FRIHOST ē FORUMS ē SEARCH ē FAQ ē TOS ē BLOGS ē COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Are you afraid of Iran shoud we start to care about them?





zaxacongrejo
Are you afraid of Iran should we start to care about them?

Well it looks like Iran as doing his homework in the past years and seems to be a strong nation ready for fight should we start to care about them?
Can these Middle East crises affect us citizen of the rest of the world?
And what can we retain from this last 8/10 days in Gaza?
I believe yes and here are my thoughts about the subject
As everyone know Iran has been supporting Syria for the last years, and before, but letís just talk about the last year, and Bashar a Assad still there even with strong support from the USA and ISRAEL to the rebels, and the main cityís almost vanish from the heart surface he and his team are still there in control.

Now in the last week Israel that at 1 month ago as shown to all world the state of the Iranian nuclear program ďNathansĒ (this name always reminds me of how long and complex the Stuxnet code is, how dangerous he still being ) and were the line where Israel will have to do something
Suddenly and with the use of the excuse of rockets they decide to bomb invade and almost Gaza ok ho supports Hamas? Again Iran does, so what we are seeing are tests to check how strong Iran is. How fast their answer is, and guess what they are strong now and they keep the promise to cut the Persian Gulf which we all know will end up with the raising of the price of oil
Now imagine in a near future Israel engage in a war with Iran first thing they will do is to cut Persian Gulf transit of tanker boats and Israel as not enough boats to stop them, and here is when this all this story starts to affect us because Israel will force the USA to use their boats to help
And guess what? What if one of those boats goes down targeted for an Iranian missile?
What will happen? The American nation will demand and answer to that attack, and there you have the united states involved in another war this time against Iran
I know some here do not admit but USA are still the lead of the world economy so each time they have problems soon or later that will be reflected economically all around the word.
Now about the oil, considering that all or almost all the Brent oil comes from Persian Gulf
A war in that zone will automatically interrupt the transit of tanker boats but you can argue but Brent also comes from other countries like Libya yes right it use to come when "Gaddafi"
Was there today Libya as still in civil war with lots of dubious groups claiming parts of the territory so be prepared to pay for gasoline and diesel because and if they really engage in a fight
truespeed
If the Americans could just learn to get along with the Russians and the Chinese we could nip every little potential war around the world in the bud,we could stop the slaughter in Syria for example,it just needs the major countries of the world coming together for the benefit of everyone and not just themselves.
zaxacongrejo
Quote:

If the Americans could just learn to get along with the Russians and the Chinese we could nip every little potential war around the world in the bud,we could stop the slaughter in Syria for example,it just needs the major countries of the world coming together for the benefit of everyone and not just themselves.


You are dam right but how can a person/country ďdealĒ with a 2 sometimes 3 faces person/country?
Obama as being done an awesome work on those subjects
And in my opinion those countries are both like the mythological creature Medusa
From ancient Greece
Because being 100% fair the Chinese are very friendly with one face and them with the other face they attack the American economy and interests al around the world by attacking I mean they donít play by the same rules.
How can an American factory compete with a Chinese factory? Itís impossible Chineseís made good at 80% of the price not to speak about the fakes as far as I know is the only country in the world that supports fakes industry by support I mean they donít do nothing against it they closed their eyes and done

And them all the world suffer invasions of fakes and an invasion that even at the AIRFORCE 1 and 2 were find fake parts.
Thatís also a war but in other fields the economical fields
And what about cyber espionage? Both are guilty
Russians seam to believe that the cold war didnít finish lol
What about the Chinese army why the hell they need a so big and sophisticated army?
More yet why are them exploring intra planetary guns technology?
By intra planetary guns I mean guns that fire from satellites
RosenCruz
Iran is a strong country with a deep culture. So beware all ! They are not IRAQ or LIBYA or some muppet following middle east country.
deanhills
RosenCruz wrote:
Iran is a strong country with a deep culture. So beware all ! They are not IRAQ or LIBYA or some muppet following middle east country.
Well said Rosen. Also I don't think it is just political, there are strategic resources involved in oil. Global powers like the US, Russia and China are all competing for access to oil. So there are economic reasons why these guys may look as though they are not getting on, but are in fact playing economic games with one another. At the expense of every one involved, presently most of all Syria and Turkey.
zaxacongrejo
Quote:
Iran is a strong country with a deep culture. So beware all ! They are not IRAQ or LIBYA or some muppet following middle east country.


thats exactly why i open this topic thanks
mqmpakistani
Iran is going towards wrong direction.

In an ideal world, Iran is a natural ally of West, while country like Saudi Arabia has real Extremist Version of Religion which covers al-Qaida & Taliban and all other Suicide bombers.

While Iranian People are very much liberal as compared to Saudi People.

Things went wrong when US & UK toppled the Democratically Elected Government of Dr. Mussaddaq and installed the Shah (King). That became the main reason why Religious elements succeeded in propagating hatred against the US and UK.
zaxacongrejo
You are right and now 60 years later Iran is threating the world with their and unknown
ďnuclearĒ program, they are not Arabs but Persian and itís an huge country
Thatís why I believe we should start to care about them, and the eventual consequences a war
At the zone can cause us all. Besides they are not only but also the face of big problem
Called new age communism or maybe commucapitalism loll red winds are coming for us loll
mqmpakistani
Actually both US and Iran have to ponder upon the future.

Only if the problem of Israel & Palestine is solved, then that could bring a lot of change in this region.


Sooner or later, the hard core Religious Elements will overpower the King' Families in Saudia and other Gulf States. Hardcore religious elements are spreading at very high speed. Reformist are losing in Iran while hardliners bring this Palestinian Crises as an argument against US.

