War with Iran.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

You can live in your la-la-la land till a nuke goes off somewhere in the suburbs of Paris, or better yet a cargo/tanker with said device in a port with oil refining facilities. We'll be laughing about Michael Jacksons being alive-jokes, no doubt.

[sprayer_faust 0]

Isn't the US budget already depleted? Why Waste All Resources again? I doubt it will happen.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Isn't the US budget already depleted? Why Waste All Resources again? I doubt it will happen.

No ground forces on Iranian soil. You have carrier battle groups in the Red Sea, CBGs in the Persian Gulf, you have Azerbaijan conducting military excercises at this very moment, or it could be troop deployment disguised as war games. You have Afganistan to the East, Iraq to the West, Saudi Arabia across the Gulf to the South.

You have Israeli Jets going on a picnic in North-Western Saudi Arabia provinces, and they will fly due East along the Iraqi-SA border when the time comes.

Syria will stay put, if it won't it will become Iraq 1991, Take Two. The US still has forces in Iraq and why the hell do you think they haven't pulled out yet?

Iran is the end-game, last frontier for whatever cause you think those wars were and are fought for. But it won't be like Iraq, or Afganistan; all military and strategic infrastructure will be bombed, officials will get their own Tomahawks, civilian infrastructure won't be touched, unless Iranian regime starts burning bridges once shit hits the fan.

P.S. With no foreign troop on the territory of Iran, there won't be an insurgency against said troops. What you will get is a Civil war in Iran, you've seen a glimpse of it last year.

Persians are not muslims, Persians are a proud people and they can be reasoned with; you think todays youth there practices Islam? Think Zoroastrianism with belief in Western ideas. They say the revolution won't be televised (quote originated in the US?), well, you'll be seeing it on YouTube once the regime's infrastructure falls.

Edited June 24, 2010 by Iroquois Pliskin

[Baff1 0]

The Russians are building a naval base in Syria. They don't have to worry anymore.

No more getting bombed by Israel.

No more threats of invasion from George Bush.

We have pushed them into the loving arms of Vladimir Putin.

Iranians have Silkworms, no enemy shipping can stay in the Persian Gulf in the event of conflict. Especially not aircraft carriers.

Naval airpower is pretty limited by it's range in this example.

Not that America doesn't have Iran completely surrounded with land based aircraft.

The revolution will not be televised is a song by Gil Scott Heron.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qoalKUt0mo&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qoalKUt0mo&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Don't expect a civil war in Iran anytime soon. As much as we are trying our damndest to promote one, it's not coming and external aggression will simply unify the population against a greater evil they hate more.

Iran is a very progressive society, I doubt there are as many countries in the world that have been reforming as fast as theirs. It would be a mistake to dismiss their country's government because of it's religion. A lot of people connotate muslim with medieval. Iran isn't Saudi. It's a progressive state. Arguably the most progressive democratic and free in the middle east. (It's a toss up between them and Israel I expect, both having enormous great gaping flaws that we could of course all spend hours picking apart).

Unfortunately, they can't be reasoned with. They think we are weak liars and delight in winding us up, because they can.

They openly seek to usurp our hegemony. Given the opportunity they will do so.

Edited June 24, 2010 by Baff1

[Mike84 1]

The Russians are building a naval base in Syria. They don't have to worry anymore.

No more getting bombed by Israel.

The Russian naval base in Tartus has been there since 1971. How many times has Syria been attack by Israel since?

Right...

[echo1 0]

You can live in your la-la-la land till a nuke goes off somewhere in the suburbs of Paris, or better yet a cargo/tanker with said device in a port with oil refining facilities. We'll be laughing about Michael Jacksons being alive-jokes, no doubt.

I think someone has been watching too much 24.

Arguably the most progressive democratic and free in the middle east.

Given the events of last year, that either says a lot about Iran's neighbors, or means nothing at all.

[Mike84 1]

Given the events of last year, that either says a lot about Iran's neighbors, or means nothing at all.

No, it says a lot about the person posting such BS.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

I think someone has been watching too much 24.

Someone seems to be living in cozy Europe where the knot of bigotry and nationalism was shredded back in 1945. And someone is forgetting the Blockbuster bombs, for instance, that were dropped on Civilian targets and/or pretty much everything else. You don't like the word Nuke? We can replace it with EMP, Dirty Bomb.

There is a huge knot right now in the Middle East and it's been there since time immemorial, just like Medieval Europe, but the problem escalated in Europe with the Industrialization which gave us WW I & II, and every single skirmish or war in the XVIII-XIX centuries.

