alpine_saint Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Oh, wow. A stream of posts blaming the U.S. "Everything is the fault of the U.S, and if we cant blame them, it must be the British Empire's fault" How utterly original.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 (edited) Oh, wow. A stream of posts blaming the U.S. "Everything is the fault of the U.S, and if we cant blame them, it must be the British Empire's fault" How utterly original.... Its clear you really dont know your history. Its not just some randoms on a messageboard, its documented fact. Try this as a basic primer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax Edited 12 January, 2012 by buctootim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Iran is responsible for the rise of Islamic fundamentalism over the past 30 years and is therefore culpable or directly involved in the deaths of thousands via events such as 9/11, the Bali bombing, 7/7, etc. and now it wants nukes to do its bidding. As others have pointed out, you couldn't be more wrong. Iranians are Shia. The attacks on the West are, without exception, carried out by Sunnis - the ones who, on the whole spent the last ten years bombing, killing and maiming Shias in Iraq. The attacks on the West have been orchestrated predominantly by Saudis and Egyptians - all from extremist Sunni sects. None were Shia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Oh, OK. Poor little Iran is all misunderstood. They are of no threat to anyone else at all. Monkey-Face and Khameni want nukes as mantelpiece ornaments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 LOL at the likes of verbal and the rent-a-quotesmuch of my work is directed at this region....will not go into much more but can say that the threat is real........not in real as in bomb the UK with a huge weapon but real enough to fuk all of our lives over very easily............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 12 January, 2012 LOL at the likes of verbal and the rent-a-quotesmuch of my work is directed at this region....will not go into much more but can say that the threat is real........not in real as in bomb the UK with a huge weapon but real enough to fuk all of our lives over very easily............ Right... And they would do this why exactly? What would they gain from this move, save a one-way trip to oblivion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Yeah we know, its being quietly whispered that Iran will seize the straits of Hormuz and strangle the west with an oil blockade under threat of nuclear holocaust. Doesnt make it fact, 'nudge nudge national security dontcha know' simply means people are more likely to be credulous. Maybe if we werent busy deposing their governments, selling arms to the country that invaded them, assassinating their scientists, and putting economic sanctions against them for getting the bomb that far more unstable countries like Pakistan acquired without a whisper - they might be a bit nicer. Just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Oh, OK. Poor little Iran is all misunderstood. They are of no threat to anyone else at all. Monkey-Face and Khameni want nukes as mantelpiece ornaments. They want nukes to stop other countries from messing with them. Your tone is almost as inappropriate to the debate as your line of argument thus far, sir. Pretty much every fact you've listed has been wrong. Not wrong in the sense of "inaccurate" either, more wrong in the sense of "the complete opposite". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Right...And they would do this why exactly?What would they gain from this move, save a one-way trip to oblivion? because they would control the middle east......hence all of us in a way...is just the tip of the ice berg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 because they would control the middle east......hence all of us in a way...is just the tip of the ice berg Do Pakistan control Asia? Their internal affairs are being seriously ****ed with by the US and Israel. If I was President of Iran I would be doing exactly the same things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 12 January, 2012 because they would control the middle east......hence all of us in a way...is just the tip of the ice berg They would control the Middle East after their country has been reduced to a smoking husk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Do Pakistan control Asia? Their internal affairs are being seriously ****ed with by the US and Israel. If I was President of Iran I would be doing exactly the same things. why are you going on about paki-stan?....this is not pakistan...no two cirucmstances are the same....what a very odd comment...it wil only take iranian units to sail from chah bahar or bander abbbas and block the straits of Hormuz for you to start really paying expensive fuel bills, car fuel...christ, even the price of your daily bread will go up..........there is no way, in the interests of the UK will we (more so the US) allow that to happen.....imagine going to the petrol pump and paying double over night.......???....that would be just the start of it.......the gulf states would be strangled as they wont be able to trade etc etc.....again, just the start of it...there is a whole load more that could happen.