And if these hardcore religious elements come, then it is sure that there will be a clash between them and the West.

These hard core religious elements are not only in fight with the WEST, but they hate all others (like orthodox Sunni Muslims, Shias and other sects etc.).

So, better for Iran and US to ponder upon their relations and they should try to solve the problems peacefully.
zaxacongrejo
Wow thanks please keep posting help us to understand better the subject
But arenít Saudi , USA, friendly ?or only Sometimes when its sun outside?
When the Palestine problem could be solved people didnít really care about it now
They are the driving line for a bunch of terrorist orgs.
deanhills
mqmpakistani wrote:
Only if the problem of Israel & Palestine is solved, then that could bring a lot of change in this region.
I don't agree. There is an uprising in Egypt at the time of writing this post. Syria is in GRAVE trouble. Bahrain has still not settled after its last major uprising. The latter have nothing to do with the Israeli Palestine conflict. I also don't think that the problem of Israel and Palestine could ever really be solved. Not when it may lead to extinction of any of the two. Which is what it would take to make at least one of them happy.
milkshake01
I am indifferent and not afraid of Iran.
zaxacongrejo
Thatís because you probably write from there. No worries we arenít talking about people but politics my opinion persons are all similar and they all have similar goals no matter the country religion, race, etc., the problem are governments.
And their obsessions keep away from Nathans loll or you will find yourself glowing in the dark loll
mqmpakistani
zaxacongrejo wrote:
Thatís because you probably write from there. No worries we arenít talking about people but politics my opinion persons are all similar and they all have similar goals no matter the country religion, race, etc., the problem are governments.



You are quite right about the "Government".

Unfortunately, the things start changing in my region, and 'Religion' is becoming more and more a driving force and it always run parallel to the Government.

zaxacongrejo wrote:

Wow thanks please keep posting help us to understand better the subject
But arenít Saudi , USA, friendly ?or only Sometimes when its sun outside?
When the Palestine problem could be solved people didnít really care about it now
They are the driving line for a bunch of terrorist orgs.


Yes, they are friendly, but only on "Governmental Level".

But as far as Saudi People are concerned, then they are one of the most extremist people in the universe & Religion is playing a lot bigger role in their life.

That is why there is a lot of hatred against the West and Western Culture in the Saudi Society.

Loving your own religion and culture is one thing, but hating all other religions & cultures is another thing. I am familiar with the Text Books of Saudia, their Religious Scholars and their writings.... and I could tell you that they are based upon hating all others who are not similar to them.

That is why, sooner or later, there will be a clash while madness and extremism has already taken places in hearts of people, and it is only a matter of some time till this appears and spread on mass level.

Please make the difference in these 2 thinking styles::::

1. I am a Muslim but I respect all other religions and cultures too.

2. I am a Muslim, and I hater all other religions and cultures, while they are false, ... and it is my God given Duty to spread Islam through sword and show the right path to people through sword.


Unfortunately, this 2nd kind of thinking is on rise and 1st kind of people (Muslims) are disappearing at rapid pace.

Personally, I love Humanity, I love Western people who respect me, my culture, my religion..... But I have to warn them to be careful, while I see my side is going towards extremism, and to such extent where for sure they are going to collide with Western Culture in name of spreading "Islam".
mqmpakistani
As compared to 'Saudia People', there are "Iranian People" who still love and respect the Western People as human beings.

Let me quote from the poll carried out by a western news organization. It was jointly commissioned by the BBC and ABC News, and conducted by an independent entity called the Center for Public Opinion (CPO) of the New America Foundation. [http://www.terrorfreetomorrow.org/upimagestft/TFT%20Iran%20Survey%20Report%200609.pdf]:


Iranian Shiite Muslims Think Favorably of Sunni Muslims, Christians, [b]Americans and others [/b]

... For Iranian citizens of the Islamic Republic, 87 percent of who in our survey
identified themselves as Shiite, views of both Sunni Muslims and Christians were
overwhelmingly favorableówith only 8 percent voicing an unfavorable view of
Sunnis and 11 percent of Christians. (Opinions on Jews were divided, though
more are favorable than unfavorable.)

Indeed, Iranian views of Sunnis and Christians, as well as non-Iranians generally,
are quite acceptingómore so than the corresponding views of their neighbors,
such as in Saudi Arabia, according to our TFT survey there.

Iranians clearly distinguish between countries and policies they do not like (US
and Israel), and people they do like (Christians, Americans, Arabs, Sunni
Muslims and Jews). Iranians are favorable to Christians by a 6:1 margin, Sunni
Muslims by a 9:1 margin, Americans by a 2:1 margin and Jews by a 5:4 margin.
In fact, Iranians are as favorable to Americans as they are to their Arab
neighbors. The high favorability of Sunni Muslims among Iranians (higher than
for Arabs generally) demonstrates that Shiite/Sunni issues are not the primary
force driving a wedge between Iranians and their Arab neighbors.



That is why, it is necessary that this collision between the Government of Iran and West stops and they find a way towards a peace.
RosenCruz
I really believe Iran and Turkey are different from other countries in Middle east / Eurasia.

Turkey is a strong secular country with a nice army and young population, ready to die, ready to kill

Turks has been in Anatolia since 1071, they know how to defend it, secure it very well

Both Iran and Turkey have strong historical bonds with the geography they are in

Both countries has trained scientists, writers, artists that dominated the middle east for hundreds of years.

They are no post-World War I created English muppets, I believe
zaxacongrejo
Quote:

Please make the difference in these 2 thinking styles::::

1. I am a Muslim but I respect all other religions and cultures too.

2. I am a Muslim, and I hater all other religions and cultures, while they are false, ... and it is my God given Duty to spread Islam through sword and show the right path to people through sword.


Thanks this is very important to understand the way people think
In my opinion a collision between religions like a war Christians against Muslims will never happen because there are so many nuclear power spread between them we will end up causing max extinction to all of us

Quote:

I really believe Iran and Turkey are different from other countries in Middle east / Eurasia.


I agree with you and Turkey as prove that in the last year, they are plenty of reasons to
Do something in what concerns to Syria and Bashar al-Assad
mqmpakistani
[quote="zaxacongrejo"]
Quote:

Do something in what concerns to Syria and Bashar al-Assad



System should be changed in Syria and democracy must come.

Problem is this that opposition (majority) consists of al-Qaida & Muslim Brotherhood, who are really extreme in slaughtering all those who differ with them.

People of Syria seems to be more afraid of the present Opposition as compared to Bashar al-Asad (who is himself playing evil role of dictator). Especially the minorities (Alavies & Christians) have gone completely in the camp of al-Asaad.

Worst thing is this that now Syria and Turkey have tense relations too.


I still believe that BEST solution lies in the resolutions of UN, which demands a free and fair election under the UN body. But opposition is now not going to agree upon any thing less than killing of Basharat al-Asaad.

Very sad indeed to see so much hatred and blood.
D'Artagnan
...Gulf war...
mqmpakistani
D'Artagnan wrote:
...Gulf war...


Not good for the world economy.

Not good for the world peace.
zaxacongrejo
Quote:

Please make the difference in these 2 thinking styles::::

1. I am a Muslim but I respect all other religions and cultures too.

2. I am a Muslim, and I hater all other religions and cultures, while they are false, ... and it is my God given Duty to spread Islam through sword and show the right path to people through sword.




Pakistanis friends said

Thatís politics, not religion, all Muslims should tolerate other religions and cultures hate is not something we want at our religion
zaxacongrejo
Quote:
..Gulf war...


brasil is guilty on this.
selling to iran, military arcenal, are not the best politics
zaxacongrejo
Quote:
I still believe that BEST solution lies in the resolutions of UN, which demands a free and fair election under the UN body. But opposition is now not going to agree upon any thing less than killing of Basharat al-Asaad.


The Turks know exactly the problem thatís way they donít do nothing, they know thatís isnít syrya, but Bashar al-Asad the problem, unfortunately soon Syria will be a new Libya , no control lots of armed groups, this if and when Bashar al-Asad no longer there
deanhills
zaxacongrejo wrote:
Quote:
I still believe that BEST solution lies in the resolutions of UN, which demands a free and fair election under the UN body. But opposition is now not going to agree upon any thing less than killing of Basharat al-Asaad.


The Turks know exactly the problem thatís way they donít do nothing, they know thatís isnít syrya, but Bashar al-Asad the problem, unfortunately soon Syria will be a new Libya , no control lots of armed groups, this if and when Bashar al-Asad no longer there
Think you're right this is going to go the Libya way, except Syria is not as tribal as Libya is. Pretty much only two major political groups, those against the establishment and those for the establishment. What Libya did not have however were the big power political games that are being played out by the US, China, Russia, Iran and Israel. Turkey is more or less a victim of circumstance, but probably also feature in the games of power as well.
JoryRFerrell
If you only had a thousand nukes or so, would you think it was a good idea to attack a nation/nations who combined, have at least 50,000 nukes of their own? I would hope, for your sake the answer is no, because you would be annihilated after launching even a single missile. It makes no tactical sense for Iran to nuke any nation without being attacked first. To launch a pre-emptive attack, unprovoked, and with nuclear weapons, is universally consider an action which warrants a justified defense by any means necessary. I.E. we would not be blamed if we completely leveled Iran for attacking us or an ally.
Basically what I am saying is this: Iran is not full of stupid, ignorant people, who cannot count. They have taken tally of our resources vs their own. They have taken tally our our total nuclear armament and their own. They have found the difference is in our favor. Our advantage allows us to field a much larger armament, built by grade-A engineers. To launch an attack without the ability to defend themselves after having done so, would be suicide. If they are in fact intelligent enough to build a nuclear bomb, then this implies they should be intelligent enough to realize this is a bargaining chip
and defensive weapon only. Again, to be redundant, using this class of weapon, like chemical/biological, in a pre-emptive strikes earns you nothing if you don't have what it takes to win outright. At least the majority of Iranians would be murdered only an hour two (at most) after the very first strike on Western soils (the rocket tech today can deliver a nice size payload quite quickly). This is surely something any sane individual would have thought out, and would indeed consider to be a loss.
zaxacongrejo
Quote:
If you only had a thousand nukes or so, would you think it was a good idea to attack a nation/nations who combined, have at least 50,000 nukes of their own? I would hope, for your sake the answer is no, because you would be annihilated after launching even a single missile.

I agree with you but that only means they had done their work and they are very strong now.
In the other land Iran I governed by ayatollahs and guess what ,religion as never been a good adviser , so is not a science, an ayatollahís riot could end in a direct attack to Israel for example
Quote:
Again, to be redundant, using this class of weapon, like chemical/biological, in a pre-emptive strikes earns you nothing if you don't have what it takes to win outright. At least the majority of Iranians would be murdered only an hour two (at most) after the very first strike on Western soils (the rocket tech today can deliver a nice size payload quite quickly). This is surely something any sane individual would have thought out, and would indeed consider to be a loss.

Again so they seem to be a big player which in my opinion for the zone and world peace is not good
Is true that the zone needs a kind of 2 power in order to stop Israel from abuse like they use to do, but again religion is not a good adviser so having Iran in that role doesnít seem to me
The best choice
deanhills
zaxacongrejo wrote:
Is true that the zone needs a kind of 2 power in order to stop Israel from abuse like they use to do, but again religion is not a good adviser so having Iran in that role doesnít seem to me
The best choice
Seeing how Israel views Iran as the worst disaster for the Middle East waiting to happen, I'd say it would be the worst choice.
zaxacongrejo
Quote:
I'd say it would be the worst choice.

And I agree with you , and thinking more deeply thereís no country in nowadays that can work as a balance power except the USA, because most of them are a mess now, and this will leads us to an escalate of the problem because the one there that can work as balance is not interested and itís too far ,and can will only ďbe interested ďin a case of already a massive war on the zone which is India
JoryRFerrell
I almost forgot to address the threat of a nuclear Iran acting with allies in an attack. The simple fact is that even if China, Russia, and Iran acted together, we would still have enough nukes (possibly even without outside help) to nail nearly all major cities, severely harming their populations moral to continue an extremely bitter and insanely violent war with the US and it's allies. I find it hard to believe any developed nation, how ever extremist, is going to let this happen. Too many people want to live.
deanhills
JoryRFerrell wrote:
I almost forgot to address the threat of a nuclear Iran acting with allies in an attack. The simple fact is that even if China, Russia, and Iran acted together, we would still have enough nukes (possibly even without outside help) to nail nearly all major cities, severely harming their populations moral to continue an extremely bitter and insanely violent war with the US and it's allies. I find it hard to believe any developed nation, how ever extremist, is going to let this happen. Too many people want to live.
Surely nuclear weapons are mostly used for defensive purposes and are there for maintaining balance of power, not for attacking countries. With Iran however we have a potentially crazy man totalitarian regime that no doubt will use its nuclear arsenal to blackmail surrounding countries into totalitarian submission.

Christoper Hitchens, who made a study of this, put it in just the right words for me below:

JoryRFerrell
deanhills wrote:
JoryRFerrell wrote:
I almost forgot to address the threat of a nuclear Iran acting with allies in an attack. The simple fact is that even if China, Russia, and Iran acted together, we would still have enough nukes (possibly even without outside help) to nail nearly all major cities, severely harming their populations moral to continue an extremely bitter and insanely violent war with the US and it's allies. I find it hard to believe any developed nation, how ever extremist, is going to let this happen. Too many people want to live.
Surely nuclear weapons are mostly used for defensive purposes and are there for maintaining balance of power, not for attacking countries. With Iran however we have a potentially crazy man totalitarian regime that no doubt will use its nuclear arsenal to blackmail surrounding countries into totalitarian submission.

Christoper Hitchens, who made a study of this, put it in just the right words for me below:



I have to respectfully disagree on this. If we are worried about Iran bullying surrounding nations, we need to make it explicitly clear that the nations Iran intends to bully with nuclear weapons are OUR allies and will have our support (in terms of retaliation at least) for any possible nuclear strike.
Afterall, the instability of the middle east is bad for us right? So it "behooves" us to look out for any nation in the Middle East who wants our help fending off larger, more capable predators. European countries have even more to worry about than the US. They are much, much closer to Iran, and so Iran, if it presents any threat at all, is just as harmful for them and so you can bet your behind they won't sit back idly and let Iran bully the Middle East without stepping in and asking, "Just wth do you think you are doing?" Even if Europe had no interest in a smaller ME nation before, they'd have to jump in to ensure Iran has a check in place. Everyone is aware of this need. Even if it's a simple buffer formed by smaller, less resourceful nations working together, it's still better than letting Iran manipulate the region, getting it's local opposition outta the way, leaving it free to deal with more distant enemies. Obviously they would use it immediately in an attempt to strong-arm Israel (no need to motivate majority of ME there :\) because the cultures are already at odds and hate one another, but for more distant threats, they'd have to build up to it. They are not just going to try harassing the hell out of Great Britain, Italy, Greece, etc. Iran may want war, but it will need mobility. It would be hard to move resources, transport troops and the like, through neighboring middle East countries (at least openly), because we WILL attack any aiding allies of Iran after a nuclear strike. We would work to ensure, by whatever means necessary, that Iran's neighbors knew the penalty for aiding Iran after it made a completely unprovoked, unnecessary, nuclear strike.

So it all boils down to the only real way to win a war after you launch nukes: COMPLETE AND UTTER DOMINATION. Iran simply just does not have that, and even with allies, they would be more of an auxiliary force, with more capable nations fighting the brunt of the war. If we were to invade Iran, I think it would be a different story, but as for risking launching a massive war with nations far, far abroad....I just don't see it....

And I'm sure ME countries neighboring Iran don't either. Again, if they are worried, someone needs to let 'em know we won't have it, and we have their backs in preventing Iran from using nukes as an ace.
deanhills
JoryRFerrell wrote:
I have to respectfully disagree on this. If we are worried about Iran bullying surrounding nations, we need to make it explicitly clear that the nations Iran intends to bully with nuclear weapons are OUR allies and will have our support (in terms of retaliation at least) for any possible nuclear strike.Afterall, the instability of the middle east is bad for us right? So it "behooves" us to look out for any nation in the Middle East who wants our help fending off larger, more capable predators. European countries have even more to worry about than the US. They are much, much closer to Iran, and so Iran, if it presents any threat at all, is just as harmful for them and so you can bet your behind they won't sit back idly and let Iran bully the Middle East without stepping in and asking, "Just wth do you think you are doing?"
Isn't that EXACTLY what the US has been doing for the last decade and more? Strike alliances with countries in the Gulf Region who are friendly towards the US? It also has alliances with Iranians inside and also outside Iran who are friendly towards the US. I thought that was a focused goal of the US Government when Obama took over as well. To make friends with those countries in the Middle East and Asia who are friendly towards the United States.