And now the knot-problem in the ME increased with Globalization, which threatens stability in the world: not of single regions or countries, but Hemispheres.

Iran is the last card in the deck, if you think there won't be a war, you're delusional -- these wars in ME transcend Administrations of the US government.

Baff1, ignore Russians they don't amount for s-t. They have no strategy, only short-term gains for a select few which profess their Bluff through loudspeakers all across the Globe, while the population is living in piss-poor conditions unimaginable to the average Westerner.

P.S. It's been only 64 years since establishment of the country of Israel. We can remove the remaining pockets of instability in the next 10 years, don't you think?

Edited June 25, 2010 by Iroquois Pliskin

[Baff1 0]

The Russian naval base in Tartus has been there since 1971. How many times has Syria been attack by Israel since?

Right...

From the Israeli news.

Russia renovates Syrian port of Tartus

in order to move there Russian fleet from the Black Sea. Russian move is largely retaliatory for the US involvement in Georgia and Ukraine. Ukraine pushes Russia to vacate the navy base in Crimea.

Russian deployment in Syria means bringing S-300 and likely S-400 anti-aircraft batteries there. Importantly, Russians would bring their full models rather than the stripped-down export versions. Though the killing range of S-300 is relatively small, the radar detection range would provide warning info for much of Syria.

Russian deployment emboldens Syria, and explains Syria’s unwillingness to negotiate peace with Israel.

After visiting Moscow, Iran’s foreign minister vowed to “expand and strengthen†his country’s relations with Russia.

In the confrontation with America, Russia retaliates by supporting Israel’s enemies..

http://samsonblinded.org/news/russia-renovates-syrian-port-of-tartus-3102

Tartus is undergoing a massive upgrade. We aren't talking about just 5 Russian sailors being posted there anymore. This is turning into a forward naval base for their nuclear armed fleet. They will take it's security seriously just as we take ours.

The Russians and the Israeli's co-develop Israeli's radar and radar counter measures. So you can bet their air defences on their own installations can recognise them.

These days almost half of Israel's population are ex soviets. The mere presence of Russian forces enhances peace just as the presence of U.S. ones would. They are close allies with deep cultural links.

---------- Post added at 06:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:43 AM ----------

P.S. It's been only 64 years since establishment of the country of Israel. We can remove the remaining pockets of instability in the next 10 years, don't you think?

Unfortunately I don't think that.

We have no intention of even trying. I don't even think that is something I want to see happen, it all sounds a bit too "final solution" for me.

I think a quite likely outcome is that Iran gets nuclear parity with Israel and a deeper peace ensues. (Also an arms race in Saudi).

I holiday in the same place those piss poor Russians do. The same place the Israeli's do too. They all spend more money at the bar than I do.

Certainly my Russian exchange students during the Cold War couldn't believe how I was living! I might have had a nicer house than them, and a car, but at this time they outproduced the combined militaries of the 28 richest countries in the world by a factor of 8-1. Go figure.

The Russian strategy is that it looked like they needed a new naval port to replace the Black Sea one they were losing in Ukraine. (Not sure if they still are losing it currently?)

Their major naval operations are all currently in the Gulf of Aden on anti piracy actions. Syria is a good location for them, just as Israel is for the U.S.

I don't worry about the Russians at all. The world is a safer place for having them around.

Edited June 25, 2010 by Baff1

[GRS 10]

A word of advice, if you're going to bash the president do it in a intelligent manner and not use the variations of the scripted buzz phrases that the far right puts out for it's ignorant followers.

A word of advice, if you're going to bash the right, do it in a intelligent manner and not use a variation of the scripted buzz phrases like you just did.

[spooky lynx 73]

I don't see any trouble if Iran really develops its own nuclear weapons. It has the right to have an effective way of defence. With the US and NATO being the only Iranian opponents since early 90's the missile with nuclear warhead is the only way to chill out some "falcons" sitting at the both banks of the Atlantic ocean. And only WMD will make some persons to respect opinion of Iran.

[Big Mac 19]

Well considering they have ties to terrorist groups who don't like the US very much or Russia either for that matter, I have a problem with them developing nukes, chemical agents, or God forbid biological agents. No one has a right to build WMDs and call it defense. There is nothing defensive about any other those 3 things. Oh and the US and Russia last I heard signed yet another treaty to dismantle another few thousand nukes. Honestly though there are way too many countries with nuclear weapons, nobody wants a country who's governed by religion instead laws in control of them.

Edited June 25, 2010 by Big Mac

[Baff1 0]

No one has a right to build WMDs and call it defense.

My country does.

The ability too.

We call it our "nuclear deterant".

That's our right and if you don't like it, so what?

Are you suggesting Iran is a country that has no legal system? That it is not governed by the rule of law?

Things are a little different there than in some forgotten Taliban valley in my opinion.

@Spooky, the way Iran feels about the U.S., it feels about Russia too.

And while I agree that nuclear/military parity among rivals brings peace between them, it does not bring peace between rival nations that have them and rival nations that do not.

Quite the opposite,it frees the WMD equiped countries to attack those without them. In the case of Iran, this means all it's neighbours would be in direct danger from it. Including allies that none of us wish to lose.

Edited June 25, 2010 by Baff1

[Daniel 0]

I'm more troubled by Pakistan's nuclear potential than Iran's. That is, the Taliban training and recruiting in a nuclear capable country. Scary stuff.

[echo1 0]

My country does.

The ability too.

We call it our "nuclear deterant".

That's our right and if you don't like it, so what?

There are enough evil governments with nuclear weapons as it stands, we don't need any more please.

Are you suggesting Iran is a country that has no legal system? That it is not governed by the rule of law?

Things are a little different there than in some forgotten Taliban valley in my opinion.

Yeah, because a country run by self-serving religious nutcases is such an improvement...

Edited June 25, 2010 by echo1

[Big Mac 19]

My country does.

The ability too.

We call it our "nuclear deterant".

That's our right and if you don't like it, so what?

Are you suggesting Iran is a country that has no legal system? That it is not governed by the rule of law?

Things are a little different there than in some forgotten Taliban valley in my opinion.

Ok to your first response I have to say this, MAD does no one any favors and wins no wars.

And to your to your response which has taken the form of a "Well thought out" question (Feel the sarcasm?) There is a difference in the Rule of Law and the Rule of God. the policies of western countries for the most part are dictated by the Rule of Law. Iran's policies are dictated by the Rule of God. A country who's policies come from a holy book and leaders who are religious zealots who have no business running a government instead of people with sane thinking has no business possessing WMDs. You my friend need to think before you speak.

I personally am against any country having WMDs, but I'll settle for the status quo.

Edited June 25, 2010 by Big Mac

[Gunter Severloh 4056]

Watch the movie:

ZEITGEIST II ADDENDUM (FULL MOVIE!)

he followup to the original film w/ focus on money, corruption, scandals & Jacque Fresco / The Venus Project.

The wars, our preseidents, its all a ploy to keep our system going, war with Iran is just another way for the empire to expand its territory, policies, govenments, religions have nothing to do with anything, its all an illusion designed to keep you and your family in slavery to keep feeding the machine.

just watch the movie its very in depth and informative, long too.

After seeing this movie I found these arguments or discussians rather pointless.

[Baff1 0]

Yeah, because a country run by self-serving religious nutcases is such an improvement...

But can you think of a country this statement does not apply to?

I can't.

---------- Post added at 08:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:37 PM ----------

Ok to your first response I have to say this, MAD does no one any favors and wins no wars.

And to your to your response which has taken the form of a "Well thought out" question (Feel the sarcasm?) There is a difference in the Rule of Law and the Rule of God. the policies of western countries for the most part are dictated by the Rule of Law. Iran's policies are dictated by the Rule of God. A country who's policies come from a holy book and leaders who are religious zealots who have no business running a government instead of people with sane thinking has no business possessing WMDs. You my friend need to think before you speak.

I personally am against any country having WMDs, but I'll settle for the status quo.

WMD haven't won my country any wars?

Yes they have.

They won our war with Japan. We used them in WW1. We won that war. We used them against the Kurds, we won that war too.

And more importantly they have kept the peace in Europe for 60 years now.

Irans policies are dictated by it's government. The head of state is also the head of the church. Just the same as in my country (only the Queens church is the largest religion in the world!).

Yes, religion is more integrated into their republic and indeed their society. But the laws are still voted on, the ministers all directly elected. The judiciary that upholds these laws looks the same as any other 5 tiered judiciary in the west.

George Bush and Tony Blair both cited God's will as reasons to invade Iraq. People are religious. Get over it.

Edited June 25, 2010 by Baff1

[echo1 0]

Yes, but there are varying degrees, and from I have seen, the people of Iran have ended up with a shittier end of the stick than others.

the ministers all elected.

Like this?

[Baff1 0]

Just becuase they elected the guy the west didn't want them to, doesn't invalidate their system of government in anyway.

---------- Post added at 08:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:51 PM ----------

from I have seen, the people of Iran have ended up with a shittier end of the stick than others.

