What to do about Iran?

[XMan]

Text

Very inflammatory remarks - would you allow them nuclear weapons with their history of supporting terrorist groups?

 

[Jhhnn]

"Allow" them nuclear technology? Whatcha gonna do about it, X-Man, invade? Start a war with a bombing campaign, open up our troops in Iraq to a pincer attack from the Syrians on one side, the Iranians on the other, and a popular uprising in the middle?

If anything, the ongoing trashtalk from the Bushies spurs the development of Nukes. If my country had been placed on the "Axis of Evil" hitlist, I'd be all in favor of the development of nukes... as would anybody with enough sense to come in out of a hailstorm...

The only so-called terrorist groups they support, to my knowledge, are those who target Israel- the Lebanese Hezbollah, in particular, who didn't even exist prior to the Israeli destabilization and invasion of that country...

 

[XMan]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
"Allow" them nuclear technology? Whatcha gonna do about it, X-Man, invade?

I don't have any suggestions, I'm just throwing it out there for discussion. Note that Israel bombed Iraq's Osirak facility, which was purportedly intended to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons.

So do you not "count" Hammas, Islamic Jihad, and others as related terrorist groups because their attacking Israelis? You might check your history, as well - Israel was a target of terrorists long before the invasion of Lebanon.

 

[TommyVercetti]

Launch an attack from two fronts, one from Iraq and one from Pakistan. THen attack from the Caspian. That should make a quick victory. Then restore true democracy in that religious zealot run country, and bring freedom to the people.

 

[Jhhnn]

It's your assertion, X-Man, that the Iranian govt supports terrorists, and your obligation to present evidence in support of such a claim, rather than to merely enumerate commonly demonized groups while alleging some linkage- after the invasion of Iraq, that rhetorical tactic is not something most folks will willingly bend over to receive...

Might also try to remember that Israel is not the 51st state, either, even though the tail wags the dog a lot more often than most would like to admit...

 

[TommyVercetti]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
It's your assertion, X-Man, that the Iranian govt supports terrorists, and your obligation to present evidence in support of such a claim, rather than to merely enumerate commonly demonized groups while alleging some linkage- after the invasion of Iraq, that rhetorical tactic is not something most folks will willingly bend over to receive...

Might also try to remember that Israel is not the 51st state, either, even though the tail wags the dog a lot more often than most would like to admit...

I am sure there is evidence, but it's secret, and no one else can see it.

 

[Jmman]

Well, I personally do not want to see a country who mandates the chant "death to America" at every single prayer for the last 25 years or so to have a weapon with the capability to kill millions of Americans in one attack. Call me a hawk if you want to, but I think we need to pressure them to give up their nuclear capability.....

 

[Infohawk]

The first thing we need to do is restore our credibility when it comes to arms control. We need to admit we overreacted (lied) about Iraqi WMDs and stop turning a blind eye to Israeli WMDs and work with other Democracies to figure out a consistent plan to keep WMDs away from small radical states (including Israel and Iran).

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: TommyVercetti
Launch an attack from two fronts, one from Iraq and one from Pakistan. THen attack from the Caspian. That should make a quick victory. Then restore true democracy in that religious zealot run country, and bring freedom to the people.

Restore Democracy? Don't tell me you think the Iranians had democracy with the Shah....they were more like a colony than anything else.

 

[Jhhnn]

Stop making sense, Infohawk, ya commie pinko lovely human-loving bastard. How the Hell is the Military-industrial complex supposed to make a buck without a lot of the usual demonizing fud flying around? Jebus, what are you trying to do, ruin the Economy?

 

[conjur]

I bet Chalabi would know what to do!!

 

[XMan]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
It's your assertion, X-Man, that the Iranian govt supports terrorists, and your obligation to present evidence in support of such a claim, rather than to merely enumerate commonly demonized groups while alleging some linkage- after the invasion of Iraq, that rhetorical tactic is not something most folks will willingly bend over to receive...

Might also try to remember that Israel is not the 51st state, either, even though the tail wags the dog a lot more often than most would like to admit...

I don't need to present evidence to anything, Jhhn. You yourself acknowledged that "The only so-called terrorist groups they support, to my knowledge, are those who target Israel". I then asked if you didn't count those groups as legitimate terrorist groups since they were targeting Israel - well?

 

[glenn1]

The first thing we need to do is restore our credibility when it comes to arms control. We need to admit we overreacted (lied) about Iraqi WMDs and stop turning a blind eye to Israeli WMDs and work with other Democracies to figure out a consistent plan to keep WMDs away from small radical states (including Israel and Iran).

Sorta like the "arranged framework" Clinton worked out with North Korea? Or how we sat back and watched India and Pakistan set off matching nuclear detonations in 1998? Wow, that sounds like a great plan. Sounds more like Linus Van Pelt's security blanket than an actual working non-proliferation strategy.

Face it, no approach any administration has ever tried has really worked to curb arms proliferation. That includes touchy-feelie approaches like Infohawk's, and the blunt force approach we tried in Iraq. States have entered the nuclear club during Democratic administrations (Russia, China, France, Pakistan) and Republican (India during Nixon). And those who are seeking to enter the nuclear club don't seem to be much affected by who's in power in the U.S. or what diplomatic sensibilities they have. And sitting around fretting about "restoring our credibility" is just so much thumb sucking from those who have no damn idea of what the world is really like.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: glenn1

The first thing we need to do is restore our credibility when it comes to arms control. We need to admit we overreacted (lied) about Iraqi WMDs and stop turning a blind eye to Israeli WMDs and work with other Democracies to figure out a consistent plan to keep WMDs away from small radical states (including Israel and Iran).

