🇮🇷 The Iran Thread II

[Thundercrack85]

^There's no evidence they intent to get weaponized nukes. The nuclear program for energy in the Middle East would be a bigger story to me.

Right, hence the fortified, underground facilities. All for peaceful purposes, I'm sure.

 

[DBryan]

That's bat **** logic.

Let's find industrialized countries that DON'T have fortified, underground facilities.

Can you name them for me?

 

[8wid]

Right, hence the fortified, underground facilities. All for peaceful purposes, I'm sure.

The evidence presented shows they are not spinning enough plutonium to build a weaponized warhead. Wouldn't you be scared of an airstrike by Israel after the Western media biasedly demonizes everything about your way of life on daily basis for the past eight years now, had the US President call you're country part of an axis of evil after 9/11 along with Iraq and North Korea, then be afraid after the way the US invaded Iraq on similar claims of seeking to eliminate weapons of mass destruction that didn't exist. Wouldn't you be afraid when Western oil companies and contractors are eager in starting a war to commit regime change and to establish their control over your natural resources as they did in Iraq and Afghanistan? I you aren't you should be.

 

[Hobgoblin]

I would be willing to consider Iran's program could possibly be peaceful, if it werent for all that "Death to America!" "Death to Israel!" "Israel must be wiped off the map!" nonsense. Even if the leaders of Iran apologized for those statements and made moves to improve relations with the West, could we know for sure if they are being truthful?

Yes, you could say that America needs to do the same thing for Iran. Let's face it, neither country will risk losing face in this matter. Pride. That is as much the problem here as anything.

 

[8wid]

^All three nations have irrational and zealotous leaders who war monger and use rhetoric and threats of violence. As much as the president of Iran has said Israel needs to go, how often have many US conservatives and others said a preemptive strike is needed to take him out and protect the Jews?

I have a feeling that the Iranian president will eventually leave office in a few years and not pursue another term. Once he does and the US has FINALLY pulled out of Afghanistan within four or five years this rhetoric is going to vanish.

 

[Hobgoblin]

I'm not so sure. The Ayatollahs are the real leaders of Iran I'm told, and they never leave power. They are the one's with the agendas, not presidents.

 

[Thundercrack85]

The evidence presented shows they are not spinning enough plutonium to build a weaponized warhead. Wouldn't you be scared of an airstrike by Israel after the Western media biasedly demonizes everything about your way of life on daily basis for the past eight years now, had the US President call you're country part of an axis of evil after 9/11 along with Iraq and North Korea, then be afraid after the way the US invaded Iraq on similar claims of seeking to eliminate weapons of mass destruction that didn't exist. Wouldn't you be afraid when Western oil companies and contractors are eager in starting a war to commit regime change and to establish their control over your natural resources as they did in Iraq and Afghanistan? I you aren't you should be.

Please stop pretending this totalitarian rogue state is some poor misunderstood underdog. You can't say you want to wipe Israel off the map, while simultaneously enriching uranium and testing long-range missiles, and expect the Israelis not to take some kind of action.

But yes, if I did all that, I would be scared of an airstrike.

 

[Hobgoblin]

White House to Slap Iran with More Sanctions

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...o-ratchet-up-pressure-but-could-ease-israeli/

 

[8wid]

Please stop pretending this totalitarian rogue state is some poor misunderstood underdog. You can't say you want to wipe Israel off the map, while simultaneously enriching uranium and testing long-range missiles, and expect the Israelis not to take some kind of action.

But yes, if I did all that, I would be scared of an airstrike.

The Iranian regime is not a poor misunderstood underdog, most Americans and Europeans don't see through the shady case for war in another country. They are an irrational and oppressive regime, but they have been intimidated by the West into becoming paranoid and more defensive than ever with daily hints that an attack may be inevitable. The testing of long-range missile is just sabre-rattling on the side of the Iranians to counter the US media. Both sides do it and warmonger, but Iran has no history of attacking another nation. There is no evidence they are enriching enough uranium to build a weaponized nuke, it's only the degree needed for a civilian nuclear program. Read the EPA reports yourself to find out.

