SubJeff on 12/2/2006 at 08:42
Regarding US money for attacking Iran - let us not forget that Iraq and Afghanistan are already occupied by the US. That's the countries to the east and west of Iran. The US will also be able stage attacks from Pakistan and the gulf. Iran is surrounded.
Not only that but if Iran IS going to use WMD, even if they do not attack Israel in response to UN action (like Saddam did during the first Gulf War in an attempt to get other Mid Eastern nations on his side when Israel reataliated, which it didn't) I suspect that Israel is concerned enough to launch pre-emptive attacks.
And WDM attack on Israel by Iran will cause a like-for-"ololwehavemore"like. I really believe this, but with Sharon out of action it might not be as extreme a response. They are already getting very, ver agitated in Tel Aviv with Iranian statements of late and the nuclear thing.
Deep Qantas on 12/2/2006 at 21:44
Quote Posted by RyushiBlade
To me, this says, "Since you've made such a big deal out of this, we're
going to make nuclear warheads. Unless you stop. Incidentally, western laws do not apply to us. If we want to attack civilians, we will. If we want to use chemical warfare, we will."
I did laugh. Can you do one about China?
RyushiBlade on 12/2/2006 at 22:03
Ok, maybe they didn't say exactly that, but I didn't intend it to be taken completely seriously. The point I was trying to make is that 'they' generally regard the west as blundering fools. If Iran's leader denies the Holocaust, it is only likely he denies Geneva and Versailles. I'm most likely wrong, but did Iran (or any in the middle east) take part in these? Is there anything besides the U.N., which Iran has so far stood in defiance of, which binds the country to those international laws? *shrugs* Politics is just as much about what isn't said than what is. Often it's hard to judge words from silence, and often those listening get the words wrong. It's still worth listening nonetheless.
Aerothorn on 13/2/2006 at 00:57
...did you read my post?
Deep Qantas on 13/2/2006 at 19:50
Seeing as how the situation in the middle east is pretty volatile right now and the world is quite receptive to all sorts of radical messages (Muhammed comics, olol) the only right way to go about this business is to rely on cold facts.
The way you depict the issue sounds like propaganda thinly veiled as innocent questions. Then again... all opinions are just second hand propaganda anyway, right? :p
BEAR on 14/2/2006 at 01:29
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
That does seem a perfectly reasonable game though. I mean, if Iran's leaders oppose everything that the West stands for, then it's only right that they should want to have as little to do with the West as possible (in fact I wish our own leaders would show the same sort of consistency, rather than condemning oppressive regimes but still selling them warheads and equipment).
Whoa there. Iran's president has said this, not Iran (the landmass or the population). That might seem like nitpicking, but it's lazy generalisation to apply such obnoxious views to all of Iran's citizens.
How are we going to wage war on Iran when we're bogged down in Iraq, and will be for years to come?
Well, I dont know what "we're" doing, but I know that the US has more than enough airpower to start 2 more wars, maybe more. BLOATED "DEFENSE" BUDGET FTW!
Swiss Mercenary on 14/2/2006 at 06:02
But conducting artillery and bombing campaigns when in a Democracy leads to staggering levels of War Weariness, which can be counteracted by luxuries, but only to a point.
paloalto on 15/2/2006 at 16:47
Well China which is looking to get more petrol has signed oil contracts with Iran and may not like it if we go bombin Iran.If they decide to attack Tiawan it would further stretch the US and British armed forces.
BEAR on 16/2/2006 at 16:27
Agreed. We seriously need a war with china. That would be great if we could pick one by attacking iran, but only if its by air, we couldnt commit groundtroops cause we would need those for the chinese invasion.
Swiss Mercenary on 16/2/2006 at 17:45
Quote Posted by BEAR
Agreed. We seriously need a war with china. That would be great if we could pick one by attacking iran, but only if its by air, we couldnt commit groundtroops cause we would need those for the chinese invasion.
Heeeheehee.
Haahaahaa.
Which reminds me of a thought I had yesterday...
Now, in Iraq, the natives weren't alltogether opposed to the 'liberation', and all that. I mean, plenty of them didn't like Saddam. Plenty welcomed the, ah, liberators with open arms (At first).
And all that.
Consider the amount of trouble the US is having right now in pacifying the country.
Somehow, I suspect that the amount of people in Iran who will be welcoming an invasion with open arms will be numbered somewhere in the double digits. Namely, the American prisoners who haven't been executed yet, should a war start.
I can't seriously consider that the US and its allies have nearly enough troops to think about pacifying the country. Let alone the fact that last I heard, Iran, unlike Iraq, doesn't use cardboard cutouts to man its junk.
Or, at least, so I've heard.
