War in Iran?

[Michael]

so the question is..
should there be a war just cause Iran refuses UN folks to check out their nuclear development..??

i think it seems like a high price to pay..what if the US almost destroys half of iran and kill alot of their own and others.. and then find out..that ohh they where not making nukes.. what then??

a such senario will play out very badly for the US.. will they fall back on the fact that its not their fault..and its the iranians cause they didnt let UN ppl in??.. will they justify the war with that reason??..
and if so will anyone buy that BS??

I am going to respond fast because I am short on time.

There are several things to consider:
1. Iran is admitting to enriching uranium for "peaceful" purposes.
2. The US and other countries HAVE NOT made any claims that they have weapons but do have the intention to make them
3. The IAEE has gone in or is going to to evaluate them and they are saying that they will not change their position no matter what they say

I don't think the US is trying to go to war with Iran but I may be wrong. I think Iran is just trying to....well you know what, they seem crazy enough to go to war with Israel...or let me not say crazy enough but passionate and motivated enough to do such a thing.

I think the only problem we see is inconsistent, politicall incorrect, and dangerous comments coming from Iran. Their intentions only mean harm. I don't know if you don't realize that Artist but the point is that Iran has made some very scary comments that would make me worry about letting them have nukes.

I truly think that this problem, like many out there, can be resolved without war. I don't like war, and when I say that war should be the last resort I mean that.

I think diplomacy should be taken more serious by both ends of the spectrum. Europe has to get guts to stand unified on what they believe. If they do not want Iran with nukes then full steam ahead with diplomatic actions.

Let me ask you something. What happens if the UN passes sanctions against Iran? They don't need Russia or China to necessarily agree with sanctions for them to be passed. What if Iran doesn't obey them? What then?
You really feel that Iran would be perfectly fine with nuclear weapons--if that is their intention?

 

[Osnabrueck]

so the question is..
should there be a war just cause Iran refuses UN folks to check out their nuclear development..??

Actually Artist, the question isn't should there be a war. That's not on the table, even if Iran continues along its current path.

The question is weather or not China and Russia will eventually go along with the rest of the UN security council and approve sanctions against Iran if they refuse to cooperate in the near future.

If not, the rest of the world has to sit on their hands and figure out what's to be done.

 

[LaArtist]

yep gotta agree with you both..
now to every muslim (or atleast me and the ones i know) the state of israel causes many problem for us.. and i feel its missplaced and actually i dont even see it as a real state.. if im allowed to be honest..

BUT ( and this is a big one).. the year is 2006 and we have to deal with situatuon that is.. to wipe out a whole nation as the irani dude says..is just freakin stupid to be honest.. if you make such claims then ofcourse ppl will get alarmed about your intentions with anything let alone nuclear power..

so imo if the iranis does not co oporate with the UN there should be sanctions..

PS
Note imo listening to the UN or doing what they say is not the same thing as doing what the US says (or atleast i like to belive so)..
and just to be clear.. i still belive the US has other intention with a iran war than just guarding their land and israel

 

[SDNR]

Note imo listening to the UN or doing what they say is not the same thing as doing what the US says (or atleast i like to belive so)..
and just to be clear.. i still belive the US has other intention with a iran war than just guarding their land and israel

I hear this propaganda a lot - but it is completely untrue. The United Nations is not run by the US - if anything, the current Secretary General (Kofi Annan) quite obviously cannot stand the Bush administration. What you said Artist is absolutely untrue - Iran is part of the UN itself for gods sake.

As far as sanctions go .....well we are just going down the same path as Iraq .......sanctions will only further isolate Iran ...and that in turn, will continue to fuel radical Islam and it's hatred of the west.

 

[LaArtist]

i think you missunderstood me roberto.. i was saying that i belive that the UN is not run by the US.. and then i just added atleast i like to belive so..

PS
well if sanctions will fuel radical islam and hatred towards US.. what will the a War do?? i think even more damage..
so i dont know how they will solve this problem.. your point is very vaild to..
so i guess the only thing we can do is to sit back and hope that no blood is spilled..

 

[SDNR]

Oh sorry Artist - I did misunderstand. I have heard lots of people recently saying the US runs the UN ........I think they would like to..it would make things much easier for the Bush government if they did run the UN.

I think Donald Rumsfeld probably wishes those planes on September 11 had flown into the UN building instead of the World trade Center.

 

[LaArtist]

yeah man ..who wouldnt wanna run the UN.. imagene the crap you can get away with if you get the approvement of the UN..
well i guess we are lucky that its still free and not ran by any specific country

 

[SDNR]

well if sanctions will fuel radical Islam and hatred towards US.. what will the a War do?? i think even more damage..
so i dont know how they will solve this problem.. your point is very vaild to..
so i guess the only thing we can do is to sit back and hope that no blood is spilled..

