Iran is One Year away from the bomb!

[Bill3000]

No need to talk to you....I have already won the arguement.

Saying that you "won the argument" automatically makes you lose.

 

[Ecofarm]

Unless government (law) is by the people, of the people and for the people, it = pyramid scheme = sham. To think otherwise is pharoahistic and/or serflike.

 

[MobBoss]

Saying that you "won the argument" automatically makes you lose.

Sorry, but I dont play by 'Bills Rules (tm)" that Bill himself doesnt follow.

 

[MobBoss]

Unless government (law) is by the people, of the people and for the people, it = pyramid scheme = sham. To think otherwise is pharoahistic and/or serflike.

Rather myopic dont you think? So, monarchy = sham? Dictatorship = sham? Communist = sham?

Again, legitimacy does not hinge upon democracy. You couldnt be more wrong if you tried.

 

[Bill3000]

Sorry, but I dont play by 'Bills Rules (tm)" that Bill himself doesnt follow.

I've never, ever, said that I have won an argument.

 

[MobBoss]

I've never, ever, said that I have won an argument.

I know. Not my fault you cant win an arguement. Perhaps you should try harder....

 

[Photi]

No need to talk to you....I have already won the arguement. For what its worth, the Saud dynasty roots started back in 1744....thats a few years even before the USA existed. Current control was established back in 1902...again, prior to any US involvement in the region and 36 years before oil was found there.

As for the UAE....do some reading. Their pricipal ally in formation was by far the UK...not the USA....the Sheikhs have had treaty with the UK as early as 1892 and were under British protection until 1971.

Sham governments? Nope. Sham arguement? Yes.

Thanks for playing.

the UK revived the wahabbi movement in the early 20th C (which at that point was powerless) to counteract the rashidi control in the hijaz. around the 1930's or so UK stepped aside and let the US take over with the setting up of ARAMCO. by the time oil money started pouring in, Ibn Saud was able to consolidate his power with various penninsular tribes allowing for the formation of the KSA. to say the US calls the shots there is probably an exaggeration, but the US is the sole guarantor of Saudi security. they probably wont bite the hand that feeds, at least not too hard. it is a delicate dance in saudi.

 

[Ecofarm]

Rather myopic dont you think? So, monarchy = sham? Dictatorship = sham? Communist = sham?

Again, legitimacy does not hinge upon democracy. You couldnt be more wrong if you tried.

To ME, the legitimacy of a government is TOTALLY hinged upon democracy. Without some form of governmental acountability to the citizen, I cannot envision human rights security. After that minimum is met, we can discuss which is "better". Churchill quotes appreciated.

I'll try harder, but I just cannot see a monarchy, dictatorship, theocracy, or communist-in-progress totalitarian state as a legitimate form of government.

 

[MobBoss]

the UK revived the wahabbi movement in the early 20th C (which at that point was powerless) to counteract the rashidi control in the hijaz. around the 1930's or so UK stepped aside and let the US take over with the setting up of ARAMCO. by the time oil money started pouring in, Ibn Saud was able to consolidate his power with various penninsular tribes allowing for the formation of the KSA. to say the US calls the shots there is probably an exaggeration, but the US is the sole guarantor of Saudi security. they probably wont bite the hand that feeds, at least not too hard. it is a delicate dance in saudi.

While I dont doubt that the USA would come to Saudi aid if requested, you cant deny that the Saudi military is indeed formidable as a regional power in of itself....it is full of the best equipment their money can buy and their officers are often trained in professional schools in the UK and USA.

They are more than capable to defend themselves without the aid of the USA. In that regard, they are most certainly not a sham government.

 

[Ecofarm]

Power through the barrel of a gun = legitimacy?

We can agree to disagree.

 

[George2816]

While I dont doubt that the USA would come to Saudi aid if requested, you cant deny that the Saudi military is indeed formidable as a regional power in of itself....it is full of the best equipment their money can buy and their officers are often trained in professional schools in the UK and USA.

They are more than capable to defend themselves without the aid of the USA. In that regard, they are most certainly not a sham government.

I really doubt the saudi miltary is a formidable miltary in the middle east if they were what would stop a miltary coup??

