Iran willing to attack on U.S. soil

[monovillage]

War doesn't work like that. It's not waged against individuals but nations including those who mean us no harm. It always brings about unintended consequences. Regardless of that it was a squandering of resources and lives, and no enemy could have more effectively drawn our attention away from or reduced our ability to contend effectively in what should have been our sole focus, Afghanistan.

imo we shouldn't still be in Afghanistan either.

 

[JTsyo]

No, the mistake we made in Iraq was trying to nation build, we should have gone in, killed Hussein and his sons and got out. End of story.

You do something like that with a regional power and the you could destabilize the entire ME. Who do you think would fill in the power vacuum, civilians with democracy on their minds or a warlord type?

 

[monovillage]

You do something like that with a regional power and the you could destabilize the entire ME. Who do you think would fill in the power vacuum, civilians with democracy on their minds or a warlord type?

Not my concern. Do you think the new democracies arising in the ME are more favorable to the U.S. then the regimes they replaced?

 

[momeNt]

Not my concern. Do you think the new democracies arising in the ME are more favorable to the U.S. then the regimes they replaced?

If you are talking about Iraq, then absolutely the US establishment absolutely views that as a victory. Iraq no longer sought to price its oil in Euros and its foreign reserves were all moved from Euros to USD.

If Iran is close to a nuclear weapon then expect to hear more of this propaganda about them willing to attack on US soil, or them having spies in the USA because there will be no way to enforce the use of the dollar by invading Iraq if they are ready and willing to use a nuke.

Iran gets nuke = Iran gets to pick their currency to trade in free of threats, unless the establishment is reckless enough to risk nuclear war to preserve dollar hegemony.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

imo we shouldn't still be in Afghanistan either.

And I agree. Something to consider. After 9/11 there was considerable good will towards the US. Certain moments in history allow the turning of tragedy into something which can give meaning to loss, to make progress against our attackers in ways bullets never will. There may never be such an opportunity in our lifetimes and I hope one is never again wasted as badly.

Consider Iran. It was the one nation who's people protested in our support. It was a time when political moderates favorably disposed were gaining in government. That was the time to reach out and engage. Well engage we did. We alienated the Iranian people who take as well to insults as Texans do to their state. Then we try to bully others into backing the Iraq war. What happened? We vindicated what the extremists who were in the process of being marginalized, who then were not only make an incredible comeback, but managed to change the election rules to prevent future challenges.

You'll not find that I'm a Craig who tosses angst against the US at every opportunity but I have good reason to believe that my analysis has merit. GWB was the key person who made Iran the headache it is today. He is the perfect example of why applying the biggest stick first can be disastrous.

 

[al981]

Yet you can not point to any oil actually being pumped for US interests.

Remember, the US companies were actually shut out of the awards for Iraq oil & pumping

irrelevant. the US does not need to consume iraqi oil in order to protect its economy. it only needs to control and / or rid countries and leaders that are capable of shocking supply.

also, funny how you ducked bolton's admission for months.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

irrelevant. the US does not need to consume iraqi oil in order to protect its economy. it only needs to control and / or rid countries and leaders that are capable of shocking supply.

also, funny how you ducked bolton's admission for months.

And yet control hasn't happened. Shoots that theory all to hell. The clip of bolton has no context but yes, the Western world depends on the flow of oil and when Saddam threatened it by his actions in the gulf war he was kicked out of Kuwait. Fast forwarding, neither Afghanistan nor Iraq has done anything to secure oil and indeed have driven costs up. BTW Bolton doesn't tell Obama what to do and his opinions are his own, not that of the conspiracy du jour.

 

[al981]

And yet control hasn't happened. Shoots that theory all to hell. The clip of bolton has no context but yes, the Western world depends on the flow of oil and when Saddam threatened it by his actions in the gulf war he was kicked out of Kuwait. Fast forwarding, neither Afghanistan nor Iraq has done anything to secure oil and indeed have driven costs up. BTW Bolton doesn't tell Obama what to do and his opinions are his own, not that of the conspiracy du jour.

of course control has been established, including large military bases and the removal of entire enemy armies. control of resources have also been removed from saddam.

funny how US troops were only pulled in an election year

there is no claim of bolton telling obama what to do. he is merely describing the true reasons for the invasions post 9/11, contrary to the denials and other proven lies spewed on national television. keep up.

 

[momeNt]

And yet control hasn't happened. Shoots that theory all to hell. The clip of bolton has no context but yes, the Western world depends on the flow of oil and when Saddam threatened it by his actions in the gulf war he was kicked out of Kuwait. Fast forwarding, neither Afghanistan nor Iraq has done anything to secure oil and indeed have driven costs up. BTW Bolton doesn't tell Obama what to do and his opinions are his own, not that of the conspiracy du jour.

Iraq in 2003 switched from Euros to USD for its oil, a move that required the removal of Saddam. Costs have gone up in oil mostly due to dollar devaluation also.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Iraq in 2003 switched from Euros to USD for its oil, a move that required the removal of Saddam. Costs have gone up in oil mostly due to dollar devaluation also.

Actually, switching to the Euro cost Saddam and Iraq quite a bit of money. He gained absolutely nothing by switching over to the Euro. Instead he cost his country millions purely so he could thrust his middle finger in the air. Not exactly a smart move on his part. Then again, Saddam wasn't known for giving two shits about the majority of people in Iraq.

http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1095057.html

 

[monovillage]

And I agree. Something to consider. After 9/11 there was considerable good will towards the US. Certain moments in history allow the turning of tragedy into something which can give meaning to loss, to make progress against our attackers in ways bullets never will. There may never be such an opportunity in our lifetimes and I hope one is never again wasted as badly.

Consider Iran. It was the one nation who's people protested in our support. It was a time when political moderates favorably disposed were gaining in government. That was the time to reach out and engage. Well engage we did. We alienated the Iranian people who take as well to insults as Texans do to their state. Then we try to bully others into backing the Iraq war. What happened? We vindicated what the extremists who were in the process of being marginalized, who then were not only make an incredible comeback, but managed to change the election rules to prevent future challenges.

You'll not find that I'm a Craig who tosses angst against the US at every opportunity but I have good reason to believe that my analysis has merit. GWB was the key person who made Iran the headache it is today. He is the perfect example of why applying the biggest stick first can be disastrous.

It's my opinion that some of the feel good support was just the typical media hyperbole. Rah rah kind of puff stuff that makes it onto the networks.

A huge mistake to try to bully other nations into supporting us in the Iraq retaliation, or to try to justify our actions with the WMD spiel. If it's in our interests to take action, then we should take action and let the chips fall where they will.

I fully supported President Obama's action in Pakistan when he had Osama assassinated with a military strike force. It was in our interests to do it, we did it, screw off if you don't like it.

 

[momeNt]

Actually, switching to the Euro cost Saddam and Iraq quite a bit of money. He gained absolutely nothing by switching over to the Euro. Instead he cost his country millions purely so he could thrust his middle finger in the air. Not exactly a smart move on his part. Then again, Saddam wasn't known for giving two shits about the majority of people in Iraq.

http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1095057.html

It cost him more than money, it cost him his life. The Euro may not have been the best currency to switch over to, but if he had been successful in getting OPEC to agree to pricing their oil in something other than USD, the USA would have been in a world of hurt.

For some nice economic reasoning on why it's so important to the USA to have goods priced in dollars read here, http://www.energybulletin.net/node/12463

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

It cost him more than money, it cost him his life. The Euro may not have been the best currency to switch over to, but if he had been successful in getting OPEC to agree to pricing their oil in something other than USD, the USA would have been in a world of hurt.

What cost him his life was screwing his own people over for years. Keep in mind that it was Iraqis that put him on trial, determined him guilty, then strung him up by the neck, not the US.

For some nice economic reasoning on why it's so important to the USA to have goods priced in dollars read here, http://www.energybulletin.net/node/12463

Seriously? A nearly 6 year old article that has already debunked itself? fyi, Iran stopped accepting dollars for their oil in 2007 and opened their oil bourse in 2008 with no significant economic impact to the dollar. Sheesh. I can't believe people are still recycling that crapola.

Additionally, while Iran, like Iraq, doesn't care about screwing their own people if they can throw up that middle finger, other countries base their oil prices on the US dollar because traditionally it has been the most stable currency in the world. Despite recent history, that isn't likely to change any time soon.

Frankly, people who loudly proclaim that it's all about oil and every move the US makes is some sort of machination to control that oil come off as simpletons who are highly naive about International politics and economics.

 

[momeNt]

What cost him his life was screwing his own people over for years. Keep in mind that it was Iraqis that put him on trial, determined him guilty, then strung him up by the neck, not the US.


Seriously? A nearly 6 year old article that has already debunked itself? fyi, Iran stopped accepting dollars for their oil in 2007 and opened their oil bourse in 2008 with no significant economic impact to the dollar. Sheesh. I can't believe people are still recycling that crapola.

Additionally, while Iran, like Iraq, doesn't care about screwing their own people if they can throw up that middle finger, other countries base their oil prices on the US dollar because traditionally it has been the most stable currency in the world. Despite recent history, that isn't likely to change any time soon.

Frankly, people who loudly proclaim that it's all about oil and every move the US makes is some sort of machination to control that oil come off as simpletons who are highly naive about International politics and economics.

commodities were priced in USD because at the end of WW2 the USA had over 2/3rds of the world's gold, Great Britain lost much of their gold trying to stave off depression during the 20s. Bretton-woods established the USD as the reserve currency due to this fact. There was no argument over what traditionally was the most stable currency because that is not how currencies worked prior to Bretton-woods.

China and Japan have begun to trade directly and circumvented the dollar.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...ading-of-currencies-to-cut-company-costs.html

This will be happening more and more in developed nations that aren't on the USA's hit list.

 

[WelshBloke]

Willing to attack and doing so are two different things...wouldn`t you think?

How many countries has the West attacked lately?

How many countries has Iran attacked lately?

Do you thing America is more likely to attack Iran or Iran to attack America?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

commodities were priced in USD because at the end of WW2 the USA had over 2/3rds of the world's gold, Great Britain lost much of their gold trying to stave off depression during the 20s. Bretton-woods established the USD as the reserve currency due to this fact. There was no argument over what traditionally was the most stable currency because that is not how currencies worked prior to Bretton-woods.

And after the US moved from the gold standard it still remained the most stable currency in the world, so what once was has no bearing on my statement.

China and Japan have begun to trade directly and circumvented the dollar.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...ading-of-currencies-to-cut-company-costs.html

This will be happening more and more in developed nations that aren't on the USA's hit list.

Whatever.The above has nothing to do with Iran and sounds a lot like Paul-bot talking points or that of the shadenfrueders who can't seem to wait to witness the toppling of the USA.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

It's my opinion that some of the feel good support was just the typical media hyperbole. Rah rah kind of puff stuff that makes it onto the networks.

The process of normalized relations was ongoing long before that. Do you think people in Iran view the US as it did before what I mentioned? Not likely.

A huge mistake to try to bully other nations into supporting us in the Iraq retaliation, or to try to justify our actions with the WMD spiel. If it's in our interests to take action, then we should take action and let the chips fall where they will.

To take action is one thing. To do so foolishly is another.

I fully supported President Obama's action in Pakistan when he had Osama assassinated with a military strike force. It was in our interests to do it, we did it, screw off if you don't like it.

Note that Obama didn't declare a war against Pakistan. That brings us back to my original contention that blowing up a nation isn't a desired first action.

 

[sandorski]

Does "willing" mean Pre-emptively or in Retaliation?

 

[monovillage]

The process of normalized relations was ongoing long before that. Do you think people in Iran view the US as it did before what I mentioned? Not likely.
To take action is one thing. To do so foolishly is another.

Note that Obama didn't declare a war against Pakistan. That brings us back to my original contention that blowing up a nation isn't a desired first action.

If it achieves the desired results, why shouldn't it be the first action?


*edit* in my earlier post about President Obama's bombing of Pakistan, I ended with "screw off if you don't like it" That was not intended for the reader, but as part of the U.S. attitude i'd support. My awkward phrasing made it look different then I intended.

 

[SandEagle]

Mossad chief: Nuclear Iran not necessarily existential threat to Israel

Tamir Pardo says Israel using various means to foil Iran's nuclear program, but if Iran actually obtained nuclear weapons, it would not mean destruction of Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-editio...ssarily-existential-threat-to-israel-1.404227

just an FYI.....
my townhome in telaviv is safe

 

[JEDIYoda]

just an FYI.....
my townhome in telaviv is safe

Tell me where you live in Tel Aviv? Maybe we can have a kosher beer together....

 

[lothar]

credibility, the US lacks.

as stated by fmr ambassador bolton, the US is only in the middle east to steal and control its oil:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFbpKKOEnAE

war drums beatin. more weapons of mass deception type lies/false flags incoming from the lying US government.

Bullcrap.

Total(France), Shell(Netherlands), China National Petroleum Corporation(China), PetroChina(China), Petronas(Malaysia), and Lukoil(Russia) won all the Iraqi oil contracts.
Not one was won by a single US firms Exxon, ConnocoPhilips, Occidental Petroleum, etc...

The people who suggest that the US went in only for oil are complete morons in that regard. Yes, that includes both John Bolton and anyone with their tinfoil hat conspiracy theories that believes such.

 

[cybrsage]

Even the Iraqi tribal leaders stopped believing that lie long ago, which is one of the reasons why they started working with the US against AQ.

 

[Karl Agathon]

Mossad chief: Nuclear Iran not necessarily existential threat to Israel

Tamir Pardo says Israel using various means to foil Iran's nuclear program, but if Iran actually obtained nuclear weapons, it would not mean destruction of Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-editio...ssarily-existential-threat-to-israel-1.404227

just an FYI.....
my townhome in telaviv is safe

I dont think it would mean Israels destruction either. I dont think Iran wants to commit national sucide. I think there would be more of a chance (all be it not a high one) that they would sooner hand off that nuke thinking they would have no culpability for any damage. Again though, I think the probability for that would be low as well.

 

[al981]

Bullcrap.

Total(France), Shell(Netherlands), China National Petroleum Corporation(China), PetroChina(China), Petronas(Malaysia), and Lukoil(Russia) won all the Iraqi oil contracts.
Not one was won by a single US firms Exxon, ConnocoPhilips, Occidental Petroleum, etc...

The people who suggest that the US went in only for oil are complete morons in that regard. Yes, that includes both John Bolton and anyone with their tinfoil hat conspiracy theories that believes such.

who won the contracts is irrelevant.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=32942736&postcount=83

neocon ambassador's statements only confirm what everyone knew.

bullcrap yourself for continuing to believe a proven lying government that has repeatedly started wars and overthrown governments in the middle east for its economy / control of oil.

edit: as for your conspiracy remark, see my sig and duck the multiple facts you won't have the guts to address. duck son, duck. :thumbsup: