So what do you connies want with Iran anyway?

[Martin]

So there's been a lot of noise about Iran lately, but what exactly is the point of it all? You want another war? Strikes? Or are you just parroting the latest talking points without any reason?

 

[blackllotus]

I honestly don't see any reasonable method of stopping their interference in Iraq

 

[sandorski]

Bin Laden.......goes bad...OMGWTFwatermelonBBQ Iraq!!!......goes bad......OMGWTFWatermelonBBQ Iran!!!!!!...........

 

[Aimster]

All the people making threads about Iranian links to Iraqi insurgency are all people from the same political party. They all support the war with Iraq and have Bush bumper stickers on the back of their car.

What is interesting is that the people who are supporters of Israel have stayed out of the Iran-Iraq connection threads.

Just my observation ... and so the republicans will come down on me hard now. YaY.

 

[glenn1]

You're right, we should simply let Iran develop the bomb, obliterate Israel, and bring the entire Arabian peninsula into its sphere of influence. After all, it's far better to avoid messy conflict at all costs.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: glenn1
You're right, we should simply let Iran develop the bomb, obliterate Israel, and bring the entire Arabian peninsula into its sphere of influence. After all, it's far better to avoid messy conflict at all costs.

They can destroy Israel now much more efficiently than any nuclear bomb they will ever create will do.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: Aimster
All the people making threads about Iranian links to Iraqi insurgency are all people from the same political party. They all support the war with Iraq and have Bush bumper stickers on the back of their car.

What is interesting is that the people who are supporters of Israel have stayed out of the Iran-Iraq connection threads.

Just my observation ... and so the republicans will come down on me hard now. YaY.

Yeah and all the supporters of the other party are creating threads denying a link between Iran and Iraq, what's your point?

And I don't want war with Iran, ground or bombings.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: glenn1
You're right, we should simply let Iran develop the bomb, obliterate Israel, and bring the entire Arabian peninsula into its sphere of influence. After all, it's far better to avoid messy conflict at all costs.

Originally posted by: ntdz
And I don't want war with Iran, ground or bombings.

Right, so the thread is very specific: what do you people want?

 

[glenn1]

And I don't want war with Iran, ground or bombings.

Good for you. I on the other hand would have rather passed on occupying Iraq post-invasion. After 9/11 I would have methodically flattened the militaries of and then removed the regimes in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, and Syria (in that order). Personally I'd be fine with redeploying from Iraq now, so long as the route home went through Iran and Syria first.

 

[First]

Iran is no where near the weak, disorganized pool of bandits that Saddam-led Iraq regime was. Iran is legit military power with ICBM capable of destroying U.S. or Israeli cities if they choose. To preemtively strike Iran would be suicide both for Israeli and American citizens. The U.S. could destroy them, but make no mistake, it will cost us thousands of American lives. The alternative is simple and always has been; deplomacy and incentives. People act like Iran is some completely rogue nation, yet their own leader isn't at all popular and is quite easily their most extreme official.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: Martin

Originally posted by: glenn1
You're right, we should simply let Iran develop the bomb, obliterate Israel, and bring the entire Arabian peninsula into its sphere of influence. After all, it's far better to avoid messy conflict at all costs.

Originally posted by: ntdz
And I don't want war with Iran, ground or bombings.

Right, so the thread is very specific: what do you people want?

You people? Who is you people? First of all, I'm not a "connie." Second of all, I have no idea what to do with Iran, how about just stricter sanctions. I read an interesting article saying that in 10 years Iran will not be able to export any more oil because they will consume it all. Iran gets 50% of it's revenue from oil.

 

[ProfJohn]

Well first, I don't have a W sticker on my car, sorry.

I want Iran to stop interfering in other countries in a negative way.
Arming and funding Hezbollah which is now trying to bring down the government of Lebanon, plus launched its own war with Israel.

And arming and funding the anti-government forces in Iraq.

Yes, you can make a point that we interfered in Iraq as well when we invaded. But helped put a democratic government in place and are trying to support that government. Iran seems to want that government to fail, and thus is interfering in a negative way.

How do we stop them? Sadly Iran has been causing trouble for 20 years and never paid for it, unlike Saddam who got his ass kicked. Therefore, I doubt Iran is going to play nice all on its own, and might need a little kick in the ass itself before it gets the message that we are tired of their crap. Will this ever happen? Who knows.

 

[judasmachine]

Originally posted by: glenn1
You're right, we should simply let Iran develop the bomb, obliterate Israel, and bring the entire Arabian peninsula into its sphere of influence. After all, it's far better to avoid messy conflict at all costs.

go get your rifle buddy, our foreign intrests need you.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Well first, I don't have a W sticker on my car, sorry.