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 They would control the Middle East after their country has been reduced to a smoking husk? depends if we invade...which would be very unlikely....the country is huge and has a very well equipt armed forces who are far far more advanced than the tin-pot taliban Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 (edited) Im talking about acquiring nuclear weapons - Pakistan did it without a murmur from the West, but when Iran does the same people poop themselves. Id trust Iran with nukes more than Pakistan. Anyway Iran havent threatened to blockade the Straits of Hormuz, they simply threatened to close their territorial waters to international shipping, big difference. Oil tankers could still pass through on the Omani side, just need to reconfigure the shipping lanes. Edited 12 January, 2012 by buctootim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Anyway Iran havent threatened to blockade the Straits of Hormuz, they simply threatened to close their territorial waters to international shipping, big difference. Oil tankers could still pass through on the Omani side, just need to reconfigure the shipping lanes. this closing the straits of hormuz.....which is what they are threatening to do......christ almighty....again, this is not pakitstan, again NO TWO CIRCUMSTANCES ARE THE SAME.......right, if it was just as simple as reconfiguring shipping lanes...why wont we just do it...infact, you seem to be some sort of martime expert, please explain what the reconfiguration would look like...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 12 January, 2012 depends if we invade...which would be very unlikely....the country is huge and has a very well equipt armed forces who are far far more advanced than the tin-pot taliban So you're saying that if Iran launched a large bomb on an item of strategic interest, the West would just leave them alone? And what's all this "depends if we invade" bolox, mate? An invasion is not a pre-requisite for wholesale destruction. You know this. So, let's take it as read that any aggressive act from Iran will be met with a very deadly response. Therefore, I don't buy the notion that Iran will control the Middle East if it decided to attack other nations. It'll be smashed to pieces shortly afterward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 this closing the straits of hormuz.....which is what they are threatening to do......christ almighty....again, this is not pakitstan, again NO TWO CIRCUMSTANCES ARE THE SAME.......right, if it was just as simple as reconfiguring shipping lanes...why wont we just do it...infact, you seem to be some sort of martime expert, please explain what the reconfiguration would look like...? Currently shipping 'in' and shipping 'out' is separated for safety reasons into two lanes. The 'in' lane is in Iranian waters, the 'out' lane in Omani. The Omani waters are wide enough to take both in and out traffic, but would take a couple of weeks to restructure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Oh, OK. Poor little Iran is all misunderstood. They are of no threat to anyone else at all. Monkey-Face and Khameni want nukes as mantelpiece ornaments. Iran isn't misunderstood by anyone except you - you're the first I've ever heard come to that absurd conclusion. I'm not sure anyone has claimed that there are no other threats emanating from Iran. Who exactly do you have in mind when you claim that someone is arguing that Iran is 'no threat to anyone else at all'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Im talking about acquiring nuclear weapons - Pakistan did it without a murmur from the West, but when Iran does the same people poop themselves. Id trust Iran with nukes more than Pakistan. Anyway Iran havent threatened to blockade the Straits of Hormuz, they simply threatened to close their territorial waters to international shipping, big difference. Oil tankers could still pass through on the Omani side, just need to reconfigure the shipping lanes. Minor difference - Pakistan has been technically at war with a country with Nuclear Weapons, (India) and has continued to have regular skirmishes There was also (at the time) the small matter of the sale of US F16 aircraft to Pakistan. Which they paid for and then US changed their mind because of the Nukes and kept the cash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Minor difference - Pakistan has been technically at war with a country with Nuclear Weapons, (India) and has continued to have regular skirmishes There was also (at the time) the small matter of the sale of US F16 aircraft to Pakistan. Which they paid for and then US changed their mind because of the Nukes and kept the cash I suspect the actual difference is that up until now, Pakistan has co-operated with the West's intentions. I don't really see how them being in a 'warm war' with India has any bearing on why they should be allowed to have nukes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjsaint Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Oh, wow. A stream of posts blaming the U.S. "Everything is the fault of the U.S, and if we cant blame them, it must be the British Empire's fault" How utterly original.... The hallmark of lazy thinkers. Blame the West for all the ills in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 The hallmark of lazy thinkers. Blame the West for all the ills in the world. Now that is lazy. No analysis, no reasoning, just a trite phrase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 12 January, 2012 The hallmark of lazy thinkers. Blame the West for all the ills in the world. Or rather, the considered opinion of people that actually know a bit of history and have qualified their opinions. Perhaps you would like to weigh in, JJ? What evidence do we have that Iran is an international aggressor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Or rather, the considered opinion of people that actually know a bit of history and have qualified their opinions. Perhaps you would like to weigh in, JJ? What evidence do we have that Iran is an international aggressor? While 9/11, paradoxically, has precious little to do with the West, you're right in that the recent history of Iran is the history of US interference (1953 and the CIA's deposing of Mossadeq), and the reactions to it (1979 - a revolution that actually began as a left-led liberation campaign and degenerated into the