arab countries.
So does America. ;)
Quote:
So I'm wondering what people here would do if they were the President. It may come down one day to a question of life and death of the civilized world. What are you going to do as President? That is the question.
That's being more than just a little bit hyperbolic and melodramatic, isn't it? You - and many others, including "Hero" - seem to have this simplistic notion that the very first thing any nation would do upon acquiring a nuclear bomb would be to detonate it above one of their "enemy's" cities. Need I remind you that in the history of the world, there is only one nation to have ever taken that step? I'm not arguing whether it was the right thing to do at the time or not; I'm just pointing out that it hardly gives us anything like the moral high ground you seem to think we have.
I tend to think of Iranians (and North Koreans, for that matter) as human beings, no more intent on their own immediate destruction than most of the human race is. You seem to think that the very first action they would take would be to attack someone with a vastly superior nuclear arsenal, whether that be us or Israel, or someone else in the area. I take the view that that's just not going to happen. Why? Because such an action IMMEDIATELY results in your entire nation, your people, your history and culture, and every speck of what you are or what you wanted to be, will be gone, forever. Launch one single warhead against Jerusalem or Tel Aviv, and see how that goes. I triple-dog dare ya. :) Try it with Denver or Boston, even. Heck, we're a forgiving bunch, right?
I'm not trying to be insulting, but you seem to have bought into this insane notion you're being sold by the right, that everybody who isn't a god-fearing American is somehow completely inhuman and incapable of logic, and therefore can't be talked to or negotiated with, or empathized with. And I'm here to tell you that you're 100% wrong. Even Reagan knew better than that. (That's why he dealt with the Iranians, remember.)
So, I'm the President, eh? Okay, here's my address to Iran:
"People of Iran: We understand your desire to be seen as a major player on the global stage, and we welcome you. You are pursuing nuclear weapons, as is your right as a sovereign nation, much as it may pain the rest of the world to admit it. But know this, and understand it clearly: any nucle
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ehm... I dunno, Kwicko, to welcome someone while at the same time threatening immediate destruction if they step over a line doesn't exactly seem to work well with nations like Iran and Korea, who already see everything we say and do as a threat. I'd rework your speech a little bit and specifically address terrorists. Proxy groups operating for governments with nukes are the most likely source of an actual nuclear detonation.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Kwko, isn't there a significant difference between Iran of today versus Pakistan of 30 years ago?
Is there? What is the "significant difference"?
Quote:
The President of Iran and the religious mullahs are Holocaust deniers.
Well, Ahmedinejad is a denier, but so far as I've heard, the mullahs and the Ayatollah aren't. And Ahmedinejad is a figurehead; the real power in Iran isn't his.Quote:
They call for Jihad against the West.
So? We (or in this case, Bush) called for "a crusade" against Islam. Is it somehow better when it's YOUR holy war?Quote:
They have threatened time and again to wipe Israel off the map.
No they haven't. That was a mistranslation that the right-wing media grabbed onto and ran with. Ahmedinejad never said it. What he SAID was that he thought Israel would be lost to the pages of history. Quite a different thing. If I say the Cold War will be consumed by the dust of history, that's not QUITE the same thing as saying that we'll be launching all our missiles in five minutes, is it? Do you see the subtle difference?Quote:
They have also threatened all Western nations.
No more than "all Western nations" have threatened them. By the way, WE threatened every nation on Earth after 9/11, when "we" (in this case, Bush, again) said, "Either you're with us, or you're against us." That's not even a veiled threat; it's an overt one.Quote:
They have armed and trained militias in Lebanon and Palestine.
Who hasn't?Quote:
They also pose a big security threat to friendly-to-the-US Arab countries.
So does America. ;)
Quote:
So I'm wondering what people here would do if they were the President. It may come down one day to a question of life and death of the civilized world. What are you going to do as President? That is the question.
That's being more than just a little bit hyperbolic and melodramatic, isn't it? You - and many others, including "Hero" - seem to have this simplistic notion that the very first thing any nation would do upon acquiring a nuclear bomb would be to detonate it above one of their "enemy's" cities. Need I remind you that in the history of the world, there is only one nation to have ever taken that step? I'm not arguing whether it was the right thing to do at the time or not; I'm just pointing out that it hardly gives us anything like the moral high ground you seem to think we have.
I tend to think of Iranians (and North Koreans, for that matter) as human beings, no more intent on their own immediate destruction than most of the human race is. You seem to think that the very first action they would take would be to attack someone with a vastly superior nuclear arsenal, whether that be us or Israel, or someone else in the area. I take the view that that's just not going to happen. Why? Because such an action IMMEDIATELY results in your entire nation, your people, your history and culture, and every speck of what you are or what you wanted to be, will be gone, forever. Launch one single warhead against Jerusalem or Tel Aviv, and see how that goes. I triple-dog dare ya. :) Try it with Denver or Boston, even. Heck, we're a forgiving bunch, right?
I'm not trying to be insulting, but you seem to have bought into this insane notion you're being sold by the right, that everybody who isn't a god-fearing American is somehow completely inhuman and incapable of logic, and therefore can't be talked to or negotiated with, or empathized with. And I'm here to tell you that you're 100% wrong. Even Reagan knew better than that. (That's why he dealt with the Iranians, remember.)