I want Iran to stop interfering in other countries in a negative way.
Arming and funding Hezbollah which is now trying to bring down the government of Lebanon, plus launched its own war with Israel.

And arming and funding the anti-government forces in Iraq.

Yes, you can make a point that we interfered in Iraq as well when we invaded. But helped put a democratic government in place and are trying to support that government. Iran seems to want that government to fail, and thus is interfering in a negative way.

How do we stop them? Sadly Iran has been causing trouble for 20 years and never paid for it, unlike Saddam who got his ass kicked. Therefore, I doubt Iran is going to play nice all on its own, and might need a little kick in the ass itself before it gets the message that we are tired of their crap. Will this ever happen? Who knows.

You obviously have no clue about the history of the U.S and Iran.

it is the U.S that acted barbaric.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Aimster
You obviously have no clue about the history of the U.S and Iran.

it is the U.S that acted barbaric.

And the 400+ days of the hostage crisis were what?

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Aimster
You obviously have no clue about the history of the U.S and Iran.

it is the U.S that acted barbaric.

And the 400+ days of the hostage crisis were what?

hostage crisis was carried out by students who were members of MEK. Not Iran's govt.

They were kicked out of Iran shortly after the revolution and have been carrying terrorist acts against Iran ever since.

Way to justify mass murders of civilians by the U.S.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Martin

Originally posted by: glenn1
You're right, we should simply let Iran develop the bomb, obliterate Israel, and bring the entire Arabian peninsula into its sphere of influence. After all, it's far better to avoid messy conflict at all costs.

Originally posted by: ntdz
And I don't want war with Iran, ground or bombings.

Right, so the thread is very specific: what do you people want?

You people? Who is you people? First of all, I'm not a "connie." Second of all, I have no idea what to do with Iran, how about just stricter sanctions. I read an interesting article saying that in 10 years Iran will not be able to export any more oil because they will consume it all. Iran gets 50% of it's revenue from oil.

Sanctions would require an agreement that there even is a problem with Iran. They are far too partisan to even believe that September 11th meant anything, that there is a global ideology we need to contain or kill. Our dissent among ourselves and from other nations at the UN has KILLED any possible chance of pressuring Iran into doing anything.

Only choice remaining then is to allow them to do whatever they like, or to kill them. A peaceful diplomatic pressure would require a unity we do not have.

Originally posted by: Martin
Right, so the thread is very specific: what do you people want?

What do I want them to do? Iran needs to end its support of its unofficial military organizations, otherwise known as terrorist groups. Iran also needs to come clean and allow the IAEA unrestricted access, and let their buddy Russia supply the nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes instead of those anti-air rockets. Something along those lines, since Russia offered them a deal over a year ago for peaceful nuclear fuel that they flatly turned down. The entire concept of this nuclear crisis comes from the IAEA?s reports, or even the EU.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/ae2d5d24-badd-11db-bbf3-0000779e2340.html

Iran will be able to develop enough weapons-grade material for a nuclear bomb and there is little that can be done to prevent it, an internal European Union document has concluded.

Yet all I see spoken of in similar threads is Bush this, Bush that. Go ahead, take your partisan hacking further and tell us he pulled those strings at the EU. I could give a rats a** about Bush, hell, I?d prefer if he wasn?t president so we?d have a person in charge who did what was necessary on North Korea, Iran, and Iraq and could make competent choices I certainly never have, nor ever will have a bumper sticker of our fool.

However, he IS our fool, and this global war stretches far beyond the reach of any human being or a single country. We could destroy or even nuke Iran tomorrow and the next Muslim nation will proceed to build up arms for use against us. It is only if we come together to fight it properly, and AT THE VERY LEAST denounce their calls for genocide instead of aiding them, will we ever help make things better this century before it turns into a nuclear war.

Yet you cannot do that can you? You?re too busy protecting Iran to care about their calls to genocide and preparations to make good on their sworn oaths. You cannot even do so much as call it what it is, and denounce them.

 

[Balt]

Originally posted by: glenn1

And I don't want war with Iran, ground or bombings.

Good for you. I on the other hand would have rather passed on occupying Iraq post-invasion. After 9/11 I would have methodically flattened the militaries of and then removed the regimes in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, and Syria (in that order). Personally I'd be fine with redeploying from Iraq now, so long as the route home went through Iran and Syria first.

With Armchair Generals such as yourself, I'm sure we'll have plenty of troops to take over and stabilize the entire Middle East.

If we are having difficulty controlling one city, what makes you think we're going to have better luck controlling three countries? :roll:

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: glenn1
You're right, we should simply let Iran develop the bomb, obliterate Israel, and bring the entire Arabian peninsula into its sphere of influence. After all, it's far better to avoid messy conflict at all costs.

