Will there be war with Iran?

It is a lot more defensive than the wars all around the world that a certain country likes to start.

Money can only come from thin air if you print freely, that is what happened to Germany in the early 20s. Sure you might have Tehran, but it wouldn't take many pesos to buy a pile of dollars.

I am still wondering how congress plans on financing the two previous wars.

Don't forget the fed bail outs too. America is up to their nose in debt, this is nothing new, and is not worth mentioning in any argument simply because America will do what it wants, no matter how much money they need to print in one of their many facilities across the country.
 
I certainly hope not.
Perhaps some strategic bombing, conducted with several nations, will do the job...

I really, really hope we don't start sending ground troops to Persia...

"Never get involved in a land war in Asia"... this would be 3 at once for the USA.
 
It is a lot more defensive than the wars all around the world that a certain country likes to start.

A meaningless jab. Any declaration of war that involves the immediate deployment of troops outside of your borders is by definition offensive.

Money can only come from thin air if you print freely, that is what happened to Germany in the early 20s. Sure you might have Tehran, but it wouldn't take many pesos to buy a pile of dollars.

I am still wondering how congress plans on financing the two previous wars.
Don't forget the fed bail outs too. America is up to their nose in debt, this is nothing new, and is not worth mentioning in any argument simply because America will do what it wants, no matter how much money they need to print in one of their many facilities across the country.

It's already 'financed', as is most US debt, through the issuing of long-term bonds that were purchased on the market. Not quite as simple as printing money.

Also, not all bailouts ended up costing the taxpayer. The GM bailout generated a small profit. The incredibly cheap loans to financial institutions through TARP is a more mixed bag.

Am I the only one that suspects that Iran likes this turbulence? The Americans aren't going to invade and the oil price is kept really high.

The higher-ups in government, probably. It gives them easy propaganda and profits. The average Iranian probably doesn't like hearing about Americans in their presidential debate clapping whenever a candidate says they want to support an Israeli bombing campaign or directly invade Iran.
 
Also, not all bailouts ended up costing the taxpayer. The GM bailout generated a small profit. The incredibly cheap loans to financial institutions through TARP is a more mixed bag.

TARP was a cherry picking compared to the fed bail out. TARP was well under a trillion dollars. The fed bail out reached to almost 8 trillion.
 
I wonder how much cooperation the Islamic Republic can get out of a diaspora consists mostly of people who hate them.

The Iranian government can, apparently, place quite a lot of pressure upon their nationals living aboard. For one, Iranian intelligence agencies are capable of offering benefits to the domestic families of expatriates, say "you help us out with this, we'll give your dad a cushy government job," or similar. Even if such carrots fail, the same agencies are equally capable of coercing cooperation from their nationals through threats against relations still within the country.

Then there's political pressure as well. The Iranian government can offer considerations in terms of visa allowances to its nationals or similarly threaten to revoke already existing visas.

And, of course, there's also economic levers to be moved, such as freezing assets or offering, I don't know, a reduced tariff to an import-export business. Bribing can also be effective.

Plus, there's a lot of Iranians living aboard. Making a broad statement about how Iranian expatriates feel in general is pretty flawed; you'll always be able to find someone who is happy to work with the Iranian government.

What's more, I've heard that a lot of requests that these intelligence offices place with Iranian expatriates are seemingly innocuous. A person might be asked to snap a few photos of people protesting outside the Persian embassy or do something similar. Not every bit of spycraft need be overt, even to the operatives.

Such requests don't necessarily need to appear from an intelligence agency either; an intelligence officer could pose as a representative from some economic agency, a business, an NGO, or any other organization or even a friend.

According to what I've heard, the Iranian intelligence agencies view EVERY Iranian living aboard as a potential agent. Obviously, this isn't a completely viable notion, but the view point is there. The idea that their nation has millions of sleeper agents aboard is a very powerful one.

So that's how I've heard the Iranian intelligence agencies view their expatriates, but that's not the limit to the intelligence resources of Iran. There's also organizations like Hamas with very strong ties to Iran that have a LOT of supporters, many of whom support the Palestinian cause while also skeptical of Iran. Iran can use these organizations as proxies to fulfill their own national desires. So it's not just Iranian nationals who can be manipulated, but also Palestinians and Palestinian supports.
 
I think it is necessary to protect global security against them having nukes. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is almost as bad as Adolf Hitler, with his Anti Semitic views and extremist standings being considered. The only difference is Hitler built his weapons in secret, Ahmadinejad is letting the world know he is building nukes. They need to be stopped now for the interest of the free world. The LEAST that needs to be done, an SAS operation to rescue the hostages and air strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. Do NOT negotiate with terrorists.
 
I certainly hope so! We can't let those madmen get their hands on nukes. We have enough madmen in the world with nukes already.

Yet you didn't go to war to stop them. Maybe you should rectify that. Are you signing up for the North Korean front?
 
I think it is necessary to protect global security against them having nukes. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is almost as bad as Adolf Hitler, with his Anti Semitic views and extremist standings being considered. The only difference is Hitler built his weapons in secret, Ahmadinejad is letting the world know he is building nukes. They need to be stopped now for the interest of the free world. The LEAST that needs to be done, an SAS operation to rescue the hostages and air strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. Do NOT negotiate with terrorists.
If we want to stop nutty religious people in the middle east from having illegal nukes we better bomb Israel.
 
It's a disgrace they broke into the embassy ripped a picture of our Queen from the wall and started waving it around! Our Queen!

:mischief:
 
No, there isn't going to be a war. Iran wouldn't risk it and no one really wants to wage it. At most, there might be military strikes, but a full blown invasion ain't going to happen.
 
Considering that the Iranians have are threatend with war all the time and two of their neighbors have been invaded they need nukes.

No, they are a radical Islamic theocracy that wants to NUKE Israel. The NATO interventions in the Middle East are justified. Iran could also give there nukes to terrorists.
 
I think it is necessary to protect global security against them having nukes. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is almost as bad as Adolf Hitler, with his Anti Semitic views and extremist standings being considered. The only difference is Hitler built his weapons in secret, Ahmadinejad is letting the world know he is building nukes.

Actually, the Ayatollah is the leader with the real power, not Ahmadinejad, but yes he is a terrible person.

and I think AL DA GREAT is trolling.
 
Actually, the Ayatollah is the leader with the real power, not Ahmadinejad

I find it interesting that you say this which such certainty. Any particular reason for that?
 
No, they are a radical Islamic theocracy that wants to NUKE Israel. The NATO interventions in the Middle East are justified. Iran could also give there nukes to terrorists.

Iran gets threatened with war all the time. More so than Israel. No one seems to mind that Israel which is an extremely religious country based on religion has loads of illegal nukes, some one suspects Iran might be developing nukes and it is a huge thing.

But for some reason people in the middle east are supposed to accept everything and just be happy and if they are not they are crazy and hate our freedom.
 
I do not think Iran will be able to develop a weapon. They might get there before the US mobilizes but Israel will act. The real race here is based on the US election cycle, Obama will not strike before the election because he can't afford to sacrifice the political capital (he has none to spare) with his base. So Iran needs to finish a weapon and do a test to safely duck under a nuclear shroud within about a year.

Whoever is elected in 2112 will strike in 2113. Period. I expect massive air strikes and special ops with a real attempt to foster regime change via a popular uprising. Its going to be a real mess and Russia and China are not going to be happy campers. It could get out of hand.

I just don't think Obama can resist the pressure to move on this though he'd probably want to. If he remained in office and allowed Iran to first obtain a weapon and then use it, directly or by proxie, against any target, the military here would remove him and we would have a real war on our hands. He will not do this as he is committed to the long game.

The real game here over the next year is whether or not Iran can beat the clock and you see incident after incident of things blowing up over there as US and Israeli military/intel are working to delay until conditions are ripe for a mortal blow.
 
We are already fighting a form of warfare against Iran. This will continue in a controlled way until Iran gives in or is defeated in some way.

The game-changer will occur if there is another terrorist attack such as 9/11. Without such an event, full-scale war is very unlikely as this kind of stand-off is a common feature of modern diplomacy. But with a game-changing attack - particularly a nuclear one - everything is going to go to s*** really fast.
 
Back
Top Bottom