So, I'm the President, eh? Okay, here's my address to Iran:
"People of Iran: We understand your desire to be seen as a major player on the global stage, and we welcome you. You are pursuing nuclear weapons, as is your right as a sovereign nation, much as it may pain the rest of the world to admit it. But know this, and unNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
I actually find much logic in your post. I suppose it all boils down to 2 things: can you trust them enough not to detonate a device somewhere, or pass off a device to some terrorists to detonate somewhere - and - with the knowledge that they believe in the glory of suicide for a martyr's cause, how can they be allowed a first strike capability? How could you live with yourself over the consequences? You have no problem describing and treating Iranians as nice folks, and I'm sure they are. But the fanatical Jihadists are running the country, and have recently violently suppressed marches for some freedom from their own people. If they will shoot a young Iranian girl in the head in the street, do you think they'd hesitate to do far worse to their enemies? You have no problem with drawing moral equivalencies between America and Iran, and that is your right, although I would protest that comparison with every breath in my body until the day I die. Your logic was completely accurate if you were descibing the former Cold War with USSR. Mutually-assured destruction kept both side's heads in check for 50+ years. With these Islamists however, we are dealing with a different set of rules in my opinion. Perhaps TV personalities have whipped-up some frenzied fear on this subject; I do not deny that. I like the speech you would make to Iran if you were President. Again, how could rational people not get the message. Only the insane and irrational would not care much about any words.
You make a lot of good points Jongs. Bottom line, F*CK NO, I do not trust them. And this: "Only the insane and irrational would not care much about any words" is why I would find something of value to trade for compliance. Our words only incite and offend. I don't anyone posting thinks sanctions or threats will work.
Gino suggested - "Lets just put an end to the sound bytes and the we're so tough speechs and quit making enemies. As much as Iran has talked tough, so has both the West, and Israel... so let it drop... maybe without the outside bluster and threats moderates in all the involved countrys will have more room to move, and tensions will decrease."
It's not what they expect, sometimes that throws people off enough t get them to think and act differently.
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Leave Iran the fuck alone, and let them sell us cheap oil. That's all they ever wanted to do.
Back in 2005 gas was 99-cents a gallon.
In many nations gas is 5-cents a gallon...
Besides Iran is full of jews. So you're an anti-Semite if you want to kill Iranians.
Even Iran's president is jewish.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/6256173/Mahmoud-Ahm
adinejad-revealed-to-have-Jewish-past.html
Who sold Iran the nuke junk? Cheney and Rummy. Just like in North Korea.
I do support USA selling nuke bombs to Iran to nuke Israel. Kill all the "jews", let their jew god Molech sort em out. REMEMBER USS LIBERTY! Remember Remember 11 September. They killed Jesus and his disciples too. They stole $25-Trillion by extorting Congress with martial law. They steal EVERY PENNY PAID IN FED INCOME TAXES.
Sing it with me:
KILL THE JEWS!
KILL THE JEWS!
KILL THE JEWS!
Quote:
"Once we squeeze all we can out of the United States, it can dry up and blow away."
-Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, to Jonathan Pollard (convicted traitor and spy in USA) upon exiting Pollard's jail cell
"Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that. I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it."
-Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001
"The FBI has issued a BOLO on suspected terrorists driving a white delivery van from New York City to the Mexican border. The suspects are using Israeli passports. They are armed and dangerous."
-Knox County TN Emergency 911 Dispatch, Sept 11, 2001, 11am EST
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0622-05.htm
The first terrorist bombers arrested in USA on 9/11/2001 were Israeli Mossad says Fox News. There were over 500 of them, infiltrating US military bases and all police agencies. They were dressed as Muslims, "dancing in happiness" while watching and videotaping the World Trade Center explode. All were allowed to leave USA, and none were tortured to confess at Gitmo.
youtube.com/watch?v=tRfhUezbKLw
youtube.com/watch?v=JWpWc_suPWo
www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisraelis.html
14 Israeli "art students" were living in World Trade Center Towers with forged Construction Passes, connection to Mossad spy ring infiltrating every US military base and police agency in USA, arrested and deported from USA after 9/11/2001:
http://www.rense.com/general87/14_1.htm
youtube.com/watch?v=edxYE9sZ5WI
Israel police 'arrest Mossad spy on training exercise' planting car bomb
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8377746.stm
2 Israeli Mossad agents were arrested with explosive residue in their white truck in Erwin TN nuke plant.
http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=7238
Israel stole 400 nukes from USA incl ORNL. Now Israel runs security for all nuke factories in USA.
"Intelligence chatter from two agencies, Israel Mossad and one other, discussed their desire to nuke nine US cities in 2009, 'to teach America a lesson'. Within days of our broadcasts, Newsmax came out with a story saying the same thing, but blaming AllCIAduh, er, Al Qaeda."
-Dr. Cass Ingram, The Power Hour radio show, 1470 am Alcoa TN, 3 Feb 2009
Nuclear Attacks on 7 U.S. Cities in 2009: New York, Washington, D.C., Las Vegas, Miami, Boston, Houston, and Los Angeles, says Bush PR firm Newsmax
http://w3.newsmax.com/a/dayofislam/
Jews did 9/11
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_STF.htm
Human sacrifice to jew god Molech at kosher Bohemian Grove in Monto Rio California
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME