🇮🇷 The Iran Thread II

[Victarion]

I propose we send in propagandists to manipulate the disenfranchised youth into revolution. That way we can secure our hold on Iran and its oil without any threat to our military.

 

[mikey1974]

well,Iran didn't do itself,or the world,any favors with the recent visit by the IAEA...they had a perfect opportunity to show the inspector's that their program is strictly for non-military purposes,to literally take the teeth out of the countries saying they're developing nuclear weapons,and make any potential attack by Israel into a moment to make Israel the bad guys of the international community - instead they blocked access to some sites and scientists,and further aroused suspicions by being unable to explain there whereabouts of a small amount of enriched uranium that went missing,not enough to actually make a bomb,but enough to use in weapons research....

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...rns-tripled-uranium-production-iaea-says.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/25/us-nuclear-iran-uranium-idUSTRE81O08V20120225

even Putin opened his mouth,and said that Russia is against Iran developing Nuclear Weapons,and it would lead to greater risks in international stability....

 

[Hobgoblin]

Yeah, its almost like Iran is actually trying to hide something.

 

[mikey1974]

Yeah, its almost like Iran is actually trying to hide something.

now how can that be!? they're ONLY enriching uranium for medical and power purposes!!

 

[8wid]

I have the same reasoning the Iran would in response to the issue of letting in UN inspectors to see my nuclear program... "who do you (America) think you are demanding such an action when you've lied about these types of allegations before and not taken any responsibiolity for the many proven mistakes that have been made."

What right does the United States or Britain have to demand inspection of its nuclear weapons program when they don't question that of Israel or let Iran inspect their own, why should Iran have to give into to what they want when there is no evidence of a nuclear weapon being developed. Nor is the West the most polite countries either in investigating the issue without demonizing their chosen leaders nor without the war rhetoric each time. It's not that hard to imagine why Iran would not trust the United States or other Western nations to inspect them.

 

[DBryan]

I'm disappointed that people are falling for this propaganda so easily. It's basically a re-do of "Iraq has WMDs and has ties to Al Queda".

 

[Hobgoblin]

I honestly dont know if Iran is using its plants for military or peaceful purposes. None of us do. In that case, we need to treat the possibility of a nuclear Iran seriously but not jump to conclusions. Not taking Iran's threats against Israel seriously or jumping into military action too quickly is equally foolish.

 

[Midnyte_Sun]

There is no question in my mind they want to build nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are the best deterrent for military occupation by Western forces. Just look at Pakistan. The whole country is on the brink of anarchy, and the Americans are spending billions to stabilize it.

If Iran has nukes, it is a game changer in the Middle East. Iran will have more pull in the region, it will decrease its dependence on oil as energy, provide clean energy to its growing cities and in essence, spread its geo-political might to areas that America currently is losing: Central Asia and the Middle East. This all works to the benefit of China and Russia too.

 

[Thundercrack85]

No, Russia would not be onboard with that. Because if Iran has nuclear weapons, its neighbors will want them. And then Russia will have to deal with a nuclear arms race in its backyard. Russia is starting to come out against Iran. China has enough on its plate without Iran.

 

[Midnyte_Sun]

Its neighbors being who? The former CAR's? Eastern Bloc? None of those former republics can not function without Russian aid. If anything, Russia would and could change regimes in those nations without a fight. Besides, most of those nations already have Russian-friendly dictators.

 

[Thundercrack85]

No, Iran's neighbors. Like Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey. If Iran starts stockpiling nukes, they'll inevitably come into conflict.

 

[Midnyte_Sun]

Iran would never nuke Saudi Arabia, nor would the Saudis nuke Iran. Nobody wants to invade Iraq, in fact they are cozy with the Iranians so that won't happen either. Syria might need it to protect itself from regime change, but Lebanon has no need for them with the powerful support from Syria and Iran.

The only country that would need them is Israel, but any powerful nuclear attack on Israel means collateral damage on Jerusalem or the Palestinians, so that is also a non-issue. Iran would never nuke Israel, it would be a similar build up scenario like the war between India and Pakistan.