Israel does not need to attack Iran for anything until there is evidence of a nuclear weapon having actually been built and being readied to be fired, which there is not a single trace of. Israel can build itself up more diplomatically and defensively at the same time to prepare for a foreign missile attack, but there is hardly a reason for them to be scared of a nuclear attack from Iran.

Why would Iran nuke a city like Jerusalem or Tel Aviv where some of the most holy sites in Islam are, make that city uninhabitable for centuries after that attack and be hated for it, kill potentially thousands of Palestinians they wish to protect and make a free and independent state for, risk a nuclear retaliation from Israel's secret nuclear arsenal, and possibly an America too, destroy the global economy overnight with a regional war etc.? It's ridiculous of a notion that Iran would destroy and discredit itself in this way. The reasons for a threat from a nuclear weapons program in Iran is totally illogical. Churches and corporate news love to keep saying it is a real threat to make a buck through scaring their congregations and audiences. Obama keeps on it to get reelected by conservative Republicans.

 

[Thundercrack85]

The Iranian regime is not a poor misunderstood underdog, most Americans and Europeans don't see through the shady case for war in another country. They are an irrational and oppressive regime, but they have been intimidated by the West into becoming paranoid and more defensive than ever with daily hints that an attack may be inevitable. The testing of long-range missile is just sabre-rattling on the side of the Iranians to counter the US media. Both sides do it and warmonger, but Iran has no history of attacking another nation. There is no evidence they are enriching enough uranium to build a weaponized nuke, it's only the degree needed for a civilian nuclear program. Read the EPA reports yourself to find out.

Israel does not need to attack Iran for anything until there is evidence of a nuclear weapon having actually been built and being readied to be fired, which there is not a single trace of. Israel can build itself up more diplomatically and defensively at the same time to prepare for a foreign missile attack, but there is hardly a reason for them to be scared of a nuclear attack from Iran.

Why would Iran nuke a city like Jerusalem or Tel Aviv where some of the most holy sites in Islam are, make that city uninhabitable for centuries after that attack and be hated for it, kill potentially thousands of Palestinians they wish to protect and make a free and independent state for, risk a nuclear retaliation from Israel's secret nuclear arsenal, and possibly an America too, destroy the global economy overnight with a regional war etc.? It's ridiculous of a notion that Iran would destroy and discredit itself in this way. The reasons for a threat from a nuclear weapons program in Iran is totally illogical. Churches and corporate news love to keep saying it is a real threat to make a buck through scaring their congregations and audiences. Obama keeps on it to get reelected by conservative Republicans.

Iran has no history of attacking another nation? So what. Its leadership has changed radically in the last few decades. Proven itself to be despotic, irresponsible, and increasingly militaristic. Especially in the last few years, with an entire purge of moderate elements.

EPA? Have you read the IAEA reports? Religious fanatics have never needed cause to be paranoid. They do not care about self-preservation. There is no reasoning with them.

You actually believe their claims? They're willing to bankrupt their entire country and become an isolated pariah state for the sake of… at most, a few measly nuclear power plants? A country incredibly rich with energy resources. What is more illogical?

 

[8wid]

Iran has no history of attacking another nation? So what. Its leadership has changed radically in the last few decades. Proven itself to be despotic, irresponsible, and increasingly militaristic. Especially in the last few years, with an entire purge of moderate elements.

EPA? Have you read the IAEA reports? Religious fanatics have never needed cause to be paranoid. They do not care about self-preservation. There is no reasoning with them.

You actually believe their claims? They're willing to bankrupt their entire country and become an isolated pariah state for the sake of… at most, a few measly nuclear power plants? A country incredibly rich with energy resources. What is more illogical?

The very words you use to describe the behavior of the Iranian regime towards Israel could easily be used for the United States in the past, especially the last decade. America has a war on average every twenty years and all except World War II they have been unnecessary interventions and often aggressive on part of the US. Iran has been at peace as long the US existed. As paranoid as the Iranian regime is, US intervention in Iraq and Libya, the demonizing of it's nuclear program in the media and political speeches, and spying, sabotage, and assassinations by Israel and the CIA, have simply made them more crazy about it. When did you hear the speeches about destroying America and Israel be even an issue to the US until just after the Iraq War began?