JoryRFerrell wrote:
Even if Europe had no interest in a smaller ME nation before, they'd have to jump in to ensure Iran has a check in place. Everyone is aware of this need.
I thought that has been in process already for a very long time.


JoryRFerrell wrote:
So it all boils down to the only real way to win a war after you launch nukes: COMPLETE AND UTTER DOMINATION. Iran simply just does not have that, and even with allies, they would be more of an auxiliary force, with more capable nations fighting the brunt of the war. If we were to invade Iran, I think it would be a different story, but as for risking launching a massive war with nations far, far abroad....I just don't see it....
Didn't the world say that of Germany as well under Hitler in the thirties? Germany was completely underestimated. Took a number of events for the world to finally pay attention. I doubt the world is going to rest on its laurels this time round. I agree with Christopher Hitchens that the Iranian Government is more of a totalitarian than a religious state, run by zealots under the leadership of a mad man. For me there are similarities.

JoryRFerrell wrote:
And I'm sure ME countries neighboring Iran don't either. Again, if they are worried, someone needs to let 'em know we won't have it, and we have their backs in preventing Iran from using nukes as an ace.
I disagree here too. They are worried.
zaxacongrejo
Quote:
With Iran however we have a potentially crazy man totalitarian regime that no doubt will use its nuclear arsenal


Loll if he for some reason starts to be considered a threat to the USA the CIA will do their work
He is often out of Iran is not like Osama itís an easy target
deanhills
zaxacongrejo wrote:
He is often out of Iran is not like Osama itís an easy target
Not a bad idea, however of course if they took Mahmoud Ahmadinejad out, there would be an even greater fanatic appearing in his place with plenty of good reason to start a war with the United States. Foreigners in Iran, particularly Westerners, would be in great trouble too.
zaxacongrejo
and you are right,but that depends on the method used
deanhills
zaxacongrejo wrote:
and you are right,but that depends on the method used
True. Still wonder why it took them so long to sort Osama out. He basically got killed when he was no longer of value to any one any longer. Particularly the Palestinian Military who sold his whereabouts out to the highest bidder.
JoryRFerrell
deanhills wrote:
JoryRFerrell wrote:
I have to respectfully disagree on this. If we are worried about Iran bullying surrounding nations, we need to make it explicitly clear that the nations Iran intends to bully with nuclear weapons are OUR allies and will have our support (in terms of retaliation at least) for any possible nuclear strike.Afterall, the instability of the middle east is bad for us right? So it "behooves" us to look out for any nation in the Middle East who wants our help fending off larger, more capable predators. European countries have even more to worry about than the US. They are much, much closer to Iran, and so Iran, if it presents any threat at all, is just as harmful for them and so you can bet your behind they won't sit back idly and let Iran bully the Middle East without stepping in and asking, "Just wth do you think you are doing?"
Isn't that EXACTLY what the US has been doing for the last decade and more? Strike alliances with countries in the Gulf Region who are friendly towards the US? It also has alliances with Iranians inside and also outside Iran who are friendly towards the US. I thought that was a focused goal of the US Government when Obama took over as well. To make friends with those countries in the Middle East and Asia who are friendly towards the United States.

JoryRFerrell wrote:
Even if Europe had no interest in a smaller ME nation before, they'd have to jump in to ensure Iran has a check in place. Everyone is aware of this need.
I thought that has been in process already for a very long time.


JoryRFerrell wrote:
So it all boils down to the only real way to win a war after you launch nukes: COMPLETE AND UTTER DOMINATION. Iran simply just does not have that, and even with allies, they would be more of an auxiliary force, with more capable nations fighting the brunt of the war. If we were to invade Iran, I think it would be a different story, but as for risking launching a massive war with nations far, far abroad....I just don't see it....
Didn't the world say that of Germany as well under Hitler in the thirties? Germany was completely underestimated. Took a number of events for the world to finally pay attention. I doubt the world is going to rest on its laurels this time round. I agree with Christopher Hitchens that the Iranian Government is more of a totalitarian than a religious state, run by zealots under the leadership of a mad man. For me there are similarities.

JoryRFerrell wrote:
And I'm sure ME countries neighboring Iran don't either. Again, if they are worried, someone needs to let 'em know we won't have it, and we have their backs in preventing Iran from using nukes as an ace.
I disagree here too. They are worried.


I agree that SOME people are doing something. But not the majority. It seems that our media is more interested in demonizing Iran and making them into a monstrous threat, in political preparation for any possible necessary action against them. You have American politicians who just absolutely love sending other less informed people into wars zones to fight for them, and have no interest in squashing this "beef" with have with Iran. For one, it's profitable. People, scared of Iran, allow these politicians, who trump up the threat, to buy more weapons and hand out more no-bid contracts. I agree that Iran with Nuclear power adds complications. But let's think about this fact:
The more the west interferes with Iranian/ME nuclear programs, the more alienated and pissed off these countries feel about their sovereignty. They look at how we deal with China for example. What do you suppose runs through their minds when they do? They correctly assume that if China did not yet have nuclear capabilities, we would attempt to prevent them from gaining any in the first place.
Which is a violation of their "sovereignty". And for a nation which wants to appear rational and respectful of international rights, they see us being hypocrites.

Visit the following website: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB38/

There are reports from the military, detailing how they wanted to prevent "Red China" from having weapons. But in 1964, they finally detonated their first device. And we are all still alive, despite the fact that we are talking about an absolutely desperate, frenzied, Maoist China. We weren't happy when Germany wanted nuclear power after the war. In both cases, it was something to be worried about, but the question is how do you rebuild trust between nations without granting each-other status as equals? These countries look at our nuclear weapons as a playing card that we use to lord over them. Many of the citizens in these countries would like nuclear weapons simply so they can point to the fact that the US tried to keep them from getting them, and they still succeeded, thereby proving their competence and equality. I think this is psychological. They want power so they can show that we aren't their bosses. After-all, they don't pay taxes to the US, so why the hell should they follow our policies? They are independent. They want/need their own ability to develop.
Also, it's about the US attempting to dominate the region to control the resources. A developing Iran means a stronger and stronger Iran, with greater need for resources, and better ability to go grab them. And you said zaxacongrejo, we could "not allow" China to have more oil. Hmm...well...if China needs oil, what are we going to do to China to prevent them from getting it? Iran looks at that and wonders, "So America thinks that if we have weapons, it will no longer be as easy for them to keep us poor and under-resourced? To prevent us from developing? Well....then I guess we need nuclear power. Let's get to brainstorming guys."

By trying to prevent these folks from getting their nuclear weapons, we are creating animosity, and an environment that says we don't care about their folks and their need for resources which can improve their lives. This only emboldens their desire for the weapons, and a desire to "hit us" in any other manner which they can, aside from a nuclear strike. That may mean the support (greater support?) of terrorists who have, by virtue of not being complete morons at fighting unfortunately,
have put up a hell of a resistance against us (doesn't help that we make their recruiting efforts easier with our fancy, 100% ACCURATE JDAM's, landing on civilians).
In a way, we have also shown, once again, how we disrespect borders and human rights with our force, expecting the Middle East to stand aside, while we kill families to "protect" our own civilians.

I am not pretending Iran is peaches and cream, but like us, they don't want any other country dictating their ability to defend themselves and grow. And the only way many people in the US seem to think we can protect our own rights is by preventing others from gaining theirs.

Noam Chomsky actually spoke on this and explains Americas foreign policy a hell of a lot better than I do. Look him up on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rutrNbkrhIA
JoryRFerrell
Also, Saudi Arabia, an intensely fundamentalist nation, is also fighting for nuclear power. Yet everyone seems to conveniently side-step acknowledgement of this fact. Why...because Saudi Arabia has our pair under it's oil-slicked boot, being the second largest supplier of oil after Canada: http://www.eia.gov/petroleum/imports/companylevel/

So when we want oil, we'll ignore fundamentalists who possibly supported the 9/11 attacks, and continue stoning women to death in stadiums. But we'll attack Iran because...you know...they are dangerous fundamentalists...and we don't like that...on...on principle. Yea...yea...that's it...
They aren't a nation of principles, so they can't be trusted. That's what we'll go with. Neutral


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muRXWLjUb90
deanhills
JoryRFerrell wrote:
Also, Saudi Arabia, an intensely fundamentalist nation, is also fighting for nuclear power. Yet everyone seems to conveniently side-step acknowledgement of this fact. Why...because Saudi Arabia has our pair under it's oil-slicked boot, being the second largest supplier of oil after Canada: http://www.eia.gov/petroleum/imports/companylevel/

So when we want oil, we'll ignore fundamentalists who possibly supported the 9/11 attacks, and continue stoning women to death in stadiums. But we'll attack Iran because...you know...they are dangerous fundamentalists...and we don't like that...on...on principle. Yea...yea...that's it...
They aren't a nation of principles, so they can't be trusted. That's what we'll go with. Neutral


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muRXWLjUb90
I can't believe that the US Government is unaware of this possibility. As far as I can see the Saudis only threatened to get nuclear weapons if there should be something happening with Israel and Iran nuclear weapon wise:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/07/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-may-seek-nuclear-weapons-prince-says.html?_r=0
zaxacongrejo
Quote:
He basically got killed when he was no longer of value to any one any longer.


See..? You get it, but in the mean time he was being watched

The problem of the nuclear weapons mass and fast spreading is the Pakistan engineer doctor Khan and his business
He sell nuclear tech to all of those countries from Pakistan, he start to do that at 70s with the Pakistan program and since them he spread to lots of countries like Lydia etc ,after the 9/11 Libya gave to the Usa as proof of good behave 1000 centrifuges loll 1000 and it was Libya so now imagine the other players
mqmpakistani
The best policy is to avoid the fight and tensions.

By sanctions (and if war starts) then you are making Iranian People hating you more and supporting their regime more and more.


The best policy is to solve the Palestine Issue.

This Palestine issue is the last weapon in the hands of Iranian Regimen to defend their hatred against the US. If you take this last excuse from them, then their population will automatically reject the Mullah Regime.


People are also mad upon US due to CIA tactics in this region.

You see, this same CIA formed Taliban to counter the Iran (Note: Western people make a mistake and don't differentiate between Mujahideen who fought against USSR and the Taliban).

Taliban was formed by CIA after the Russsia war. And it's sole purpose was to counter the Shia Irani Mullahs through extreme Sunni Mullahs of Taliban.

Therefore, that caused a lot of bloodshed of minorities at the hands of Taliban. Even these minorities in Afghanistan and Pakistan are angry upon these tactics of CIA/USA.

Now same thing is happening in Syria and minorities in Syria are hating the West. US is directly or indirectly supporting al-Qaida in Syria.

I am afraid that sooner or later this will start effecting US and the West itself. I know the mentality of al-Qaida and Taliban very well as I am myself a Muslim and have directly read the books of their religious scholars.
zaxacongrejo
i agree i some parts of what you said but honestly if those populations support them good to them because they will be the ones living with them the civilized world can always make them stay in those countries.
mqmpakistani
zaxacongrejo wrote:
i agree i some parts of what you said but honestly if those populations support them good to them because they will be the ones living with them the civilized world can always make them stay in those countries.


Unfortunately we are not living in an ideal world and we have to decide for the lesser evil as compared to bigger evil.
Nationalism is a reality.
In name of this nationalism, Mullahs will succeed in turning these people against the WEST. Therefore, this will not be a good decision to give chance to Mullahs to deceive the masses.
As far as I have read and observed, Iranian Mullahs could not be considered same as al-Qaida or Talibani Mullahs. But many people in the WEST are unable to understand this difference. Especially many of the US politicians are making this mistake.
deanhills
mqmpakistani wrote:
Especially many of the US politicians are making this mistake.
I find that strange since there are so many Iranian expats being educated at elite Universities like Harvard, etc and Iranians who have now been living for more than two generations in the US who still have families in Iran and who are actively involved in social mainstreams in the US.

I have to agree however that Iran is probably one of the most underestimated countries in the world, just because its population has always been so diverse making it completely impossible to stereotype the population. Only thing one could stereotype is the present Government. Totally puzzles me that Iranians have allowed themselves to be governed by a totalitarian Government, and can only be true that they will go into uprising one day as they always had in the past. I'm dead certain the US is wise to that and is actively assisting those who are critical of the present Government in Iran.
jajarvin
JoryRFerrell wrote:

Quote:
It seems that our media is more interested in demonizing Iran and making them into a monstrous threat, in political preparation for any possible necessary action against them. You have American politicians who just absolutely love sending other less informed people into wars zones to fight for them, and have no interest in squashing this "beef" with have with Iran. For one, it's profitable. People, scared of Iran, allow these politicians, who trump up the threat, to buy more weapons and hand out more no-bid contracts.


I agree.
For an individual, very difficult to figure out which of countries are right and which are not.

It should be remembered what history is teaching: the winner is always right and the loser is always wrong.

At the same time it should be remembered the lesson of live: life is still not so black and white.



zaxacongrejo
Quote:
Unfortunately we are not living in an ideal world and we have to decide for the lesser evil as compared to bigger evil.
Nationalism is a reality.
In name of this nationalism, Mullahs will succeed in turning these people against the WEST. Therefore, this will not be a good decision to give chance to Mullahs to deceive the masses.
As far as I have read and observed, Iranian Mullahs could not be considered same as al-Qaida or Talibani Mullahs. But many people in the WEST are unable to understand this difference. Especially many of the US politicians are making this mistake.


it dosent matter if they are jiadists mullans binladens bumbum what so ever
the true is

Albania
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Turkey
UK
USA

this what they will have to face if for some reason they get involved in war against the civilized world
you see in this world were i belong we don't condemn girls to dead with rocks
mqmpakistani
zaxacongrejo wrote:
Quote:
Unfortunately we are not living in an ideal world and we have to decide for the lesser evil as compared to bigger evil.
Nationalism is a reality.
In name of this nationalism, Mullahs will succeed in turning these people against the WEST. Therefore, this will not be a good decision to give chance to Mullahs to deceive the masses.
As far as I have read and observed, Iranian Mullahs could not be considered same as al-Qaida or Talibani Mullahs. But many people in the WEST are unable to understand this difference. Especially many of the US politicians are making this mistake.


it dosent matter if they are jiadists mullans binladens bumbum what so ever
the true is

Albania
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Turkey
UK
USA

this what they will have to face if for some reason they get involved in war against the civilized world
you see in this world were i belong we don't condemn girls to dead with rocks



Colliding with each other is never a good policy. But the best policy is to avoid the war and hatred.

What our western allies are not comprehending, is this fact that case of Iran is different than al-Qaida and Taliban.

In case of Iran, if the Western leaders do not show the sensibility, then I am afraid they don't have to counter Iran alone. But there are chances that Russia and China, and south American countries and few non-aligned countries will be standing on the side of Iran.

You could see one such case is Syria, where these countries indeed came to back the Syrian Government. Why?

Main reason is this that US leaders are playing the same tactics of using the al-Qaida extreme groups in order to make and keep this region weak and in destruction.

While on the other side, the revolution of Bahrain is 100 times more legal. But you will see the same US leaders all together neglecting it and turning their eyes away.

These Double Standards is not a good policy. US earlier supported even Saddam Hussain and Taliban on bases of this policy. This does hurt the normal Secular Population of this region and I find a lot of hate even among the Secular population of this region against the CIA tactics.
deanhills
mqmpakistani wrote:


Main reason is this that US leaders are playing the same tactics of using the al-Qaida extreme groups in order to make and keep this region weak and in destruction.
Which region are you talking about? The Middle East? What tactics are you talking about here, and how do those tactics keep the region weak.

mqmpakistani wrote:
While on the other side, the revolution of Bahrain is 100 times more legal. But you will see the same US leaders all together neglecting it and turning their eyes away.
How was the revolution of Bahrain a 100 times more legal? Than say Egypt's for example? So technically you'd have wanted the US to intervene in Egypt as well? And then what would have been left of any democracy after that? A democratic dictator and a neo-colonialist?
zaxacongrejo
Quote:
What our western allies are not comprehending, is this fact that case of Iran is different than al-Qaida and Taliban.


Different in what?
Do you realize that china canít engage in war because they are 100% depended of trade with us? What happen if we stop to buy?
south American? Is this a jooke? Lololl again south American?
Ho? And when? And where? Hugo xaves? Por ahora? O porque no te calhas?
Hey Ernesto Guevara died 50 years ago loll, awake please

Quote:
You could see one such case is Syria, where these countries indeed came to back the Syrian Government. Why?


It looks like they are helping a lot, really????

