Iran Nuke POLL Edition

[aiasib]

How do you think this will Iran thing will end?

please specifiy in comments if you choose 'other'.

i know its complicated poll, but you gotta admit this is a complicated situation

[drakkie]

I think the Bush administration is better off focusing on stability in the region and let them mind their own business. It's the people that should do the job, not some dumbass x000 miles away. But offcourse they can gain no good propaganda from it, so they threaten Iran, who respond with other threats. Thereby giving Washington free propaganda. It's like the Iraq cycle happening all over again.

[clutch-monkey]

i don't know anywhere near enough to reach a confident decision; however, they do seem pretty eager for a fight, and if they have nukes..

[2ndclasscitizen]

I think the Bush administration is better off focusing on stability in the region and let them mind their own business. It's the people that should do the job, not some dumbass x000 miles away. But offcourse they can gain no good propaganda from it, so they threaten Iran, who respond with other threats. Thereby giving Washington free propaganda. It's like the Iraq cycle happening all over again.

Hands up anyone who is surprised by this post.

[drakkie]

Hands up anyone who is surprised by this post.

hey, i honestly believe that Iran is made more of a threat by the media and the propaganda then it really is. They have an old-fashioned army, far from something like a nuclear bomb while they are seen by most normal people as a highly advanced army with a gazillion nuclear bombs...

[clutch-monkey]

hey, i honestly believe that Iran is made more of a threat by the media and the propaganda then it really is. They have an old-fashioned army, far from something like a nuclear bomb while they are seen by most normal people as a highly advanced army with a gazillion nuclear bombs...
well, they seemed to be able to capture 15 british royal marines easily the other day

[nota]

i don't know anywhere near enough to reach a confident decision; however, they do seem pretty eager for a fight, and if they have nukes..
You mean America & Israel, right?


;)

[clutch-monkey]

You mean America & Israel, right?


;)
i thought them wanting a fight was a given, i was referring to iran in this case :p :D

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Iran knows how to push America/Israel's buttons (geddit?) on the issue. it's highly hypocritical of the US to allow Israel access to nuclear technology but not other countries in the region.

This won't end well but i can't see it getting to the stage of total nuclear war - somehow i don't think the conservatives are that ingrained into society anymore. what with their good security ensuring no terrorist attacks in America for nearly 7 years now.....

Wait, it's coming up to an election. cue scare mongering......now.

[nota]

Imo there's a few poll choices that could co-apply. Eg I voted #3 but #10 and others seem equally valid

Observers far more credible & knowledgable than me have been increasingly heard voicing their serious concern and pesimism of America's true intent regarding Iran. Apparently a wide range of signals coming out from the US are not good, and eerily familiar to America's ramp-up into war against hapless Iraq. And similar to Iraq the Iranian Prez is equally as nutty as not just Saddam was, but is GWB as well. If nothing else the ongoing Iraq fiasco has proved that it only takes two religious fundamentalist headcases to destroy a nation, and again it will be the invaded country's innocent citizenry who are stuck in the middle and bear the dreadful cost

[The_Canuck]

well, they seemed to be able to capture 15 british royal marines easily the other day

They were in inflatable rafts...

[Turbo.Jenkens]

it's highly hypocritical of the US to allow Israel access to nuclear technology but not other countries in the region.

Actually the French sold the secrets to Israel and also to Iraq. The Israelis were smart enough to bomb Iraq's reactor in 1981. Bush should invade France next to win the war on terror. :rolleyes:


When Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says he wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth and bring America to its knees, I believe him. Please dont forget that even if Iran cannot make its own nuke it is only one airplane flight away from obtaining a North Korean one.

In my opinion, Tel Aviv is the most likely target.

[Mr.Tiv]

I honestly think it will be used for electricity. Maybe I'm just naive.

[Pando]

Maybe this thread will stay on topic and end with all sides agreeing with each other?