The only place Iran is being perceived as a pariah state is in the Western media that doesn't want to believe a Middle Eastern nation is willing to build a peaceful nuclear power plant, which does exist to perhaps to gain energy independence and self-sufficiency and also combat environmental elements like Global Warming which the regime does believe in. Iran committing economic and political suicide for a pointless war with Israel and one that will only contradict its clause of wanting a state of Palestine in the former borders of Israel. They could unless an exchange to kill millions just because they want to see Israel vanish? I think not. If so what has stopped them from buying a nuke on the black market from North Korea or Pakistan and just unleashing suitcase bomb in Tel Aviv? If the Iranian government really wanted to bring on the end of the world, why don't they simply just do something to put it into motion? What are they waiting for? They could falsify an attack by Israel or the United States just as easily as the other side could and justify a war for this reason that would justify an attack on Israel. Why do they need nukes to destroy the country when they have a superior arsenal of Russian made missiles and suicide attacks that would be aided by Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and more. If they don't care about self-preservation then why not destroy Saudi oil fields and the ones in Qatar and Kuwait too? Why not just start a war if they don't care about saving their own nation?

Why is it taking Iran so long to develop a bomb in the first place? After nearly a decade of alarm from the West of the dangers of a nuclear program in Iran they would have produced something or at least conducted a nuclear test like North Korea has done a couple of times. It might provoke an Israeli counter strike like in Iraq in the 80s or Syria in 2004, but why is nothing concrete being built? Hmmm... perhaps because the US loves to produce baseless stories in the corporate media that promotes war propaganda like before the invasion of Iraq... Unless a crazy person in Israel bombs their nuclear facilities, then a war with Iran is not going to happen.

Like I've said before warmongering makes good ratings, newspaper and magazine sales, video game ideas, and entertaining history channel specials, and is good for church congregations to threaten the end of the world is now upon us. Once the president of Iran finally leaves office and the US withdrawals from Afghanistan, this issue won't even be mainstream anymore.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Here is an interesting article about the crisis from the average Israeli's POV.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012-02-03/israel-iran-tensions/52978020/1

 

[Destructus86]

I would be willing to consider Iran's program could possibly be peaceful, if it werent for all that "Death to America!" "Death to Israel!" "Israel must be wiped off the map!" nonsense. Even if the leaders of Iran apologized for those statements and made moves to improve relations with the West, could we know for sure if they are being truthful?

Yes, you could say that America needs to do the same thing for Iran. Let's face it, neither country will risk losing face in this matter. Pride. That is as much the problem here as anything.

Yeah...the whole "yay for genocide" thing does sort of make you wonder....

=P

 

[Hobgoblin]

Yeah...the whole "yay for genocide" thing does sort of make you wonder....

=P

I'm being totally unfair to Iran, I know.

 

[mikey1974]

i'm really starting to feel fear....

the ultimate issue here is that Israel WILL attack without any support from any of it's allies...and what the fallout from that will be....

THE U.S. : for the moment at least,we pledge to stay out of it,as we want to continue using sanctions and such against them...but if war breaks out,and Iran starts targeting U.S. ships and troops in the area, we'll definitely be involved within a matter of a week or less....

CHINA: i honeslty don't see them being a factor as they are still building their economy up,and they'd probably rather sit back and hope the conflict would weaken the U.S. and some of our interests around the world,so they can swoop right in and take over....they're on the verge of taking over the world, they don't want to see it blown up right now....ruling ashes means ruling nothing....

THE EU: god only knows...they'll pledge support for the West,but will they actually get militarily involved? i think not,unless Iran targets them as well...

THE MIDDLE EAST: can other nations stay out of it? i realy see that being a hard sell....

RUSSIA: i still consider them to be the ultimate wild card in this...they support iran,and the tone has been belligerent between Putin and the West for years now....but would the Bear be willing to enter a miltary,shooting conflict against the West,knowing full well that it can escalate quickly into weapons being exchanged between the US and Russia,eventually evolving into at least some form of Nuclear War.... Putin wants to relive,and rebirth,the old Soviet Bear and Russia's significance and influence in the world...but,again,what influence is there to have when the world is a blackened rock?

the ultimate question is if the conflict can just stay between Israel and Iran,or will the whole region become involved,leading to more outside countries and unions picking sides and getting in the fight,leading to World War III ?

 

[Axl Van Sixx]

Western imperialism's war-mongering against Iran: End imperialist aggression and sanctions!

While the majority of people, with the memory of the War on Terror fresh in mind, are opposed to military conflict in Iran, many do harbour illusions in imposing sanctions on Iran. Some liberal or left-wing minded people, who may oppose war, suggest sanctions as a positive step for intervention against Iran. This is a mistake.

Obama has been able to convince the EU and Japan to accept the sanctions against Iran. Unfortunately, strict sanctions will not benefit the Iranian masses or assist the people in overthrowing their regime. We, as Marxists, harbour no illusions in the reactionary Islamic regime. But international sanctions, and their continuation into a possible armed clash, will only serve to strengthen the Iranian regime, cut through the class struggle, and aggravate the already enormous suffering of the people.

In fact, this is the main intention behind the constant provocations by the Iranian regime against Israel and US. The regime is stuck in a contradiction. Although it is not interested in an armed clash, which would cause it great damage, it is forced to cause the provocations because it needs a foreign enemy to divert the attention of the masses and to blame for the plight of the Iranian people.

The sanctions imposed on Iraq after Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990, and which remained in effect until 2003, illustrate this point. These sanctions devastated the lives of the majority of Iraqis. Life expectancy and quality of life declined with the spread of malnutrition, lack of medical supplies, unclean water, and a host of diseases. Average per capita income dropped from $3,510 to $450 in just six years. UNICEF’s director estimated that some 500,000 children under the age of five died as a result of the sanctions, often the result of easily preventable diseases. This served to strengthen the regime of Saddam Hussein.

Sanctions are an act of aggression against the Iranian people, already suffering under the capitalist regime of the mullahs. Already, the sanctions have caused massive inflation of the Iranian Rial. Imported goods have skyrocketed in costs, further aggravating the impoverished conditions of millions. As the squeeze on oil exports are felt, the Iranian economy will be further pushed down, resulting in mass layoffs and the increased cost of living. This will serve as a convenient distraction for the Iranian regime, who are facing massive social unrest at come, but can now point to the West as being at fault for the unbearable conditions of the people.

It is important to remember that massive movements in 2009 came close to bringing down the regime of the mullahs. It is true to say that the movement has been temporarily defeated, but in its wake and as a consequence of it, the Iranian regime has plunged into a political crisis that has led to deep divisions between rival factions of the ruling clique. At the same time, the regime has instituted its own form of austerity cuts, through eliminating subsidies on basic goods like food and fuel. These measures alone are guarantees of a revival of the movement at a later stage.

However, the current sanctions assist in cutting across, and weakening, any mass movements in Iran. They are a dead-end that serves to punish the masses. The ruling clique in Iran can use the convenient threat of sanction and foreign aggression to direct anger towards the outside. The declining standard of living of the Iranian people will justifiably be seen as the fault of the imperialists, and would strengthen the regime’s call for “national unity” against foreign aggression.

Many Iranians remember the plunder of their two neighbouring countries, Iraq and Afghanistan, and the role of imperialism in the whole region, not least in Iran. They will react to the aggression that threatens them. Our Iranian comrades, organized around the paper Mobareze Tabaqati, have explained that foreign intervention, including sanctions, is acting as a lifeline to the Islamic regime. Concretely, therefore, these measures represent a huge obstacle towards democracy, and the struggle for equality in Iran.

End sanctions on Iran!

 

[Thundercrack85]

i'm really starting to feel fear....

the ultimate issue here is that Israel WILL attack without any support from any of it's allies...and what the fallout from that will be....

THE U.S. : for the moment at least,we pledge to stay out of it,as we want to continue using sanctions and such against them...but if war breaks out,and Iran starts targeting U.S. ships and troops in the area, we'll definitely be involved within a matter of a week or less....

CHINA: i honeslty don't see them being a factor as they are still building their economy up,and they'd probably rather sit back and hope the conflict would weaken the U.S. and some of our interests around the world,so they can swoop right in and take over....they're on the verge of taking over the world, they don't want to see it blown up right now....ruling ashes means ruling nothing....

THE EU: god only knows...they'll pledge support for the West,but will they actually get militarily involved? i think not,unless Iran targets them as well...

THE MIDDLE EAST: can other nations stay out of it? i realy see that being a hard sell....

RUSSIA: i still consider them to be the ultimate wild card in this...they support iran,and the tone has been belligerent between Putin and the West for years now....but would the Bear be willing to enter a miltary,shooting conflict against the West,knowing full well that it can escalate quickly into weapons being exchanged between the US and Russia,eventually evolving into at least some form of Nuclear War.... Putin wants to relive,and rebirth,the old Soviet Bear and Russia's significance and influence in the world...but,again,what influence is there to have when the world is a blackened rock?

the ultimate question is if the conflict can just stay between Israel and Iran,or will the whole region become involved,leading to more outside countries and unions picking sides and getting in the fight,leading to World War III ?

That might make for a good Tom Clancy movie.

The US and Russia aren't going to start World War III over Iran. Putin himself will have enough problems come next election.

 

[8wid]

Shouldn't we just close this thread? There is not threat from Iran developing a nuclear weapon. It would be nice if there was a single piece of evidence that said this was something more than hype and propaganda from corporate media and military interests, but there's nothing to worry about... Be more worried for the 50 million people who live in South Korea and the 127 million who live in Japan who are under threat from the nuclear arsenal of North Korea that is still a new regime in transition over an already unstable nation. China would love military intervention there because they could oust a US ally on the Korean Peninsula.

Almost 8 million people in Israel and 77 million in Iran shouldn't be of much concern to 300 million Americans plus. Why don't we fix our own economy first instead of worrying about what MIGHT potentially happen in two third world nations.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Nah, I say we keep this thread open so we can discuss the very complicated relations the West has with Iran. Shouldn't you just stay out of the thread if you don't think this is worth talking about?

 

[DBryan]

Outside interference in Syria, all part of the build up to attack Iran?

[YT]Wx6UuuwpAFo[/YT]

We need to end the support of zionism. The far right zionists are leading us into bat **** conflicts.

 

[Quetzal]

Look I feel like Iran could do several easy steps to ease tensions with the U.S. and Israel. Iran needs an Arafat to make peace with the West. Recognition of Israel's right to exist, asking for a tranquilization of hostilities to the West to the people, and either the Ayatollah's figurehead with a moderate and a less hostile president.

These acts WOULD begin a stabilization in tension and reduction of tensions. Iran needs to recognize where the US and the west is heading to. Its not in their benefit to keep this level of argument up.

I view the Iranian program similar to the Latin American land reform governments that unleashed American responses that ended terribly for the host governments. SOME of the Latin American governments realized that the U.S. would be stubborn about this and reacted in time and had their governments and power left intact, surviving American purges via the CIA, War, etc.

Iran could propose other methods of generating power and asking other governments to help in the construction of new power facilities in exchange for ending their nuclear program. This is another method which has worked in history.
=====

Ultimately I believe the ability to avoid confrontation is more in the hands of the Iranians than in ours.

 

[DBryan]

It's the Israelis and the Americans who keep calling for pre-emptive strikes, not the Iranians.

 

[Midnyte_Sun]

Look I feel like Iran could do several easy steps to ease tensions with the U.S. and Israel. Iran needs an Arafat to make peace with the West. Recognition of Israel's right to exist, asking for a tranquilization of hostilities to the West to the people, and either the Ayatollah's figurehead with a moderate and a less hostile president.

These acts WOULD begin a stabilization in tension and reduction of tensions. Iran needs to recognize where the US and the west is heading to. Its not in their benefit to keep this level of argument up.

I view the Iranian program similar to the Latin American land reform governments that unleashed American responses that ended terribly for the host governments. SOME of the Latin American governments realized that the U.S. would be stubborn about this and reacted and survived American purges via the CIA, War, etc.

Iran could propose other methods of generating power and asking other governments to help in the construction of new power facilities in exchange for ending their nuclear program. This is another method which has worked in history.
=====

Ultimately I believe the ability to avoid confrontation is more in the hands of the Iranians than in ours.

Basically regime change.

 

[Axl Van Sixx]

It's the Israelis and the Americans who keep calling for pre-emptive strikes, not the Iranians.

Thank you.

Great article by Arthur Silber where he talks about an ad campaign he'd like to run, similar to Ron Paul's anti-war ads, about a possible war with Iran.

The First Ad: Who Are The Nazis Now?

I would want to see the ad on every major television network on the same night, right in the middle of primetime. It may well be that no network will run it. But, hey, no crime in trying. (Not this week, at least not yet.) In that case, we'd have to work to make it a huge internet phenomenon. Once it becomes big enough, major news outlets will cover it -- now as a news story. Also great!

The content of the ad would focus on the Gleiwitz incident which Germany used to "justify" Germany's invasion of Poland, as discussed in the preceding post. The ad would juxtapose Germany's claims about Poland's "provocation" with U.S. claims about Iran's "provocation." I would suggest using lots of photographs and/or film footage: shots of German leaders and troops, then shots of U.S. leaders and troops, battleships, planes, and so forth. Just imagine how angry some Americans will get. Fantastic!

When the German pictures/films are shown, we hear: "At the end of August 1939, Germany claimed that Polish saboteurs attacked a German radio station and took it over. The Polish saboteurs were actually Germans wearing Polish uniforms. The German government said that the Polish attack justified the German invasion of Poland. But it wasn't true."

Then we see the U.S. pictures/films, and we hear: "Today, the U.S. claims that Iran is working to get nuclear weapons. In fact, there isn't any proof of that. In fact, just recently 'the leaders of the U.S. intelligence community said that they were not sure that Iran was even trying to build a nuclear weapon.' The U.S. claims that Iran's determination to have nuclear weapons justifies an attack on Iran. But it isn't true."

Then we see more German pictures/films, and we hear more details of Germany's claims about why Germany had to invade Poland -- and then, "But it wasn't true."

Then more U.S. pictures, and another of the U.S. claims about Iran's actions, perhaps: "The U.S. says that Iran refuses to let inspectors verify that Iran isn't diverting materials to make nuclear weapons. In fact, Iran has repeatedly submitted to more extensive oversight and investigation of its nuclear program than any other country. The U.S. claims that Iran's secrecy and its refusal to be open about its work justifies an attack on Iran. But it isn't true."

After maybe five or six of these comparisons, we get to this:

After World War II, the U.S. was a key member of the Nuremberg Tribunal, which rendered judgment on the crimes of the Nazis. The Nuremberg Tribunal condemned Nazi Germany for waging aggressive war. It called aggressive war "essentially an evil thing," and said that "to initiate a war of aggression ... is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole." [During this narration, we see photos and films of Nazi leaders and the German military, perhaps with film of Hitler at the end of this section.]

Today, the U.S. claims that Iran is a serious threat to America and to the world, and that an Iran with nuclear weapons is absolutely unacceptable. But there is no evidence at all that Iran is even seeking nuclear weapons. So the U.S. is threatening Iran with military action because of a threat that doesn't exist and may never exist. That means the U.S., which has the most powerful military the world has ever seen, is threatening a much weaker country, a country that couldn't possibly threaten the U.S. in any serious way -- and the U.S. is threatening to launch a war of aggression, which we ourselves have called "the supreme international crime." [During this narration, we see photos and films of U.S. leaders and the U.S. military. I would suggest film of Obama at the end of this section, but that might get us all thrown in jail. And we have more work to do. So maybe just a picture of the U.S. flag.]​

And then at the very end of the ad, the tagline:

So ... Who are the Nazis now?​

Imagine for a moment what would happen if an ad like that were shown on every television network at 9 PM. Yes, it would cause a huge controversy. As I said, that would be wonderful! This should be followed by four or five more ads -- one focusing on the effects of an attack on Iran, including how it is very possible (even likely) that a war could spread very quickly throughout the Middle East and even beyond -- that we might be in the middle of World War III within months. Another ad could focus on the effects here in the U.S.: rocketing oil prices, enormous economic hardship (particularly affecting the middle class and the poor), maybe widespread government crackdowns on dissenters. A separate ad could compare the lies about Iran to the lies told about Iraq -- and by the way, I wouldn't mention Iraq at all in the first ad. The focus should be solely on Iran, and I myself think nothing should distract from that. Keep the focus very tight, and just on Iran. The ad should be as powerful as possible, and the tight focus is very important for that purpose.

 

[8wid]

edit