The Iran Thread

[Outsiderzedge]

Good for them. If America has nuclear power/weapons why not a muslim country? Why the double standard?

Because we don't like each other.

 

[raybia]

Because we don't like each other.

Yeah, unlike the way the U.S. and North Korea feel about each other.

 

[jaguarr]

I'm not a fan of ANYONE having a nuclear weapon, but I find it ironic that my own country is the ONLY one to have ever even used the damn things against other human beings, yet we continually tell other countries that they can't have nuclear arms because they won't be responsible with it. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Iran should have them either by any means because I think they would probably make bad decisions around them. I just find the stance of the U.S. government on this issue to be a bit more than hypocritical.

jag

 

[raybia]

Good for them. If America has nuclear power/weapons why not a muslim country? Why the double standard?

Well its not really about whether the country is Muslim or not as Pakistan is a Muslim country with nukes.

What's the difference? Well, first of all, Pakistan is our slave, I mean ally.

Second, Oil.


http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CLA410A.html



If someone has something you want, that last thing you want is for them to be able to prevent it by defending themselves.

This is all one giantic game of chess.

 

[raybia]

I'm not a fan of ANYONE having a nuclear weapon, but I find it ironic that my own country is the ONLY one to have ever even used the damn things against other human beings, yet we continually tell other countries that they can't have nuclear arms because they won't be responsible with it. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Iran should have them either by any means because I think they would probably make bad decisions around them. I just find the stance of the U.S. government on this issue to be a bit more than hypocritical.

jag

 

[raybia]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CLA410A.html



Excerpt

"Despite the impressive power of the U.S. military and the ability of our intelligence agencies to facilitate "interventions," it would be perilous and possibly ruinous for the U.S to intervene in Iran given the dire situation in Iraq. The Monterey Institute of International Studies provided an extensive analysis of the possible consequences of a preemptive attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities and warned of the following:

"Considering the extensive financial and national policy investment Iran has committed to its nuclear projects, it is almost certain that an attack by Israel or the United States would result in immediate retaliation. A likely scenario includes an immediate Iranian missile counterattack on Israel and U.S. bases in the Gulf, followed by a very serious effort to destabilize Iraq and foment all-out confrontation between the United States and Iraq's Shi'i majority. Iran could also opt to destabilize Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states with a significant Shi'i population, and induce Lebanese Hizbullah to launch a series of rocket attacks on Northern Israel."

"…An attack on Iranian nuclear facilities…could have various adverse effects on U.S. interests in the Middle East and the world. Most important, in the absence of evidence of an Iranian illegal nuclear program, an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities by the U.S. or Israel would be likely to strengthen Iran's international stature and reduce the threat of international sanctions against Iran. Such an event is more likely to embolden and expand Iran's nuclear aspirations and capabilities in the long term"…"one thing is for certain, it would not be just another Osirak. " [17]"






Synopsis

Regardless of whatever choice the U.S. electorate makes in the upcoming Presidential Election a military expedition may still go ahead.

This essay was written out of my own patriotic duty in an effort to inform Americans of the challenges that lie ahead. On November 25, 2004, the issues involving Iran's nuclear program will be addressed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and possibly referred to the U.N. Security Council if the results are unsatisfactory. Regardless of the IAEA findings, it appears increasingly likely the U.S. will use the specter of nuclear weapon proliferation as a pretext for an intervention, similar to the fears invoked in the previous WMD campaign regarding Iraq.

Pentagon sources confirm the Bush administration could undertake a desperate military strategy to thwart Iran’s nuclear ambitions while simultaneously attempting to prevent the Iranian oil Bourse from initiating a euro-based system for oil trades. The later would require forced "regime change" and the U.S. occupation of Iran. Obviously this would require a military draft. Objectively speaking, the post-war debacle in Iraq has clearly shown that such Imperial policies will be a catastrophic failure. Alternatively, perhaps a more enlightened U.S. administration could undertake multilateral negotiations with the EU and OPEC regarding a dual oil-currency system, in conjunction with global monetary reform. Either way, U.S. policy makers will soon face two difficult choices: monetary compromise or continued petrodollar warfare.

"I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts."

- Abraham Lincoln

"Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government. Whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights."