Just kidding, I'm not really that optimistic.

well, they seemed to be able to capture 15 british royal marines easily the other day
Having an advanced army doesn't really have anything to do with that. Given the right circumstances one could capture anyone using sticks and stones.

edit:

My thoughts on the poll is that I believe it will come to a non-violent solution.

[DieFrage]

Whenever some new guy with an agenda comes to power they are looking for a fight, especially a hot war. It's happened too many times for me to have to explain it out in this post.:rolleyes: No one can keep nukes out of the hands of people who want them bad enough. Now that Iraq is pretty much out of the picture Iran feels pretty high and mighty, they want to flaunt whatever technology, culture, influence and regime they have and say "LOOK AT ME". I really don't think that Iran, N. Korea or any other of these countries will use nukes on any scale beyond electrical power and research because the ramifications for such small countires would be devastating. Think of it, they'd have not just the US (under any president) come after them but most powerful U.N. members as well much like Gulf War I when Saddam felt he was strong enough to conquer Kuwait and get away with it. Besides, these countries would have a hard enough time accuratly launching these weapons anywhere past the middle east, or Sea of Japan in N. Korea's case, wether that be their intentions or not they are not a threat to many but something to watch for sure.

[Coventrysucks]

When Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says he wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth and bring America to its knees, I believe him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel

Realise that there are always two sides to a story.

It must be very demoralising for Iranian people to see themselves constantly portrayed as violent savages bent on genocide by "Western" governments and media.

Even if Ahmadinejad does bear such ill-will towards Israel and the West, what percentage of the Iranian population support that notion?

It seems the propaganda has succeeded once more.

[nota]

^^ Another dissection from here

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article16218.htm


THE ACTUAL QUOTE:

So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in farsi: "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."

That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e. It is the word "Regime", pronounced just like the English word with an extra "eh" sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase "rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods" (regime occupying Jerusalem).

So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want "wiped from the map"? The answer is: nothing. That's because the word "map" was never used. The Persian word for map, "nagsheh", is not contained anywhere in his original farsi quote, or, for that matter, anywhere in his entire speech. Nor was the western phrase "wipe out" ever said. Yet we are led to believe that Iran's President threatened to "wipe Israel off the map", despite never having uttered the words "map", "wipe out" or even "Israel".

THE PROOF:

The full quote translated directly to English:

"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".

Word by word translation:

Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).

Here is the full transcript of the speech in farsi, archived on Ahmadinejad's web site
www.president.ir/farsi/ahmadinejad/speeches/1384/aban-84/840804sahyonizm.htm

[MRR]

They will use it to bargain like N. Korea did (I doubt they will give into sanctions unless they were completely crippling which wont happen) or use it to threaten Israel.

[The_Canuck]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel

Realise that there are always two sides to a story.

It must be very demoralising for Iranian people to see themselves constantly portrayed as violent savages bent on genocide by "Western" governments and media.

Even if Ahmadinejad does bear such ill-will towards Israel and the West, what percentage of the Iranian population support that notion?

It seems the propaganda has succeeded once more.


^^ Another dissection from here


Yes because:
"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".
shows no aggresion towards Israel what so ever :rolleyes:

[MadMax13]

Even though i think the US, most DEFINATELY Israel, will strike any nuclear facility i stand behind Iran on its right to manufacture nukes...

[aiasib]

this is very interesting so far, the majority think this will end in a military strike. perhaps i should have specified two different options for 'strike by america', and 'strike by israel', because the they could play into very different scenarios. for example, i think an israeli strike would start a war, but i don't think an amerian strike would. then again and oddly enough, i think an american strike is a lot less likely than an israeli strike

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Actually the French sold the secrets to Israel and also to Iraq. The Israelis were smart enough to bomb Iraq's reactor in 1981. Bush should invade France next to win the war on terror. :rolleyes:


When Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says he wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth and bring America to its knees, I believe him. Please dont forget that even if Iran cannot make its own nuke it is only one airplane flight away from obtaining a North Korean one.

In my opinion, Tel Aviv is the most likely target.

No doubt bush already has drawings made up in regards to an invasion of france - it'll be normandy all over again :rolleyes:

How is bombing so-preemptively (and, i might add, against america's wishes - they were friends with Iraq way back when) intelligent? that particular reactor has still yet to be proven to be manufacturing anything but power.

North Korea doesn't have nuclear bombs - they have poorly built missile dummies. all analysts believe so. their "bomb" was so unbelievably weak it was thought to have been a dud. they have little to gain from selling to Iran - especially when Iran can make it's own nuclear technology.

What springs Tel Aviv to mind? what research have you done to support this?

[Lagonda]

Ahmadinejad is going to suffer big losses in the next elections. I don't think he's going to be re-elected seeing that he's pretty unpopular in Iran. After that they'll probably calm down.

[jcp123]

Frankly, I don't trust anything Ahmadinejad does. After all, he denies the holocaust and is always spewing strange and quite hateful statements. The nuke program may or may not be legit, but in a country with that much oil, it's hard to believe they need a nuke program for electricity, and it would be folly to trust a guy like that. I wouldn't trust him with the time of day.

[Jack_Bauer]

The US has reportedly put plans in place to begin tactical airstrikes against Iran beginning as early as next weekend. That's according to, erm, some Russian intelligence blokey...


Operation Bite: April 6 sneak attack by US forces against Iran planned, Russian military sources warn

WASHINGTON DC, -- The long awaited US military attack on Iran is now on track for the first week of April, specifically for 4 am on April 6, the Good Friday opening of Easter weekend, writes the well-known Russian journalist Andrei Uglanov in the Moscow weekly “Argumenty Nedeli.” Uglanov cites Russian military experts close to the Russian General Staff for his account.

The attack is slated to last for 12 hours, according to Uglanov, from 4 am until 4 pm local time. Friday is the sabbath in Iran. In the course of the attack, code named Operation Bite, about 20 targets are marked for bombing; the list includes uranium enrichment facilities, research centers, and laboratories.

The first reactor at the Bushehr nuclear plant, where Russian engineers are working, is supposed to be spared from destruction. The US attack plan reportedly calls for the Iranian air defense system to be degraded, for numerous Iranian warships to be sunk in the Persian Gulf, and for the most important headquarters of the Iranian armed forces to be wiped out.

The attacks will be mounted from a number of bases, including the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. Diego Garcia is currently home to B-52 bombers equipped with standoff missiles. Also participating in the air strikes will be US naval aviation from aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf, as well as from those of the Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean. Additional cruise missiles will be fired from submarines in the Indian Ocean and off the coast of the Arabian peninsula. The goal is allegedly to set back Iran’s nuclear program by several years, writes Uglanov, whose article was reissued by RIA-Novosti in various languages, but apparently not English, several days ago. The story is the top item on numerous Italian and German blogs, but so far appears to have been ignored by US websites.

Observers comment that this dispatch represents a high-level orchestrated leak from the Kremlin, in effect a war warning, which draws on the formidable resources of the Russian intelligence services, and which deserves to be taken with the utmost seriousness by pro-peace forces around the world.

Asked by RIA-Novosti to comment on the Uglanov report, retired Colonel General Leonid Ivashov confirmed its essential features in a March 21 interview: “I have no doubt that there will be an operation, or more precisely a violent action against Iran.” Ivashov, who has reportedly served at various times as an informal advisor to Russian President Vladimir Putin, is currently the vice president of the Moscow Academy for Geopolitical Sciences.

Ivashov attributed decisive importance to the decision of the Democratic leadership of the US House of Representatives to remove language from the just-passed Iraq supplemental military appropriations bill that would have demanded that Bush come to Congress before launching an attack on Iran. Ivashov pointed out that the language was eliminated under pressure from AIPAC, the lobbing group representing the Israeli extreme right, and from Israeli Foreign Minister Tsipi Livni.