Yes, that is the dichotomy here Artist. Sanctions will only hurt the innocent citizens of Iran (I know some Iranians....they are very nice people), the Iranian government has no respect for the UN and doesn't want the UN's nuclear council (or whatever it's called) to be the inspectors of their nuclear plant.

I am not anti-Iran at all, I think countries do have the right to make decisions for their own benefit - but the necessity for nuclear power is very hard to understand in a country that has massive fuel reserves - Iran has no need for nuclear power ......so it's obvious they want weapons.

I agree with you guys about Israel - it's just scary that Israel has nuclear weapons. During the Cold War, the nuclear arms race was based on the [rather illogical] premise that those weapons were a "deterrent" - the unspoken understanding was that the US and the USSR could destroy each other in half an hour ....but nobody would ever actually be the first to "push the button" ...which kind of begs the question, why did they keep producing more and more weapons when they already had enough to kill every single person on the planet in just a few hours?

...but the world has changed considerably since the Cold War - the largest nuclear weapons will [almost certainly] never be used, but we are now living in an era where the actual deployment of small nuclear weapons is not so much a possibility ....but only a matter of time.......it scares the shit out of me actually ...have we learned nothing from Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Chernobyl?

 

[warot]

I'm with you guys that Iran might be doing this for attention, they might not, but either way, a nuke is a nuke. What I am going to say is though, for the sake of the US, I hope they don't go down the path that they did with Iraq. Not that the cause was bad, because Saddam Hussein is a criminal, but because they are increasingly isolating themselves from the world. The war on terror at this pace will never end, because for every terrorist you kill, another one will exist. My point is, the war on terror should not be something that Bush should be involved in.

I hope you guys realize I'm not anti-American (as I live in Virginia right now actually). But what I've realized in my college campus is that people here (and here I mean the campus, not necessarily all of America) is that isolating yourself from the world might do more harm than good.

 

[Bozzor]

I do see that the situation with Iran will result in a military exchange of some kind, but I do not know where or how it will end. That's why my portfolio now is heavily weighted with oil, gold and defense/munitions based investments.

 

[SDNR]

Here is a short example of why the entire western world should fear Iran's desire to have nuclear weapons - to the liberal Europeans who seem to think that if they don't support the US they will be safe ......I strongly suggest they enlighten themselves with the facts.

This is from an article written by Amir Taheri who is a former Executive Editor of Kayhan, Iran's largest daily newspaper, but now lives in Europe.

......Ahmadinejad announced his intention to stand for president. Now, he boasts that the Imam (a kind of enlightened prophet) gave him the presidency for a single task: provoking a "clash of civilisations" in which the Muslim world, led by Iran, takes on the "infidel" West, led by the United States, and defeats it in a slow but prolonged contest that, in military jargon, sounds like a low intensity, asymmetrical war.

In Ahmadinejad's analysis, the rising Islamic "superpower" has decisive advantages over the infidel. Islam has four times as many young men of fighting age as the West, with its ageing populations. Hundreds of millions of Muslim "ghazis" (holy raiders) are keen to become martyrs while the infidel youths, loving life and fearing death, hate to fight. Islam also has four-fifths of the world's oil reserves, and so controls the lifeblood of the infidel. More importantly, the US, the only infidel power still capable of fighting, is hated by most other nations.

 

[Bozzor]

Actually, the reality is America has most of the world's oil reserves. However, they are locked up in shale oil. The Middle East has most of the world's easily recoverable reserves.

 

[Michael]

...for the sake of the US, I hope they don't go down the path that they did with Iraq. Not that the cause was bad, because Saddam Hussein is a criminal, but because they are increasingly isolating themselves from the world. The war on terror at this pace will never end, because for every terrorist you kill, another one will exist. My point is, the war on terror should not be something that Bush should be involved in.

Hmm...I am not sure how to respond to this. Listen, I think that if Iraq would have never happened a situation like the one we are seeing with Iran would be more of a justified reason (I am not saying it is right or that it should be done) to go to war. You see Iraq never admitted to any such weapons, wasn't against the US (publicly), etc. It was harder, in my opinion, to go to war with Iraq than with Iran. But, as we all know it we are at war with Iraq, it is not going to well, and it looks like we (US) are just picking another fight. Therefore, our reasoning and logical justification to go to war with Iran is tarnished because of the past (Iraq). I hope you get what I am trying to say.

I hope you guys realize I'm not anti-American (as I live in Virginia right now actually). But what I've realized in my college campus is that people here (and here I mean the campus, not necessarily all of America) is that isolating yourself from the world might do more harm than good.

You mean people in your campus are ignorant and wish to be isolated from the world? I am sorry I am not insulting you or your collegues, I am simply not understanding what you are saying. I will assume that what you are saying is that the common most accepted notion in your college is to be isolted from the world.

This is not a good thing as Jefferson (or was it Washington...whatever), wanted this for the US. Being an isolationist makes you, I think by default, a protectionist. If you are a protectionist (economical word), then you simply are a mercantilist. If you are all of those, then you are--in most situations-- a realist(one who doesn't trust anyone, etc...I mentioned this earlier). So in conclusion isolationalism is not good because in the end you become an enemy of everyone.

You will see that the argument that I posed has flaws just because I am tieing all those beliefs, and ways of living together. They do not necessarily mean that that is how this world works, but in pedesstrain talk, this may work for what we are talking about.



Boz I remember from back in the day you were investing in ammunition. Still doing that I see.


Back to the Iran situation. I think a military strike against Iran is possible and I mean POSSIBLE. I can see the US doing air strikes in countless places around Iran just to disrupt some operations. However, this may be bad. This can provoke a new type of terrorism. One that does not profess so much a holy war but rather an unjustified attack on a country for no apparent reason. "A country that just wanted to be free and have Nuclear energy to support its growing demands"--this is what would be thought and said by millions around the world. You see, Iraq is compsed of different groups that clash. But Iran isn't. Iran is more unified and an attack by the US would be terrible. Osama Bin Laden would love it just because he would finally have--basically--a whole country in favor of defeating the west, especially the US. This new terrorist unit will have an entity, a place, a position in the world--Iran.

The US and the word "West" are of course synonomous. I do think, however, that this word and the US will mean the samething and gradually Europe will be factored out of this situation.

The Middle East has most of the world's easily recoverable reserves.

This is true with the exception of Saudi Arabia. I remember studying, listening, or reading something that was saying that Saudi Arabia as a specific type of oil that needs to be refined double what the oil in Iran needs to be refined. I am not sure if that is the correct terminology, but I think it is something to that effect. Either way, it was concluded that so many people think that Saudi Arabia can save the US because they are such good
"friends" (bs) because they have all this good oil, when in fact they don't have all this "good" oil.


UPDATE May 5, 2006
Source BBC News.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4975138.stm


Article mentions the following:

"The draft resolution, calling on Iran to suspend enrichment or face "further action", falls under Chapter Seven of the UN Charter, which could ultimately allow for sanctions or military action as a last resort"

"Both Russia and China - the other veto-wielding permanent members of the Security Council - are opposed to strong action."

What does strong action mean? This may mean that they are not in favor of military action, but wouldn't mind sanctions against Iran.


Here is another update. http://reuters.myway.com/article/20...1_L05500235_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-RUSSIA-USA-DC.html

Criticism from the white house on Russia.

 

[SDNR]

You mean people in your campus are ignorant and wish to be isolated from the world? I am sorry I am not insulting you or your collegues, I am simply not understanding what you are saying. I will assume that what you are saying is that the common most accepted notion in your college is to be isolted from the world.

As I quoted in the previous post -

Iran's President Ahmadinejad: "Hundreds of millions of Muslim "ghazis" (holy raiders) are keen to become martyrs while the infidel youths, loving life and fearing death, hate to fight"

Ahmadinejad is absolutely correct about this and it shows very clearly that the radical Islamists have a far better understanding of the west than the west has of Radical Islam. Go to any university in the western world and you will find the same anti-Bush, anti-Globalization, politically correct rhetoric. It would be immensely difficult in this day and age to actually motivate young people to fight for their country ....sadly, this ultra-liberal attitude has made many people unwilling to fight for anything worth fighting for. The irony is, the very system and culture many of them seem to despise, is the one thing that gives them their freedom to live their lives as they do.

 

[SDNR]

"A country that just wanted to be free and have Nuclear energy to support its growing demands"--this is what would be thought and said by millions around the world. You see, Iraq is compsed of different groups that clash. But Iran isn't. Iran is more unified and an attack by the US would be terrible.

What are you talking about BMWFREAK -- even the UN (and we all know how short-sighted they can be) can see no logical justification for Iran having Nuclear power plants -- they have massive oil reserves that serve all their energy requirements already .....lets not be blind to what is staring us in the face .....IRAN WANT NUCLEAR WEAPONS!! ...the nuclear power "thing" is just a smokescreen.

Osama Bin Laden would love it just because he would finally have--basically--a whole country in favor of defeating the west, especially the US. This new terrorist unit will have an entity, a place, a position in the world--Iran.

He already does BMWFREAK -- Iran already is a terrorist state with a leader who has blatantly said on several occasions that Iran will lead a holy war against the west .....wake up man.

