The PNAC won't like this... Iran Story

[PantheraTigris2]

Yet we couldn't figure out how to take down our own plane when they were headed for the twin towers, 16 years later.

Would have been nice to have had some guided-missile cruisers on full alert in NY harbor on 9/11.

But usually, we point our guns at OTHER people's stuff (order of the day, back in the Cold War, naturally).

 

[Neomega]

But usually, we point our guns at OTHER people's stuff (order of the day, back in the Cold War, naturally).

Yeah, and some people sure do not/ did not appreciate that attitude.

 

[PantheraTigris2]

Yeah, and some people sure do not/ did not appreciate that attitude.

Yeah well, but there's really nothing they can do about it. They can not attack us on 9/11, and we're still going to get what we want from them... or, than can attack us on 9/11, temporarily wound our economy, meanwhile we go bomb the hell out of them, and rain fire down on them with an AC-130 gunship. Either way, they're not really going to win. But the terror attack way, at least we are 'suffering' to some extent, along with them (going out of our way, at least).

But in the end, might will triumph, and they just don't have enough 'weight' to pose any real threat/challenge. That's why they want nukes!

And that's why we will not allow them...

Same old story. Meanwhile, some people like here in this thread, typically give the sympathy vote for the one/ones without the 'weight' to push back agaisnt 'the big kid'. This is nothing new - same thing over and over thoughout history.

And WHO is going to win/ get what they want...? If you don't know the answer to that...

 

[PantheraTigris2]

And that guy from India (forget his name), he really should focus less negativity on the U.S. (reference the whole 'superpower' issue), and more towards Great Britain. THEY are the sole reason India is NOT a superpower as we speak. It's not the USA's fault India was kept a backwards country for so long, under British rule/domination.

So 'channel' your 'anguish' AWAY from the U.S., and TOWARDS the U.K.... they deserve it a heck of a lot more than we do.

 

[Sword_Of_Geddon]

I think China is afraid of India becoming a Superpower. They are the only country that could match China man-for-man.

 

[PantheraTigris2]

If it weren't for the Brits (i.e., they never stepped foot in India) - India would have definitely stood a good chance at being a major world power by the start of the 20th century. They weren't a unified nation like China was, though (look at a political map of India just as the Brits were starting to make their moves (of conquest, really), and it looks more complicated than a map of modern Europe).

But the potential was definitely there. India and China both could have easily been superpowers LONG before now, but they both got massively distracted (for different reasons). Japan ended up the only eastern nation to really emerge truly triumphant from the industrialization/Victorian era.

 

[Sword_Of_Geddon]

All true Pantera, but we should get back on topic before one of the moderators makes us...

Iran is on the Terrorist Nation list for a reason. If one does not agree that Iran is a threat, and that the US is, you likely hold sympathys for Bin Laden and his cause. In that case...you should ask yourself....why?

 

[Azadre]

All true Pantera, but we should get back on topic before one of the moderators makes us...

Iran is on the Terrorist Nation list for a reason. If one does not agree that Iran is a threat, and that the US is, you likely hold sympathys for Bin Laden and his cause. In that case...you should ask yourself....why?

Out of curiosity...

Do you consider this black or white?

 

[Neomega]

And WHO is going to win/ get what they want...? If you don't know the answer to that...

Cocky and arrogant. Must be the new military mindset they are teaching.

You should always show the greatest respect for the abilities of a determined enemy.



It isn't particularly funny to see someone say "Bring it On", without understanding the reality and gravity of the situation.

Moderator Action: Warned for trolling
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[PantheraTigris2]

Cocky and arrogant. Must be the new military mindset they are teaching.

You should always show the greatest respect for the abilities of a determined enemy.



It isn't particularly funny to see someone say "Bring it On", without understanding the reality and gravity of the situation.

I'm not saying 'bring it on' - and I'm not arrogant, I'm just being realistic.
And I bet after a lot of tough talk, Iran will eventually be realistic, too... and back down/ bend to the demands of the powers that be.