“We have drawn the unmistakable conclusion that this operation will take place,” said Ivashov. In his opinion, the US planning does not include a land operation: “ Most probably there will be no ground attack, but rather massive air attacks with the goal of annihilating Iran’s capacity for military resistance, the centers of administration, the key economic assets, and quite possibly the Iranian political leadership, or at least part of it,” he continued.

Ivashov noted that it was not to be excluded that the Pentagon would use smaller tactical nuclear weapons against targets of the Iranian nuclear industry. These attacks could paralyze everyday life, create panic in the population, and generally produce an atmosphere of chaos and uncertainty all over Iran, Ivashov told RIA-Novosti. “This will unleash a struggle for power inside Iran, and then there will be a peace delegation sent in to install a pro-American government in Teheran,” Ivashov continued. One of the US goals was, in his estimation, to burnish the image of the current Republican administration, which would now be able to boast that they had wiped out the Iranian nuclear program.

Among the other outcomes, General Ivashov pointed to a partition of Iran along the same lines as Iraq, and a subsequent carving up of the Near and Middle East into smaller regions. “This concept worked well for them in the Balkans and will now be applied to the greater Middle East,” he commented.

“Moscow must exert Russia’s influence by demanding an emergency session of the United Nations Security Council to deal with the current preparations for an illegal use of force against Iran and the destruction of the basis of the United Nations Charter,” said General Ivashov. “In this context Russia could cooperate with China, France and the non-permanent members of the Security Council. We need this kind of preventive action to ward off the use of force,” he concluded.

Resources:

http://fr.rian.ru/world/20070319/62260006.html

http://fr.rian.ru/world/20070321/62387717.html

Sauce - http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2007/03/26/operation-bite-russian-intelligence-claims-us-will-attack-iran/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fonlinejournal.com%2Fartman%2Fpub lish%2Farticle_1888.shtml&frame=true

Hopefully this is just wild rumour and scaremongering. :confused:

[Pando]

Hopefully this is just wild rumour and scaremongering. :confused:I'm fairly convinced that's what it is. Interesting if it isn't though.

[Equinox]

I really don't think it's a good idea for Bush or other countries to be threatning Iran. Since they are developing Nuclear technology. If Bush keeps saying stuff, obviously Ahmadinejad will develop weapons if Bush keeps saying he'll attck Iran.

I say, just leave them alone and see where he takes his program. Because saying you'll invade, if he does not stop what he is doing, is not a very bright idea. No wonder the U.S has so many enemies. If someone threatened you. You would eventually want to shut them up to.

[speednine]

I really don't think it's a good idea for Bush or other countries to be threatning Iran. Since they are developing Nuclear technology. If Bush keeps saying stuff, obviously Ahmadinejad will develop weapons if Bush keeps saying he'll attck Iran.

I say, just leave them alone and see where he takes his program. Because saying you'll invade, if he does not stop what he is doing, is not a very bright idea. No wonder the U.S has so many enemies. If someone threatened you. You would eventually want to shut them up to.

Good logic. You know what, the hell with the law against letting felons and convicted murderer's buy guns, we should just give them to them for free also!!!

Hell, here's a novel idea, why not, instead of letting iran develop nuclear technology, we just give them ours so they can sell it to terrorists and other countries who hate the west....:rolleyes:

[Pando]

Good logic. You know what, the hell with the law against letting felons and convicted murderer's buy guns, we should just give them to them for free also!!!What did that have to do with anything. For it to make sense you'd have to add that the government would threaten criminals and say they will be shot if they consider arming themselves.

Also if not being a convicted criminal would be good enough to get someone a gun in my country some alarms would go off for me personally.