 

[Bozzor]

Have a look below...

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002463368_oilstudy01.html

 

[Osnabrueck]

In the very very long run this is good news, because the US could potentially curb the ability of nations like Iran and Saudi Arabia to use oil as a political bargining chip.

However, and it's a big fat however, this doesn't help the man on the street one bit. Just like discovering a new diamond field, there's everything that stands in-between the crap in ground and consumption. High pump prices don't have to do with oil being scarce, it has to do with the entities controlling the supply chain and distribution.

So politically speaking, this is good news for the US, but it means squat when it comes to pump prices. By the time this stuff is extracted, if it's ever extracted, we'll be driving a Generation 8 Prius Hybrid-Hybrid that's good for 120mpg and pump prices will be scaled accordingly to a nice $14.00 a gallon.

 

[Michael]

He already does BMWFREAK -- Iran already is a terrorist state with a leader who has blatantly said on several occasions that Iran will lead a holy war against the west .....wake up man.

Roberto, I am hesistate to call Iran a terrorist state because there are many people that in the country that do not agree with the Iranian President. I don't think everyone, just like in Irael, is in favor of war against the west. I understand that he is not stable in the head, but I don't think that necessarily means that the whole country is behind him. Wake up? Right.

 

[SDNR]

Roberto, I am hesistate to call Iran a terrorist state because there are many people that in the country that do not agree with the Iranian President. I don't think everyone, just like in Irael, is in favor of war against the west. I understand that he is not stable in the head, but I don't think that necessarily means that the whole country is behind him. Wake up? Right.

That may be so BMWFREAK, but President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is only a messenger -- he has been hand picked by the Hidden Imam who is the highest figure in Shiism. Iran's population is 90% Shi'a Muslim and their most sacred religious figure (The Hidden Imam) is calling for a holy war (Jihad) against the infidel west -- make no mistake about it BMWFREAK, Iran is a terrorist state which poses a genuine threat, not only to the US and the west, but also to non-Shi'a Muslims in the Middle East.

 

[wltsm]

I've kinda missed this thread so I'll voice my opinion!

IMO, the war in Iran needs to happen, unless they get rid of their nuclear capabilities! To me Iran is an extremely unstable country and can't be trusted with nuclear weapons! They make treats to the rest of the world, and if they have nuclear weapons they can carry out these treats. We can't allow countries to go around destroying places. This is why the US are fighting al-qaeda, because they are trying to destroy the Western World and freedom of speach and all that goes with that. Especially for people in America, this is very important, they can't allow people to destroy their world as they know it. If Iran does get nuclear weapons, then it takes al-qaeda to the next level because no ones safe, they could destroy cities, imagine if they targeted NY, or London, or other major cities in the world, they could bring the whole world to a halt, and we can't allow them to have this power. I think that Nuclear weapons are useful for preventing war! Think back to the cold war, where Russia and America both had Nuclear weapons. I know America had the weapons before Russia but once they both had weapons it prevented war between the two nations, because both nations very both so scared of each other. Think the cuban missiles crisis, bring the two nations closest together to having a nuclear war in the whole of the cold war, but Russia didn't attack because America had nuclear weapons in Turkey which could easily strike Moscow! I don't think Iran would act in the same way, they wouldn't see the treat from America and all the other powers, and would destroy the Western world! I know I reading a bit in between the lines here, but this could happen!

Also to all of those who think America won't attack Iran because they already have two countries their involved in which aren't going to well, this isn't the first time America has been in a series of war! Think Korea and Vietnam, both wars went badly, in Vietnam America lost 58,000 men, which makes Iraq seem like a nothing war! I mean they haven't even lost 5000 men yet. Also in Vietnam 2.5 million people died which again make Iraq seem nothing. I think that people are making a too big a deal out of Iraq, of course people would normally fight against people who were invading their country, and they don't know how to live under a democracy. It takes time to form a country! This is not a short term war, it will probably take 100 years to form the country, I mean look at America, discovered by the British, once the Americans kicked them out there was a civil war, and a lot of unrest, until eventually America as we know it today was formed!

So In summary, I think America should go into Iran, firstly they need to, because Israel is under major treat from Iran, and like what happened in Ireland and the US backing the IRA, American needs to keep Israel safe, because so many people in America are jewish, they can control who gets in power in the white house. Also if or when Iran develop Nuclear weapons they have huge amounts of power, which IMO, a country in that state should not be allowd to have!

Some interesting websites:

http://democracyiniraq.blogspot.com/

A blog written by someone from Iraq supporting the war in Iraq, showing what America is doing, is supported by people from that country, and hopefully by people from Iran!

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ir.html

Lots of imformation of Iran, including size of Army, and amount of money spent on it!