The only wildcard is if the Iranian regime shares nuclear weapon technology to rogue elements like Hezbollah, or the Taliban, but that again, would be counter intuitive as any nuclear strike would be followed by a similar if not grossly exaggerated response by Israel on Hezbollah. Also, the Taliban are mortal enemies of the Islamic regime in Iran, and they would never share nuclear secrets with a hardline and hostile Sunni government in Afghanistan.

So in essence, I believe nuclear weapons will be used as a deterrent against regime change and that is the main concern for the West as they don't want the Islamic republic of Iran in gaining more power.

 

[Thundercrack85]

That's not how proliferation works. If Iran acquires nuclear weapons, and it becomes increasingly hostile towards other countries (all of this appears to be happening right now) then the other countries will want their own as a deterrent. Proliferation breeds proliferation.

Civil wars and revolutions in many of these countries are not unlikely. The last thing this part of the world needs is nuclear proliferation.

Most countries don't want nuclear weapons to use them offensively, they want them as a deterrent or so they can act militarily with virtual impunity.

 

[8wid]

The idea that IF Iran got nuclear weapons, other countries like Turkey or Saudi Arabia getting them would build them too and start an arms race is as absurd as the fear once N. Korea got nukes, South Korea and Japan would build them too as a deterant. It's all merely unbased speculation and hype.

The only real reason the American public fears Iran is because the corporate media sources most of the trust and watch say it it is. Most Americans work during the week days to come home to corporate news sources telling them about the latest threatening remarks Iran has made to the West, supposed terror involvement in Iraq, Israel, the United States, or Afghanistan. Too a story about the latest hardware Iran bought from Russia is next without stating the purpose it was bought for or where it is going. The newspaper through the AP recirculates what they say to increase their readers. On Saturday or on their day off during the weekdays, most readers will being reading books about future speculation, television shows that deal with the theme, reruns of old specials on the History, Discovery, or National Geographic Channels dealing with the topic or pseudo science, especially Bible prophecy. Saturday often brings the video games sponsoring it or ads by the US military on during violent these times to get these impressionable minds into the idea too. By Sunday, most Americans will have at some point gone to church or talked to someone who went and been warned about the End Times coming, the dangers some vague source in Israel said or was quoted from a cable network by the preacher warned about Iran's nuclear program, usually FOX, and they will think about it and believe it more. Some will often give them a DVD or a book they bought promoting this idea and the need to protect Israel from a nuclear holocaust by Iran. Most of the few televangelist shows available on TV will deal with end times topics the entire broadcast and sell products endorsing the idea too.

Only a few corporations control most of the television networks, magazines, and major newspapers in the United States. Video games draw from major events, often with a corporate owner not on the label like Disney or Fox and make games like Call of Duty, Battlefield, Tom Clancy's End War and more to satisfy their fans, promote the dangers of war in the Middle East while too desensitizing them to violence.

It's already common sense that the highly-religious, millionaire, corporate investing members of Congress manipulate war for profit and have many deals with special interests from a variety of backgrounds. Religious leaders have similar relationships, but especially in the Republican Party. The entire system promotes a pro-war agenda because it stands from gaining profit, increased viewership, and political control from a war in Iran or the fear there is going to be one and they have mined the controlled routines of Americans for decades with it.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Japan and South Korea have nukes by proxy. They are protected by American nuclear fleets stationed there. Though actually, Japan will likely rearm itself in the near future, especially with China's ongoing naval build up.

Though do you really want to use North Korea as an example? Is anyone who isn't on the Kim family payroll happy with the fact that they have nuclear weapons? What do you think will ultimately happen to those weapons?

 

[Midnyte_Sun]

That's not how proliferation works. If Iran acquires nuclear weapons, and it becomes increasingly hostile towards other countries (all of this appears to be happening right now) then the other countries will want their own as a deterrent. Proliferation breeds proliferation.

Civil wars and revolutions in many of these countries are not unlikely. The last thing this part of the world needs is nuclear proliferation.

Most countries don't want nuclear weapons to use them offensively, they want them as a deterrent or so they can act militarily with virtual impunity.

Yeah but proliferation doesn't necessarily mean active use of nuclear arms. India and Pakistan are the best example of two mortal enemies with radical political parties that have not and most likely will not use them on each other.