Quote:
These Double Standards


There arenít double standards,you have to open both your eyes not just one thatís why you see doubled

WHAT IS OF THE INTEREST OF THE UNITED STATES IS OF THE INTEREST OF THE DEVELOPED COUNTRIES AND SOON OR LATER THOSE OH SUPPORT THE MONKEYS WILL BE SMASHED


USA!!!! USA!!!! USA!!!! USA!!!!



HURRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
jazzman
Quote:
Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has dismissed his only female cabinet member, the health minister Marzieh Vahid Dastjerdi, after she criticised her colleagues for failing to provide funds to import vital medicines.

Appointed in 2009, Dastjerdi was the first woman minister since the Islamic republic was established in 1979. While seen as politically conservative, the gynaecologist has advocated a greater role for women in society.

Reports have emerged in recent weeks of shortages of some medicines crucial for treatment of cancer, multiple sclerosis, blood disorders and other serious conditions.

Last month, Dastjerdi said only a quarter of the $2.4bn (£1.5bn) earmarked for medicine imports had been provided in the current year and there was a shortage of foreign currency for the shipments.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/27/iran-female-cabinet-minister-dasterdi-sacked


This is IRAN !!
zaxacongrejo
That happen in Iraq 15 years ago the medicine problem because of blockages
1 female in a huge country this says everything you deserve freedom
mqmpakistani
jazzman wrote:
Quote:
Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has dismissed his only female cabinet member, the health minister Marzieh Vahid Dastjerdi, after she criticised her colleagues for failing to provide funds to import vital medicines.

Appointed in 2009, Dastjerdi was the first woman minister since the Islamic republic was established in 1979. While seen as politically conservative, the gynaecologist has advocated a greater role for women in society.

Reports have emerged in recent weeks of shortages of some medicines crucial for treatment of cancer, multiple sclerosis, blood disorders and other serious conditions.

Last month, Dastjerdi said only a quarter of the $2.4bn (£1.5bn) earmarked for medicine imports had been provided in the current year and there was a shortage of foreign currency for the shipments.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/27/iran-female-cabinet-minister-dasterdi-sacked


This is IRAN !!



I am not in favor of Mullah regime (that is why I don't support Ahmadinejad or Khaminei).

But I am afraid that Western people have not got the real image of Iran and there is a gap of communication.

Another face of Iran is this too that:


1. The Medical Infrastructure in Iran is perhaps more advanced than US itself. Strange to hear it, but it is the truth.

2. At current rate, Irani Universities will be having the 4th largest scientific output in 2018 (after China, US and GB).


3. The 65% graduates from the Iranian universities are the girls. I don't know any other country in the world (including Europe), where women are in such great numbers in the universities.

4. Iranian women are already flying the civilian aeroplanes, driving public Buses and Trucks, working in the industry, playing Judo, football (all games).


5. There may be no woman minister in Iran at moment, but the Western Media is not telling this that numbers of women in Iranian Parliament is normally more than their counterparts in Europe and America. (I don't know what is the position now, but during the Khatami era, the numbers of women elected in the Parliament were much more than any European Country and USA).


That is why my message is always to please differentiate between Saudi backed al-Qaida and Taliban mentality, and the intelligent nation of Iran. For sure, Iranian women don't have so much freedom and rights as the western women, but still they are not in such bad position as has been thought in the western world.

For me, Iran should be natural ally of the West, and not the Saudia. There is fundamentally something going wrong. The people of Iran have very very good opinion about the West, as compared to the Saudia's population, which hate the US and western culture and values to the last extent.

The gaps between Iran and the West must be filled, and path should be found that they don't collide with each other, but resolve their differences peacefully.
RoylanM
I think Americans will never be afraid of the Iran. We are strong country, you mess with us..well lets say you'll end up like Japan ww2 or Asama Bin Laden.We should have no reason to be afraid of them, the question should be "Are Iran afraid of Americans should THEY be worried?". USA has stood strong for centuries and we'll continue that way for many more. I believe we have to threat in the form of Iran.
I'm answering no, I'm not afraid of the Iran.
zaxacongrejo
Now is just a question of time the Syrian regime is almost done
And once they fall ,Israel will have a direct route to Nathans
teno
I am afraid of the short and long term ramifications of social injustice and nations ripping off other nations (which is social injustice on international level).

In other words, I am not afraid of Iranian people, French people, Korean people, Japanese people, Russian people, Egyptian people, and so forth ....

I am afraid of those couple of thousands of people that make huge profits out of the established stream of resources and money. And I am afraid of the weakness of the uneducated minds of the ordinary people that can be so easily seduced. E.g. being told the "enemy is out there" or "you participate at least a bit from the stream of resources going our way, so comply!"
deanhills
teno wrote:
I am afraid of those couple of thousands of people that make huge profits out of the established stream of resources and money. And I am afraid of the weakness of the uneducated minds of the ordinary people that can be so easily seduced. E.g. being told the "enemy is out there" or "you participate at least a bit from the stream of resources going our way, so comply!"
Well said. I'm afraid of the people who effectively are making the decision to create money. And they are not the Government or the people, but the Board members of the big banking corporations.

testsoc
I assure you that the 'starting' to care about Iran began a long time ago, and there are plans and contingencies in most countries.
Related topics
Federal response to Katrina was faster than Hugo,
Rigid School system in Asia
Do you understand women???
terrorism in israel
The NSA is reading this right now....
Iran says will resume atomic work
Hillary playing the race card to slam bush..
SEO techniques
IRAN REFFERAL TO SECURITY COUNCIL
Marines under mortar attack, crying for their lives..
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Second Domain activation
Pope speaks out on Jihad
Is your country on THIS map?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Politics

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.