 

[MobBoss]

Power through the barrel of a gun = legitimacy?

We can agree to disagree.

How did the USA gain legitimacy?.......through the barrel of a gun.

Again, you are simply incorrect in your opinion. No need to belabor the point, however, you are still entitled to that opinion, incorrect as it is.

 

[MobBoss]

I really doubt the saudi miltary is a formidable miltary in the middle east if they were what would stop a miltary coup??

It is ranked 25th in the world.

 

[BasketCase]

Hi meybe Iranians only going for new sources of energy, nobody saw Oil's price these days.

Did you know Iran imports about 40% of its gasoline....?

If they want more domestic energy, it would be far quicker and cheaper for Iran to simply improve its own domestic refining--which currently lags far behind its oil production.

So the explanation that Iran is looking for more energy doesn't work out.

 

[JollyRoger]

While I dont doubt that the USA would come to Saudi aid if requested, you cant deny that the Saudi military is indeed formidable as a regional power in of itself....it is full of the best equipment their money can buy and their officers are often trained in professional schools in the UK and USA.

They are more than capable to defend themselves without the aid of the USA. In that regard, they are most certainly not a sham government.

That explains them taking care of Saddam's foray into Kuwait in 1990.

 

[PersianBoy]

Did you know Iran imports about 40% of its gasoline....?

If they want more domestic energy, it would be far quicker and cheaper for Iran to simply improve its own domestic refining--which currently lags far behind its oil production.

So the explanation that Iran is looking for more energy doesn't work out.

Yes
Gasoline production of Iran is about 50 milion (I don=t know the scale), but consumption of gazoline is about 90 milion in maximom
but do you know the growth rate of Gasoline consumption in Iran. five years ago whole consumption is aboout 55 milion and several Gasoline production projects is underconstraction in Iran
most of problems in this area roted from Cheap Internal Price of Gasoline
but if governmentsuddenly increase the price of Gasoline this caused a very high inflaction rate and cause so many other problems
this yaer government implemented a coupon like system to control the rapid growth rate of Gasoline consumption and also a little increase in gasoline prices
BTW, if Iran could manage its internal gasoline consumption, also neede new sources of energy because simply price of oil increased and using other sources of energy is economic
for example producing electrecity by using oil without other environmental effects needs say 100 barrel, some years ago this cost 2500% but now cost 7500$ so its cost tripled
another problem faced Iran in energy is old and unefficient systems and equipments, this is due to USA. because USA prohibit oil companies to invest in Iran's energy sector by Damato Rule and ect

 

[Ecofarm]

Russia has offered to provide the fissonable material. Why does Iran need to produce its own depleted uranium if the world is willing to loan them as much as they need (for that particular type of reactor), at the cost of inspections? Can't they just use reactors that do not reaquire depleted uranium?

 

[George2816]

Russia has offered to provide the fissonable material. Why does Iran need to produce its own depleted uranium if the world is willing to loan them as much as they need (for that particular type of reactor), at the cost of inspections? Can't they just use reactors that do not reaquire depleted uranium?

Because Iran doesn't want to be depend on some other country like the USA is depend on the middle-east for oil.


BTW i really doubt the USA would "loan" iran any amount of uranium for power plants

 

[Ecofarm]

Russia made the offer, weeks ago.

 

[PersianBoy]

History of Iran and Russia shows that Iranians can't trust Russians
Also Iran suggest a Consersuim including Russia, USA, GB and other countries enrich Un inside Iran
Before Islamic revolation Iran and Germany have a contract to germany build a nuclear planet for Iran but they refuse after 1979
Now Russia is building that planet for Iran but many times wanted more time to start it
how Iran can trust them to don't stop flew of enriched Un in future?
if you say Iran and Russia have contracts, ask from eastern Europe republic, didn't they have contract with Russia for Gas?
the underconstracting Nuclear planet of Iran in Boshehr is building by Russia and Russian promise to support enough enriched Un for it and Iran accept. but for other nuclear power planets that planned to construct, Iran need more enriched Un
BTW, according to related Internation Organization Rules and other Protocols, any country could develop and try to enrich Un for peacefull aims and nobody could prove that Iran have other aims than Energy