- Thomas Jefferson

 

[jaguarr]

It's my day to agree with you. Tomorrow, I'm afraid I'll have to go against everything you post. Sorry. It's only fair.

jag

 

[raybia]

It's my day to agree with you. Tomorrow, I'm afraid I'll have to go against everything you post. Sorry. It's only fair.

jag

"Tomorrow" -- whose location
The Wise deceives
Though its hallucination
Is last that leaves --
Tomorrow -- thou Retriever
Of every tare --
Of Alibi art thou
Or ownest where?



Thank God I won't be back on the Hype until Monday!

 

[jaguarr]

*checks calendar* Oh, well Monday will work well. That's a scheduled day for me to agree with you.

jag

 

[Addendum]

Article IV, Section 1 of the NPT

Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.

 

[raybia]

*checks calendar* Oh, well Monday will work well. That's a scheduled day for me to agree with you.

jag

 

[raybia]

Article IV, Section 1 of the NPT

Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.

I think this is evidence that Jefferson was right. (Your sig)

 

[jaguarr]

Article IV, Section 1 of the NPT

Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.

Dammit, we make our OWN rules, 'cuz we're 'MERICANS!

jag

 

[raybia]

Bump

 

[deemar325]

Nah, they need a good whoopin!

I don't believe for one second that the President of Iran has good intentions with the nukes he want so bad.

 

[Milkman95]

^Exactly, take out evil when you can.

 

[rabidfanboy]

Agrees with above two posters.

I don't believe for a second they didn't have any other motives besides energy for developing their nuclear capabilities.

 

[dpm07]

Nothing is going to happen. The US is not going to attack Iran. People are spazzing out over nothing if they think the US will invade Iran. I don't see it happening.

Go ahead and read this article, and you will see:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12285630/

Furthermore:
"President Bush this week dismissed media reports of plans for strikes on Iran as “wild speculation” and said force might not be needed to curb its nuclear ambitions." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12277578/

There may be some embargos set up by the UN against Iran, but it is highly unlikely that the US will invade Iran with a ground force or launch an air strike against the country to punish them for not obeying the rules we have set.

 

[raybia]

^Exactly, take out evil when you can.

If evil rises in the U.S. who is going to take it out?

 

[rabidfanboy]

China

 

[deemar325]

^ America is not Nazi Germany guy.

We have our faults, but rest asured we are not in the business of committing genocide.

Whereas Iran is choppin a the bit to take over Iraq and wage a holy war on the USA and other infidels.

We usually make or attempt to make any country we declare war on free and better than it was before. I just see no good in Islam (religion in general) and that part of the worlds whole society and costums.

I know from first hand experience.

 

[Milkman95]

If evil rises in the U.S. who is going to take it out?

The United States, as usual.

 

[raybia]

^ America is not Nazi Germany guy.

No not yet.

But what would stop us? Who could stop us?

Jefferson said that any Government strong enough to give its citizens everything we need is also strong enough to take away everything we have.

We're actually more powerful than Nazi Germany ever was and we have more bases and troops stationed around the world than any country on Earth.

We have our faults, but rest asured we are not in the business of committing genocide.

Give us proof of that. I can give you examples where we have committed genocide, but the U.S. Government would give it a different name (sematics)

Whereas Iran is choppin a the bit to take over Iraq and wage a holy war on the USA and other infidels.

That is what the media has given you.


We usually make or attempt to make any country we declare war on free and better than it was before.

Do you really believe that?

Afghanistan is such a country that you are describing. Remember?

Its that country that was going to put to death a former Muslim who converted to Christianity. Yes, the same country that American has made better and more free.

Oh, by the way, the Opium trade in Afghanistan that the Taliban had completely shut down. Its back up into production and has claimed its place as the #1 producer in the world. God Bless America!
I just see no good in Islam (religion in general) and that part of the worlds whole society and costums.

That's because you are ignorant about it and your only knowledge of it is from the media and heresy.

I know from first hand experience.

Any first hand experience you have of Islam would only be from some Muslims you have interacted with. And I'm sure that you haven't interacted with all 1.5 billion Muslims so your limited first hand experience by no means define Islam or the Middle East.

Muslims don't define Islam, the Quran and the life example of Mohammed the Prophet does.

 

[deemar325]

^ Not all muslims are bad, but that culture is seriously ass backwards.


semantics? Alright you got me there (Native Americans and all.)

 

[deemar325]

Oh I have a lot of first hand experience, alot!

Alot!