It does elevate the risk, but like Israel, Iran will likely use it as a deterrent against invasion. But at the same time, if Israel chooses to attack prematurely, it will ignite a war in the middle east and make it highly unstable for itself when Lebanon, Syria, even Shia elements in Pakistan and Afghanistan will raise arms against it. It is not a good scenario if they start a war.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Assassinated Iranian Scientist's Wife Admits Nuke Program for Israel
http://news.yahoo.com/wife-admits-i...ist-ultimate-goal-annihilation-174209842.html

 

[Thundercrack85]

Yeah but proliferation doesn't necessarily mean active use of nuclear arms. India and Pakistan are the best example of two mortal enemies with radical political parties that have not and most likely will not use them on each other.

It does elevate the risk, but like Israel, Iran will likely use it as a deterrent against invasion. But at the same time, if Israel chooses to attack prematurely, it will ignite a war in the middle east and make it highly unstable for itself when Lebanon, Syria, even Shia elements in Pakistan and Afghanistan will raise arms against it. It is not a good scenario if they start a war.

But no one would suggest that it's a good idea. Especially given the deteriorating situation in that country.

 

[WildcatNC]

I'm disappointed that people are falling for this propaganda so easily. It's basically a re-do of "Iraq has WMDs and has ties to Al Queda".

This.


Of course Iran wants nukes. Every country in that unstable region that doesn't already have them wants them. Its a game changer on the world stage. You get to sit at the big kids table and get treated with respect. You would be crazy NOT to want them.

There is no evidence they have them though and they have nowhere near an adequate delivery system. This is all just a re-hash of the war propaganda, ala Iraq. How people do not see this amazes me.

Its not our business to police the world anyway. This place is right in the backyard of Russia, China, India, etc. Hell, Europe is closer to them AND in more danger from them than we are. Let some of them take care of it AND pay for it (money and lives).

I suspect we are taking care of business for Israel or the Saudi's rather than our actual security anyway.

 

[Hobgoblin]

I suspect we are taking care of business for Israel or the Saudi's rather than our actual security anyway.

Yes, I believe that is the point of alliances. One side looks out for the other.

 

[WildcatNC]

Yes, I believe that is the point of alliances. One side looks out for the other.

The point of alliances isn't systematically spending all of our money and lives to eliminate their enemies and threats, on a preemptive basis no less. Its criminal behavior and we sure as hell wouldn't tolerate it in our hemisphere, ask Cuba.

Its just wrong and a criminal foreign policy IMO. This very attitude and policy is what has created the whole mess over there for the last century or so, same as in South America.

 

[Wheels]

The U.S cannot sustain a war with Iran. The idea we are considering this is stupid.

 

[Hobgoblin]

The point of alliances isn't systematically spending all of our money and lives to eliminate their enemies and threats, on a preemptive basis no less. Its criminal behavior and we sure as hell wouldn't tolerate it in our hemisphere, ask Cuba.

Its just wrong and a criminal foreign policy IMO. This very attitude and policy is what has created the whole mess over there for the last century or so, same as in South America.

So you are fine with the chance that a long time ally could get vaporized?

 

[WildcatNC]

The U.S cannot sustain a war with Iran. The idea we are considering this is stupid.

Haven't you ever played Risk? The US certainly is. They never intended on leaving the middle east anyway. Its been a priority since the 70's. They are going to stay there and keep border hopping and give us whatever lies and propaganda they can to convince people its a good idea. Hell , we can even put sanctions on someone, interfere with their internal politics to piss them off, then when they get angry about it we can cry that they are "a danger to the US and want to bomb us". Then call anyone a "terrorist sympathizer" that calls us out on it.

Its not hard to see how we operate.

 

[WildcatNC]

So you are fine with the chance that a long time ally could get vaporized?

I assume your talking about Israel.

Its fear mongering, plain and simple. Israel doesn't need us to handle its affairs and THEY have said as much. What happened the last time the middle east jumped on Israel? Regardless of what Iran builds its not going to outgun Israel, we have made sure of that. If Russia and China don't want nukes going off on their borders then they should step up and take action.

This notion of preemptive wars is empire building nonsense. This whole idea of alliances, did we learn nothing from WWI? (thats rhetorical, we obviously didn't) Its one thing to have allies, its another to get drug into policing their neighborhood for them with our money and lives.