Sorta like the "arranged framework" Clinton worked out with North Korea?

Nope.

Or how we sat back and watched India and Pakistan set off matching nuclear detonations in 1998?

Nope.

Sounds more like Linus Van Pelt's security blanket than an actual working non-proliferation strategy.

Exactly, that's what happens when you construct strawmen.

Face it, no approach any administration has ever tried has really worked to curb arms proliferation.

Okay. That's why I'm suggesting something different.

That includes touchy-feelie approaches like Infohawk's, and the blunt force approach we tried in Iraq.

My strategy has never been tried. When have we had a consistent plan that included disarming Israel? I'm sure the Israelis wouldn't consider it touchy feeling.

And sitting around fretting about "restoring our credibility" is just so much thumb sucking from those who have no damn idea of what the world is really like.

That's a personal attack. I suggest you attack my arguments next time instead of discussing strawmen and my ideas about what the world is really like. Feel free to follow my link about fallacious reasoning in my sig.

 

[NightCrawler]

No Iran has no need for nukes and I'd be worry some extremist group would steal them.

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: glenn1

The first thing we need to do is restore our credibility when it comes to arms control. We need to admit we overreacted (lied) about Iraqi WMDs and stop turning a blind eye to Israeli WMDs and work with other Democracies to figure out a consistent plan to keep WMDs away from small radical states (including Israel and Iran).

Sorta like the "arranged framework" Clinton worked out with North Korea?

Nope.

Or how we sat back and watched India and Pakistan set off matching nuclear detonations in 1998?

Nope.

Sounds more like Linus Van Pelt's security blanket than an actual working non-proliferation strategy.

Exactly, that's what happens when you construct strawmen.

Face it, no approach any administration has ever tried has really worked to curb arms proliferation.

Okay. That's why I'm suggesting something different.

That includes touchy-feelie approaches like Infohawk's, and the blunt force approach we tried in Iraq.

My strategy has never been tried. When have we had a consistent plan that included disarming Israel? I'm sure the Israelis wouldn't consider it touchy feeling.

And sitting around fretting about "restoring our credibility" is just so much thumb sucking from those who have no damn idea of what the world is really like.

That's a personal attack. I suggest you attack my arguments next time instead of discussing strawmen and my ideas about what the world is really like. Feel free to follow my link about fallacious reasoning in my sig.

Woot! Another fallacy argument by the king of fallacies!

 

[zephyrprime]

We need to admit we overreacted (lied) about Iraqi WMDs and stop turning a blind eye to Israeli WMDs and work with other Democracies to figure out a consistent plan to keep WMDs away from small radical states (including Israel and Iran).

So your plan is to figure out a plan?

 

[jackschmittusa]

I suggest that we use the military to install GW Bush as Christian governer of Iran as soon as he is voted out here. I'm sure he can bolix up any plans they may have (while having the best intentions of course).

 

[dirtcheapguy]

Originally posted by: TommyVercetti
Launch an attack from two fronts, one from Iraq and one from Pakistan. THen attack from the Caspian. That should make a quick victory. Then restore true democracy in that religious zealot run country, and bring freedom to the people.

you talk like kid. talk is cheap make happen is expensive lol

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: TommyVercetti Then restore true democracy in that religious zealot run country, and bring freedom to the people.

I guess perhaps that would be appropriate, since it was the U.S. (C.I.A) in the early 50's who overthrough the first and only democratically elected government in Iran and installed the Shah in order to gain oil concessions. Thank God things like this could never happen today.

 

[boran]

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: TommyVercetti Then restore true democracy in that religious zealot run country, and bring freedom to the people.

I guess perhaps that would be appropriate, since it was the U.S. (C.I.A) in the early 50's who overthrough the first and only democratically elected government in Iran and installed the Shah in order to gain oil concessions. Thank God things like this could never happen today.

and you guys (the US) sometimes wonder why they hate you so much overthere.... you'd know by now that everything you do in other countries politics gets back to you like a boomerang, it might have been with the best intentions or not, but just look at OBL and saddam, without the US both would not be the person they are today. I am not saying it was wrong, because at that moment you could not know how they would turn out to be, but in the end it always turns out like that.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: zephyrprime

We need to admit we overreacted (lied) about Iraqi WMDs and stop turning a blind eye to Israeli WMDs and work with other Democracies to figure out a consistent plan to keep WMDs away from small radical states (including Israel and Iran).

So your plan is to figure out a plan?

If you want to nitpick, I would say part of the plan is to figure out a plan. I think details would need to be worked out later. The key element is working with the international community for a comprehensive and fair approach to WMD proliferation.

 

[eigen]

Originally posted by: NightCrawler
No Iran has no need for nukes and I'd be worry some extremist group would steal them.

What is the criteria for needing nuclear weapons? Do we need them. You say of course we do we have enemies to defend against. Do you not believe that Iran has interests as well. Are there interest not valid becasue they are no aligned with the US. Thinking like that is dangerous, to paraphrase Robert S. Macnamra "You MUST sympathize with your enemy".

 

[GrGr]

The Bushies are not content with the US enormous (to put it mildly) nuclear arsenal. No they are busy little beavers building new "mini-nukes" as we speak. In that light why should Iran give a rat's ass about what Bush has to say about their country, except of course for the fact that Bush is a gazillion times more likely to nuke somebody than the Iranians.

 

[AnImuS]

"What to do about Iran?"

Let the Mossad handle it.

:beer: