Iran
- Thread starter afups
- Start date
soberups
Pees in the brown Koolaid
The bottom line about Iran is that we have been meddling in the internal affairs of that country since WWII and they have every right to fear and hate us.
As far as their nuclear program goes....nuclear weapons are 67 year old technology, and the fundamentals of how to build one were understood for at least a decade before we built the first one in 1945.
We built our first nukes without the benefit of any computer technology or modern machining equipment whatsoever. So the reality is that any modern nation that has made a decision to develop and or acquire nuclear weapons is eventually going to succeed. India did it....Pakistan did it...North Korea did it...Israel did it.....and there is very little that we can do to prevent Iran from doing it. That particular genie was let out of the bottle a long long time ago, and she has no intention of ever going back in.
The modern nations that do not have nuclear weapons (Japan, Australia, Canada, West Germany etc.) have made a political decision not to possess them, a decision that has been made all the easier by the fact that they enjoy the protection of our nuclear umbrella. These nations could quite easily build nukes if they chose to, but they choose not to because their potential enemies are deterred from threatening them with nukes by us.
We need to accept the fact that Iran will soon have nukes if it does not already. So we need to adopt a policy of deterrence to make the cost of using those nukes too horrible for them to contemplate. It worked for 50 yrs against the Russians, and it will work against Iran also. If Iran wants to join the nuclear club, then it needs to be made very clear to them by both us and Israel that any terrorist use of a nuclear weapon anywhere in the Middle East will be deemed to have originated in Iran and will be met with a brutal and overwhelming nuclear response to their military bases and nuclear facilities. The club has rules, and if they cant play by those rules then they dont need to be playing at all.
As far as their nuclear program goes....nuclear weapons are 67 year old technology, and the fundamentals of how to build one were understood for at least a decade before we built the first one in 1945.
We built our first nukes without the benefit of any computer technology or modern machining equipment whatsoever. So the reality is that any modern nation that has made a decision to develop and or acquire nuclear weapons is eventually going to succeed. India did it....Pakistan did it...North Korea did it...Israel did it.....and there is very little that we can do to prevent Iran from doing it. That particular genie was let out of the bottle a long long time ago, and she has no intention of ever going back in.
The modern nations that do not have nuclear weapons (Japan, Australia, Canada, West Germany etc.) have made a political decision not to possess them, a decision that has been made all the easier by the fact that they enjoy the protection of our nuclear umbrella. These nations could quite easily build nukes if they chose to, but they choose not to because their potential enemies are deterred from threatening them with nukes by us.
We need to accept the fact that Iran will soon have nukes if it does not already. So we need to adopt a policy of deterrence to make the cost of using those nukes too horrible for them to contemplate. It worked for 50 yrs against the Russians, and it will work against Iran also. If Iran wants to join the nuclear club, then it needs to be made very clear to them by both us and Israel that any terrorist use of a nuclear weapon anywhere in the Middle East will be deemed to have originated in Iran and will be met with a brutal and overwhelming nuclear response to their military bases and nuclear facilities. The club has rules, and if they cant play by those rules then they dont need to be playing at all.
soberups
Pees in the brown Koolaid
A bit of historical irony; In 1981, the Israelis launched a pre-emptive strike upon the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak in order to destroy it before it came online. A technical state of war existed between Isreal and Iraq at that time, and a nuclear-armed Iraq was deemed to be an existential threat to Israel.
What is not widely publicised is that Israel was not the first nation to attack the reactor. Iran launched an airstrike against the reactor a year or so earlier during the Iran/Iraq war, but failed to destroy it. During the Iran/Iraq war, the Khomeini regime in Iran recieved technical and indirect military assistance from....you guessed it....Israel. And when Israel was planning its own attack on the reactor, it met with officials from the Khomeini regime in France to discuss technical details of the reactor and its defenses. Its was also agreed that, should any of the Israeli strike aircraft become damaged or unable to return to Israel (they were operating at the extreme limits of their combat range and midair refueling over Saudi Arabia would not have been possible) they would be given permission to land in Iran for refueling or emergency repair!!
Now the situation has been almost reversed. Iran is a mortal enemy to both Israel and Saudi Arabia, whose airspace the Israelis would be forced to fly over should they attack Iran. It is widely believed (and has been reported) that Saudi Arabia has quietly granted Israel permission for such overflights, or at the very least would turn a blind eye to them. The Saudis would love nothing more than to see Israel destroy the Iranian nuclear threat.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend!
What is not widely publicised is that Israel was not the first nation to attack the reactor. Iran launched an airstrike against the reactor a year or so earlier during the Iran/Iraq war, but failed to destroy it. During the Iran/Iraq war, the Khomeini regime in Iran recieved technical and indirect military assistance from....you guessed it....Israel. And when Israel was planning its own attack on the reactor, it met with officials from the Khomeini regime in France to discuss technical details of the reactor and its defenses. Its was also agreed that, should any of the Israeli strike aircraft become damaged or unable to return to Israel (they were operating at the extreme limits of their combat range and midair refueling over Saudi Arabia would not have been possible) they would be given permission to land in Iran for refueling or emergency repair!!
Now the situation has been almost reversed. Iran is a mortal enemy to both Israel and Saudi Arabia, whose airspace the Israelis would be forced to fly over should they attack Iran. It is widely believed (and has been reported) that Saudi Arabia has quietly granted Israel permission for such overflights, or at the very least would turn a blind eye to them. The Saudis would love nothing more than to see Israel destroy the Iranian nuclear threat.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend!
cachsux
Wah
Plus it provides denyability.
klein
Für Meno :)
I heard Saddam didn't openly deny not having weapons of mass destruction, just so Iran would need to fear him.
Now since Americans killed him, and killed everything for Iraq to defend itself - all hell is breaking lose with the neighbor Iran.
As far as I see, nothing good turned out about America's intervention in Iraq. - A silly and costly mistake.
Now since Americans killed him, and killed everything for Iraq to defend itself - all hell is breaking lose with the neighbor Iran.
As far as I see, nothing good turned out about America's intervention in Iraq. - A silly and costly mistake.
Iran would not deem it as necessary to have nukes if countries like israel didnt already have them. It is also good to remember that our country assisted iran with nuclear technology in the 1970s when the Shah was still in power and they were our little cops on the beat in that region. Also during that iran-iraq war we supplied both sides with weapons and intellegence. Over 1 million people were killed in that war.
FCNL: "A World Free of Nuclear Weapons," Wall Street Journal
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
Griffin is a comedian...what do you expect? It's easy to get a laugh out of Iran based on their ridiculous leader and their equally ridiculous claims and policies. The actual Iranian people would fit into the description above. Just like here, they have kooks and nuts too, but most have the same aspirations we do. And my guess is that TP is pretty easy to find there too.
It's kind of like when Bush was President. Everyone hated us (the USA), but not the actual American people. The Iranian "leader" (short guy), doesn't represent his people, much like the idiot Bush didn't represent us.
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
If you look close, you can see the strings.
moreluck
golden ticket member
Pay attention, Kathy entertained in IRAQ !! And, it's all about observations. She was told by big brass not to shake hands with the locals.
soberups
Pees in the brown Koolaid
It is worth pointing out however, that Israel has been surrounded on all sides by nations bent upon its destruction ever since its birth as a nation in 1948. It has never acknowledged having nuclear weapons and it has never threatened to use nuclear weapons on any other country. And it gave back the entire Sinai region to Egypt once a peace treaty was signed, and it has honored that treaty for over 30 years. It has also honored its peace treaty with Jordan. The Middle East is a dangerous place and if I were Israel I would want nuclear weapons also. Its pretty tough to defend a country that is only 60 miles wide, you dont have much room to retreat and your civilian population centers are minutes away from the front lines. Deterrence and preemptive strikes are pretty much your only options.
A good book by Steven Kinzer "Overthrow: America's Century of Regime Change From Hawaii to Iraq". Starts with Hawaii , Cuba, Puerto rico, panama, iran, guatamala, south vietnam, chile...ends with iraq. Gist of the book is :no nation had ever become great without control of foreign markets and access to the natural resources of foreign countries. Here is a terrific quote by the historian Charles Beard: "Here, then is the new realpolitik. A free opportunity for expansion in foreign markets is indispensable to the prosperity of american busines. Modern diplomacy is commerical. its chief concern is with the promotion of economic interests abroad"!!
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
Yes, there is an "ass hand" in Middle Eastern cultures. Leave it to a world citizen such as yourself to offer us an informed opinion on the practices of other cultures.
soberups
Pees in the brown Koolaid
The only nation that has ever posessed nuclear weapons and then subsequently dismantled them is South Africa. And they are the only nation that ever will. The only thing that can maintain the peace at this point is a policy of deterrence. We should do our best to negotiate and pursue a path of diplomacy in order to try and normalize relations with Iran, but we should also make it quite clear that,if they want to join the nuclear club, that at all times there will be one or more of our Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines on patrol in the Indian Ocean with 24 nuclear-tipped Trident missiles aimed right at Iranian military bases and weapons facilities. Any nuclear attack, whether military or terrorist, upon Israel or Saudi Arabia will be treated as an attack upon the United States by Iran and will be met with an overwhelmingly brutal nuclear response. It worked in Cuba in 1962 and it can work in Iran today.
soberups
Pees in the brown Koolaid
In many impoverished nations of the world, toilet paper is an unaffordable luxury. Its easy for us to condemn such practices when we can load our fat asses into our SUV's and drive down to MallWart for a $10 case of toilet paper. Its not so easy when you make $2 a day or have no income or home at all.
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
It will be interesting to see how Iran responds when our carrier group sails back into the waters they warned us not to re-enter. As whacked as the Iranian leadership is, they have to know that they'd be wiped out easily. The economic sanctions are working very well, and the Iranian currency has been seriously de-valued. There is a very real threat of a public uprising against the current regime, so Shorty is feeling the pressure from both sides. He's between a rock and a hard place, and it will be interesting to see if he can squirm out of this situation.
Shorty also has to know what you mentioned about Israel and Saudi Arabia. The Mossad probably has already infiltrated the nuclear program as they did the missle program. There will probably be an "accident" at the weapons facility soon, which could keep Israel out of having to make a public attack to destroy it. He doesn't have very many good options.
Israel was imposed on the people of the middle east by UN mandate. That immediately didnt help the situation. Also in 1956 israel joined england and france in attacking egypt over the suez canal. Again in 1967 it was israel who attacked first , took other country's lands and til this day continue to occupy some of them, namely palestinian territory. Granted some these arab nations have some reactionary leaders ( we have had a few in this country too alas) such as the iranian nut but they have never attacked israel. He can spew as much nonsense as he wants to but he has no power to just attack or bomb israel. He is just a figure head without much real power. It is up to israel to be a better neighbor instead of the bully it has been all these years!!
wkmac
Well-Known Member
Good video 804 in post #44. The bulk of global conflicts and the rise of many authoritarian states, even the Soviet Union can lay very much at the doorstep of the United States. If there was real transparency, the American people would never support what our gov't has done abroad in the so-called name of protecting American interests. The more interventionist the United States becomes regardless of which party holds the reins of power, the more these type videos get out and the people watch them. It's another reason we see such actions as SOPA or an internet kill switch being advocated but the reasons for are always something else.
Non-interventionism is a growing idea of which folk on the so-called left, right and even in the middle are more and more coming to agree on. That's a good thing.
Sober,
Iran and Israel or more specific the jewish people have historically had a good relationship that dates back to the 600 BCE when Persian King Cyrus the Great conquered the Babylonians and then released the jews held captive by the Babylonians to return to Jerusalem. Cyrus even financed this return out of his own pocket and as a result, in the Old Testament Cyrus is called a moshiach or in modern english we translate as messiah. The word is instructive in how jews of that time considered Cyrus and the peoples of Persia. It's been European/Western interventionism that has upended that cherished relationship of several thousand years and it won't repair itself until we get the hell out of their way.
Non-interventionism is a growing idea of which folk on the so-called left, right and even in the middle are more and more coming to agree on. That's a good thing.
Sober,
Iran and Israel or more specific the jewish people have historically had a good relationship that dates back to the 600 BCE when Persian King Cyrus the Great conquered the Babylonians and then released the jews held captive by the Babylonians to return to Jerusalem. Cyrus even financed this return out of his own pocket and as a result, in the Old Testament Cyrus is called a moshiach or in modern english we translate as messiah. The word is instructive in how jews of that time considered Cyrus and the peoples of Persia. It's been European/Western interventionism that has upended that cherished relationship of several thousand years and it won't repair itself until we get the hell out of their way.
Similar threads