[nota]

Hell, here's a novel idea, why not, instead of letting iran develop nuclear technology, we just give them ours so they can sell it to terrorists and other countries who hate the west....:rolleyes:
How is that idea novel? :confused: Too late because the Republican Party beat you to it years ago

"President Gerald Ford signed a directive in 1976 offering Tehran the chance to buy and operate a U.S.-built reprocessing facility for extracting plutonium from nuclear reactor fuel. The deal was for a complete 'nuclear fuel cycle'." At the time, Richard Cheney was the White House Chief of Staff, and Donald Rumsfeld was the Secretary of Defense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran#U.S.-Iran_nuclear_co-operation_in_the_1970s

[Cotterik]

I don't know enough about Iran to make a decision. But what I do know is this. The closer and closer we get to west vs middle east war, the more vulnerable we get because theres nothing stopping them bringing entire villages into our country and taking it from the inside out.

as far as nukes go. I'll believe it when I see it.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Theres some Xenophobia here that i'm really, really not liking.

while i agree multiculturalism only works when people are willing to assimilate into the culture they are entering by the same token trying to keep things "pure" is like trying to stop a waterfall with a sink plug.

I'd die if i couldn't experience other people's cultures and ways of living - if only for the food <licks lips> :p

I think the types of people - those who move but wish to change their adopted society - often for the worse - should be dealt with accordingly.

However if you make these people loyal to their country, you will have no problem.

Does this make sense to anyone else?

[Equinox]

Good logic. You know what, the hell with the law against letting felons and convicted murderer's buy guns, we should just give them to them for free also!!!

Hell, here's a novel idea, why not, instead of letting iran develop nuclear technology, we just give them ours so they can sell it to terrorists and other countries who hate the west....:rolleyes:

What does the law have to do with Iran. They are their own country and the U.S cannot make laws for them. If they want to give guns to felons, well we can't stop them.:rolleyes:

Plus how do you know some American isn't helping Iran. The U.S government helped Osama Bin Laden years ago. And then when the U.S learned he was conducting terrorist activities, they went after him getting him kicked out of his own country... Then look what happened. He fought back!

I am not saying give them stuff (like sell some country in the middle east F-16 fighters, like they did) But why argue when you know they will eventually get pissed and strike back.

The U.S is like a bully. The bully picks and taunts others, until one day the people that, that bully picked on, fight back. If you look at what has happened to the U.S. Most of the attacks where the results of the U.S pissing people off, so they strike back.

[speednine]

What does the law have to do with Iran. They are their own country and the U.S cannot make laws for them. If they want to give guns to felons, well we can't stop them.:rolleyes:


It was a metaphor, apparently it wen't over most of your heads. thanks for reading though....



Plus how do you know some American isn't helping Iran. The U.S government helped Osama Bin Laden years ago. And then when the U.S learned he was conducting terrorist activities, they went after him getting him kicked out of his own country... Then look what happened. He fought back!

Because when our government is threatening sactions against a nother ocuntry for trying to develope nuclear weapons, i doubt we would be helping them. If it was some schmuck, i could care less. America isn't one person.



The U.S is like a bully. The bully picks and taunts others, until one day the people that, that bully picked on, fight back. If you look at what has happened to the U.S. Most of the attacks where the results of the U.S pissing people off, so they strike back.


Right because, we initiated the middle east terrorists to conduct 911?? What are you trying to say? So tell me w hat did we do to the middle east, to piss everyone off before 911?

[IBrake4Rainbows]

you want a list on how the US actually gave weapons to Iraq during it's war with Iran (1980 - 1988)? or how about supporting Afghani Rebels in the 80's as well?

there is a lot of previous efforts the US has managed to somehow look at with rose tinted glasses.

Couple this to it's ties with Israel (which many arab countries wished did not exist) and it's obvious why their is animosity.

[Equinox]

you want a list on how the US actually gave weapons to Iraq during it's war with Iran (1980 - 1988)? or how about supporting Afghani Rebels in the 80's as well?

there is a lot of previous efforts the US has managed to somehow look at with rose tinted glasses.

Couple this to it's ties with Israel (which many arab countries wished did not exist) and it's obvious why their is animosity.