Throughout history, Persians were always known to be ambitious, stubborn, calculating and defiant - but ultimately would always settle for the logical, intelligent, rational decision... when it came to 'crunch time', and stared them in the face. Probably the same will happen today. They're just trying to flex what muscle they can, as much as they can get away with. Heck, look at their position on a map... if I were them, with U.S. forces on both sides of me, being labelled as the 'Axis of Evil' - along with Bush in office, I'd be a little uncomfortable, too. Heck, I might even (begin to) try to stand up for myself. But I'd know not to go too far... and I think they will, too.

 

[Neomega]

I'm not saying 'bring it on' - and I'm not arrogant, I'm just being realistic.
And I bet after a lot of tough talk, Iran will eventually be realistic, too... and back down/ bend to the demands of the powers that be.

A lot of the worlds best nuclear technicians are muslim. An dbeing realistic is admitting the US named you specifically, in a list, starting with Iraq and ending with North Korea sa an "axis of Evil"

Being realistic is knowing the US has you in it's sights, and ony nuclear deterrance can truly stop aggression.

Being realistic is knowing Iran has absolutely no plan to abort their ambitions for nuclear power, they have been considered a potential nuclear power since the mid eighties. Many others had the same status back then, but two notably stand out, Neighbors India and Pakistan.

Being realistic is knowing Tehran is very near to a weapon, and perhaps is more concerned now with a viable delivery alternative than with the actual explosive itself.

I know a lot of fundamentalist Christians , Jews and Muslims want a world war III. A first or second coming of a messiah. Be careful what you wish for.

 

[Sword_Of_Geddon]

Out of curiosity...

Do you consider this black or white?

No...looks like Dolphin Gray to me...why?

Are you saying that theres a third side? I agree...but that doesn't mean that this third side can't be sympathic. I have heard the term "one mans Terrorist is another man's patriot"...but this doesn't matter..what matters is what happened on 9-11, and what Al-Quida's actions have been. His believes and his goals are secondary to his and his organization's crimes. Would you disagree that justice must be served? How else do you counteract aside from force?

 

[Sanaz]

Iran is on the Terrorist Nation list for a reason. If one does not agree that Iran is a threat, and that the US is, you likely hold sympathys for Bin Laden and his cause. In that case...you should ask yourself....why?

Bin Laden is a nut, but that doesn't mean his "cause" isn't without some merit. And I don't mean the "cause" of destruction of America and Israel, I mean the "cause" of gaining some attention for his people and the abuses thrown upon them. The US is not innocent, and neither is Iran - you can not separate the current situation in Iran from the US backing of the pre-revolution government, or their actions in Iraq in 1991 or now. It seems that the standard reason for denying nuclear research and development to Iran is that they will use it for terrorist reasons, presumably against Israel. This may be true, but the likely reason they want them now in particular is because of a clear threat from the US and Israel, and the pattern has been that they will receive more fair treatment if they have nukes than if they do not. I'd say the real reason for denying them nukes is to make sure they don't have equal power on a world stage. The current Iranian government probably shouldn't, but the nation as a whole deserves it for their future. Stopping a nation from developing doesn't hurt the government nearly as much as it hurts the average citizens.

 

[Sword_Of_Geddon]

Maybe, but I don't think more nukes is a good idea. I want all nukes eliminated from the planet. Nuclear Weapons are not weapons, they are doctor-assisted suicide.

 

[Sanaz]

Maybe, but I don't think more nukes is a good idea. I want all nukes eliminated from the planet. Nuclear Weapons are not weapons, they are doctor-assisted suicide.

That is my true opinion, but unfortunately they aren't going away. And more unfortunately, being a member of the "nuclear club" holds the highest respect. How odd is that? It's like belonging to an exclusive "men's club" - it may be prestigious, but who wants to hang around with a bunch of men all the time? You truly lose for winning.

 

[Neomega]

Maybe, but I don't think more nukes is a good idea. I want all nukes eliminated from the planet. Nuclear Weapons are not weapons, they are doctor-assisted suicide.

????

Nuclear weapons bring peace to the world. I say this with an absolutely straight face.

 

[Sword_Of_Geddon]

They only provent other countries from using Nukes on each other, mutual guaranteed descruction.

I'd rather have a world at war than have the specter of global descruction hanging over my head.

 

[Richard Cribb]

We support Terrorism. That's what is so bad.

Even worse, your country is the leading rogue-state. This page is just one of the many that can provide lotsof information on the topic.http://free.freespeech.org/americanstateterrorism/books/RogueState.html

Why are they nutcases? I'm sure much of the world considers Americans to be nutcases with an unstable and untrustworthy goverenment. Hey we're the only country to ever actually use nuclear weapons.

True. I think it is just as important to oppose USA today, as it was to oppose Germany in the late 30's.

I am not an apologist, I am pro-Iran. There is a difference. My family is Iranian, and most still live in Tehran. And the current US government is a larger worldwide threat than the current Iranian government, as bad as that is. And hopefully that will change. Don't forget that the US strongly supported the Iran with the Shah, and that was a seriously bad government. This government was in response to that one, and by the religious standards of the area, it is a better government (again, as bad as it is). The US also supported Iraq in a war against Iran in the 80's, and won't be forgiven. To broadly classify Iran as the bad guys and the US as the good guys is just incorrect. And as long as the US is supporting the Saudi government, and talks of good and bad are worthless (Iran is not worse than Saudi, as far as oppression and human rights violations are concerned).

The best thing about the US is the constitution and checks and balances in government, so that when we get a nutty president like the current one in power they can be removed if they step too far out of bounds (and this one has come close, like they all do). I would love to see Iran with a constitution, the sweeping powers removed from the clerics, and the elections become legitimate. Unfortunately, the revolution was in reaction to the problems with the Shah, and what they got was really no better than what they had. The US is not innocent in the current middle east situation at all (and I haven't even mentioned the unilateral support of Israel, which can be argued forever).

When I say that I want Iran to have the chance to succeed as a nation, it is not so they can drop nukes on Israel. It is so they can advance as a society (although I think it's a horrible way to "advance"). The US has proven that nukes are a deterrent to invasion and occupation. Iran is in a position of needing to rush their program in secret before the US and Israel can attack, for their own self defense. That's just sad, and reflects very poorly on the current US foreign policy.

Is Iran innocent? No way. But neither is the US. I just happen to have good reason to look equally at both sides of the problem.

Your arguments are both reasonable and convincing. And right now, there are reasons for being worried. Just check out this: http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=67&ItemID=6039 which also offers useful background information.

 

[Hygro]

Out of curiosity...

Do you consider this black or white?

that's halarious. Since it's not white, and with me, it must be black, and against me!

 

[CenturionV]

I think America should be disarmed for being anri-Iranian. We're the ones that have used nuclear weapons and are invading countries.

Nuclear weapons are not the problem, bad guys with nuclear weapons are the problem. Nukes don't kill people, people kill people

People in the US government are just unwilling to admit the truth which is iran is one of our ENEMIES, the US and its allies are already in a state of "cold" war with iran and the whole islam world at large, I forsee a large amount of continued warfare in the middle east untill either, radical islam at large has either

A. Developed nuclear weapons and enough military might to challenge the US and the West at large (China/russia won't be on our side in this, it will be just the North America, and western europe), this WILL lead to a new large scale cold war, and with islams level of unstability, possibly WWIII (some thing I believe we should avoid if possible).

or

B. We get them all before they can get A. I just don't see any other options, there mutually exclusive, if we don't act, or act to slowly, they will get A. If we go fast we need to make sure to not get bogged down (this is gonna mean a lot more "hard" tactics, lotsa civilian casualties, heavy destruction of these nations industry, and none of this "liberation" crap, let the UN clean up afterwards, make it there problem.) And we can not stop even 1 nation short, all the big boys need to go, probably iran, sudan, syria and egypt are the main targets, with saudi arabia as a possible later target.

I just can't see things going down any other way, we can wait 20, 30, 40 years even before it happens, but eventually if those islamic nations wanna remain even slightly up-to-date militarily they will need nukes.