They can destroy Israel now much more efficiently than any nuclear bomb they will ever create will do.

what a stupid comment.

If Iran could they would, but the problem is they can't.

 

[glenn1]

If we are having difficulty controlling one city, what makes you think we're going to have better luck controlling three countries?

At no point did I propose controlling the 3 countries. I said we should destroy their armed forces and leadership and that's all. Once we got done doing that I'd leave them to their own devices. This wasn't about making them a "safer place for democracy," but rather using them as an example to the rest of the world what happens when you're a state sponsor of terrorism.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: Shivetya

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: glenn1
You're right, we should simply let Iran develop the bomb, obliterate Israel, and bring the entire Arabian peninsula into its sphere of influence. After all, it's far better to avoid messy conflict at all costs.

They can destroy Israel now much more efficiently than any nuclear bomb they will ever create will do.

what a stupid comment.

If Iran could they would, but the problem is they can't.

stop posting.
If you are going to call something of mine stupid you damn well better have lots of facts to back up your B.S post.

Iran has stockpiles of chemical weapons. Israel is a small state. Launching all their chemical weapons at Israel would destroy the entire country.

What is a small yield nuclear bomb going to do? huh? Destroy 1/4 of a city? Hell, if Iran is lucky maybe it'll destroy 1/2 of a city. I'm sure they'll have a wonderful time mounting such a big fat ugly nuclear bomb on their warheads.

& If they could they would comment shows you have no idea about M.E politics and agendas.

Nobody is out to kill anyone in mass numbers of that proportion, except maybe Hamas.

 

[imported_Shivetya]

aimster,

my stance still stands, if Iran could get rid of Israel they would have. What part of that comment confuses you?

It doesn't matter what weapons they have, chemical or nuclear, they can't and they know it. Developing nuclear weapons just makes it easier to cause problems for the rest of the world.

 

[Jhhnn]

From glenn1-

This wasn't about making them a "safer place for democracy," but rather using them as an example to the rest of the world what happens when you're a state sponsor of terrorism.

So, uhh, what about the Contras- the mujahedin- Salvadoran, Chilean and Argentine death squads? US complicity in Iraqi death squads?

I suppose it's not terror if we're behind it, right? Must be something else, like "Free, Freedom and Liberty!"...

You got nothin', nothin' but lame-ass raving...

 

[Starbuck1975]

So, uhh, what about the Contras- the mujahedin- Salvadoran, Chilean and Argentine death squads? US complicity in Iraqi death squads?

America has certainly gotten its hands dirty on numerous occasions...no question about that...and largely a result of the wars on the periphery that defined the madness of the Cold War...our values as a nation and actions on the international stage on occasion do not align...then again, taking all of the examples you mentioned, hindsight is 20/20...from Manifest Destiny to Bay of Pigs, America has numerous examples of questionable and sometimes violent behavioral patterns.

That being said, we need to examine Iran's recent belligerence and nuclear ambitions, and the implications of those behaviors independent of the war in Iraq.

My understanding of Iran is that it has a growing population of secular Muslims, mostly students and the growing ranks of educated professionals...I don't think the regime of Iran accurately reflects the people living there.

So the question remains...how do you control and isolate the nutjobs running Iran from the people living there? A ground war in Iran will result in the same downward spiral we experienced in Iraq...but how do we mitigate Ahmadinejad without escalating tensions?

Oh, and what is a "connie."

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Shivetya

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: glenn1
You're right, we should simply let Iran develop the bomb, obliterate Israel, and bring the entire Arabian peninsula into its sphere of influence. After all, it's far better to avoid messy conflict at all costs.

They can destroy Israel now much more efficiently than any nuclear bomb they will ever create will do.

what a stupid comment.

If Iran could they would, but the problem is they can't.

stop posting.
If you are going to call something of mine stupid you damn well better have lots of facts to back up your B.S post.

Iran has stockpiles of chemical weapons. Israel is a small state. Launching all their chemical weapons at Israel would destroy the entire country.

What is a small yield nuclear bomb going to do? huh? Destroy 1/4 of a city? Hell, if Iran is lucky maybe it'll destroy 1/2 of a city. I'm sure they'll have a wonderful time mounting such a big fat ugly nuclear bomb on their warheads.

& If they could they would comment shows you have no idea about M.E politics and agendas.

Nobody is out to kill anyone in mass numbers of that proportion, except maybe Hamas.

Ummm... the PRESIDENT OF IRAN has said repeatably that "Israel should be wiped off the map". I'm pretty sure that's his agenda. Granted, whoever actually runs the Iranian government seems to be keeping him on a leash, but I wouldn't be surprised if he ordered some retarded desperation attack when his term ends. Sadly enough, I don't think he'd lack followers.