Thank you for the back up. And yes, there is alot that the U.S did to lead up to the attacks. There is alot of documenteries and the like to back up these claims.

If you have the Biography channel or something. The next time a Bio about Bin Laden comes on, or something to do with the Middle East... Watch it and you will see, that the U.S government did supply Bin Laden with alot of resources when they were allies. Because I think Bin Laden had alot of soldiers, rebels or whatever they where called on his side, and the U.S wanted him to help them with Iran because Iraq was invading Iran at the time. (Not sure on how it went but it was something like that).

I can't remember if the deal went through or not. But the U.S did sell some middle eastern country F-16 fighter's a while back. Which at the time where the most advanced Jet in the world. Don't say, "well thats because Lockheed Martin or Boeing sold the jets to them"... No, the U.S government authorized it and gave them a deal. (I think it was Isreal or Iran, but I'm not sure).

[nota]

So tell me what did we do to the middle east, to piss everyone off before 911?
Start at the beginning by looking here - a history lesson definately worth reading

http://www.kinghussein.gov.jo/kabd_eng.html


The present catastrophe may be laid almost entirely at your door. Your government, almost alone in the world, is insisting on the immediate admission of 100,000 more Jews into Palestine—to be followed by countless additional ones. This will have the most frightful consequences in bloody chaos beyond anything ever hinted at in Palestine before.

[MadMax13]

Personally im worried more about what BUSH will do than what Ahmadinejad will ...

[Rockefella]

Personally im worried more about what BUSH will do than what Ahmadinejad will ...

Bush is just about finished.. he's only got another year to his term.

[Pando]

If you have the Biography channel or something. The next time a Bio about Bin Laden comes on, or something to do with the Middle East... Watch it and you will see, that the U.S government did supply Bin Laden with alot of resources when they were allies. Because I think Bin Laden had alot of soldiers, rebels or whatever they where called on his side, and the U.S wanted him to help them with Iran because Iraq was invading Iran at the time. (Not sure on how it went but it was something like that).No that was in Afghanistan. The US government helped Bin Laden and the Taliban fight the worst enemy of them all, Communism.

edit:
Oh and look what I found for all you firefox users:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3792
It made me lol.

[MadMax13]

Bush is just about finished.. he's only got another year to his term.


True, but god speaks to him, and when god speaks to people the shit usually hits the fan...

[MadMax13]

No that was in Afghanistan. The US government helped Bin Laden and the Taliban fight the worst enemy of them all, Communism.

edit:
Oh and look what I found for all you firefox users:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3792
It made me lol.


Actually Communism is only evil because America claims it to be, and brainwashes its citizens to believe it as well. Oh, and it wasnt the Taliban, it was the Mujahadeen...

[The_Canuck]

Actually Communism is only evil because America claims it to be,

It's not evil, just a pipedream.

[Pando]

Actually Communism is only evil because America claims it to be, and brainwashes its citizens to believe it as well.I've heard Communists eat children. As it is a different ideology the logical solution is to declare a war on it. Wars on ideologies are essential for the spreading of happiness, freedom and democracy. Always. Remember - only commies think different.

Oh, and it wasnt the Taliban, it was the Mujahadeen...You're right about that, the Taliban movement didn't exist back then under that name, but it rose from the chaos when everyone was fighting each other.

[Coventrysucks]

Wars on ideologies are essential for the spreading of happiness, freedom and democracy.

Strength through joy, etc.

[jcp123]

Personally im worried more about what BUSH will do than what Ahmadinejad will ...

That's hard to believe...I'm still not sure what Bush did that's SO bad...

[Cyco]

That's hard to believe...I'm still not sure what Bush did that's SO bad...

Lie about intelligence to the UN.
Illegally invade several countries.
Illegally detain and torture people.
Threaten to invade other countries for no good reason.

You think these are not SO bad?

[The_Canuck]

Illegally invade several countries.


Or...one.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

oh, he's invaded Australia Alright, just be stealth.

he's probably watching me right now << >>