And what have you seen?

Women in Iran got the vote before women in Spain.

Jewish people in Iran freely worship and live without fear.

Education is free.

Iranian youth (and women) go to university. (No fee's, unlike in my country).

Social inequality is down. (Unlike in my country)

Poverty is down. (Unlike in my country)

The economy is grown. (Unlike in my country)

Foreign militaries have all been expelled and repulsed.

Who in the Middle East has it better than the people in Iran?

Who in Iran has it worse than they did 30 years ago?

Iran has made great strides and is a very civilised country. Credit where credit is due.

They are still my enemies I expect, but I am able to respect my enemies.

Edited June 25, 2010 by Baff1

[jakerod 254]

Who in the Middle East has it better than the people in Iran?

Who in Iran has it worse than they did 30 years ago?

I

Neda Agha-Soltan? Although, technically she wasn't 30 but you get the point.

Sohrab Aarabi?

Well go to ch's link and you will find a few more.

[Baff1 0]

I get the point.

You are suggesting that riots in Iran are somehow worse than riots anywhere else.

That riots in Israel are nice riots. That riots in L.A. and New Orleans are peaceful, gentle riots. That the Swiss police don't shoot political protesters in the back while they are running away.

People were killed in a riot? Well that invalidates their entire system of government then doesn't it. That completely erases the last 40 years of cultural, political, ecomonic, military and social advances for the population.

Wait a minute..no it doesn't.

How many other nations in the middle east do women even have the right to vote, let alone protest about the results of an election?

You see if you hate someone enough, you can take all the best things about their society and portray them as poo.

Iran is a country with a lively and progressive democracy. It's population is motivated and involved in it.

Can you imagine any party in my country getting 64% of the vote? They can't even get the 34% the losing party in Iran gets.

98% turnout!!! This is a country who's government means something to them. Who believe in the system.

Edited June 25, 2010 by Baff1

[Barely-injured 0]

Whether we like it or not, there is still a significant number of people in Iran who actually are quite fine with their government (maybe not exactly like it but they don't hate it either). There is always some who obviously disagree with the government's practices and what not. Still no amount of propaganda about how poor iranian people are oppressed by their government and that they are really just waiting for that tiny incy wincy chance to revolt and embrace the west is going to change that.

Even more important, all iranians pro or against their government are almost first witnesses of the disaster of their neighbor Iraq (which incidentally their government have some part in creating). In the case of an invasion I am pretty sure most of them will rally behind their government (all things considered, still a wise decision in my opinion).

[echo1 0]

And what have you seen?

Well, the hanging of homosexuals for one...

[Big Mac 19]

Irans policies are dictated by it's government. The head of state is also the head of the church. Just the same as in my country (only the Queens church is the largest religion in the world!).

Yes, religion is more integrated into their republic and indeed their society. But the laws are still voted on, the ministers all directly elected. The judiciary that upholds these laws looks the same as any other 5 tiered judiciary in the west.

George Bush and Tony Blair both cited God's will as reasons to invade Iraq. People are religious. Get over it.

Oh Laws are voted on over there but it makes little difference when the Ayatollah can make all those votes meaningless with one word. It's a sham democracy.

As for Bush and Blair you completely missed the point I made and shows you either didn't bother to understand it or can't understand it.

WMD haven't won my country any wars?

Yes they have.

They won our war with Japan. We used them in WW1. We won that war. We used them against the Kurds, we won that war too.

And more importantly they have kept the peace in Europe for 60 years now.

Actually no they didn't. Those wars were won by men. Just because we used them doesn't mean jack. The germans used them during WW1 and if I remember correctly they lost that one. The Iraqis used them against Iran and they didn't win that war.

What kept the peace for 60 years in europe during the cold war had very little to do with nukes and more to do with both sides not wanting to make the first move. And as for the rest of the world, for those 60 years there wasn't much "peace" We fought each other through proxy wars through out the third world.

Nukes and other WMDs on both sides were a weapon no one wanted to use. They much rather take on the other through conventional means so they could have their industry and resources, but neither side had the capacity to do so. NATO didn't have the numbers nor the will and the Warsaw Pact had the numbers, but not technological know how to keep the momentum for a full scale advance.

---------- Post added at 05:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:34 PM ----------

Iran has made great strides and is a very civilised country. Credit where credit is due.

They are still my enemies I expect, but I am able to respect my enemies.

Yea killing gays and and arresting people who speak out against the government and then ship them to a prison where they are tortured through out their entire sentence is the mark of a truly civilized country. Edited June 25, 2010 by Big Mac