clerics' orgy of power that followed.) The strongest evidence of Iran's international aggression, away from its own borders, is in Lebanon, where it is the chief sponsor and effective controller of Hezbollah. There are no outrages that I can think of that compare to, say, Lockerbie - and actually the Americans are guilty of committing their own Lockerbie with the shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane in 1998. (The US, like the Libyans, eventually paid compensation of $60m+ to the families of the victims.) The worst anti-Western actions that I can recall are the Hezbollah kidnappings in Lebanon and the hostage-taking of American Embassy staff after the 1979 revolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Some people getting really moist at the opportunity to attack the U.S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Some people getting really moist at the opportunity to attack the U.S Link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Team 1. I believe x, y and z is true because of these events in history, these precedents, this evidence and this analysis. Team 2. No it isnt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 12 January, 2012 The strongest evidence of Iran's international aggression, away from its own borders, is in Lebanon, where it is the chief sponsor and effective controller of Hezbollah. There are no outrages that I can think of that compare to, say, Lockerbie - and actually the Americans are guilty of committing their own Lockerbie with the shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane in 1998. (The US, like the Libyans, eventually paid compensation of $60m+ to the families of the victims.) Didn't know this. Interesting. The worst anti-Western actions that I can recall are the Hezbollah kidnappings in Lebanon and the hostage-taking of American Embassy staff after the 1979 revolution. And that's the thing. Judged against some of the atrocities the West has committed, even in the same timeframe, Iran doesn't seem like a threat. Sure, we may not like that Iran supports Hezbollah, but we can understand it - especially since the state itself is honest to a fault about how it feels about Israel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 and Hezbollah was formed because? .......in response to Israel's invasion of Lebanon and attempts to change the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 and Hezbollah was formed because? .......in response to Israel's invasion of Lebanon and attempts to change the government. Not all of Hezbollah's funding comes from Iran. A good chunk of it comes from their base in the 'tri-border' area along a fringe of Paraquay, Argentina and Brazil, where they control smuggling operations. Odd, but true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Not all of Hezbollah's funding comes from Iran. A good chunk of it comes from their base in the 'tri-border' area along a fringe of Paraquay, Argentina and Brazil, where they control smuggling operations. Odd, but true. Ha. What do they smuggle? anything un Islamic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Do Pakistan control Asia? Their internal affairs are being seriously ****ed with by the US and Israel. If I was President of Iran I would be doing exactly the same things. Pakistan doesn't need anyone else to feck up their internal affairs. They've been managing that VERY well on their own for years. They don't need the Yanks or the bomb they have their own word for it, begins with c and ends with orruption Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Ha. What do they smuggle? anything un Islamic? Certainly: drugs, booze, but also electronics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 The hallmark of lazy thinkers. Blame the West for all the ills in the world. Unfortunately though, with the "Forget about Israel" geographic part of the ME that is the Gulf, then the Americans ARE to blame. They supported the corrupt regime of the Shah, even a little easing of his Iron Rod would have kept the Middle Class in check and dampened the support for the Revolution that overthrew him. And Dubya talked everyone into removing the balance to Iran's influence "cos his Daddy left unfinished business". Now IF ONLY he had spoken to pops about why he pulled back from Iraq after Gulf War 1. Anyway back to basics. Russia is worried. That makes a difference, they were supposed to be best friends with Iran Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Some people getting really moist at the opportunity to attack the U.S So do you believe that the US is whiter than white Alpine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 I meant Iran is being ****ed with. Agree about Pakistani corruption, thats why its so dangerous for them to have the bomb. Anybody with a thick enough wad would be able to 'borrow' one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Certainly: drugs, booze, but also electronics. Corrupt old world. Saw an interesting CNN clip about smuggling in Brazil - electronics, not drugs. Apparently there is more money in smuggling an Iphone than cocaine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Russia is worried. That makes a difference, they were supposed to be best friends with Iran Russia's "worries" centre on the underground enrichment facilities. They have called for further talks, and are asking Iran to join six-way talks without any preconditions. I'd argue that this approach is likely to lead to more progress than labelling them the "Axis of Evil". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 (edited) So you're saying that if Iran launched a large bomb on an item of strategic interest, the West would just leave them alone?And what's all this "depends if we invade" bolox, mate? An invasion is not a pre-requisite for wholesale destruction. You know this.So, let's take it as read that any aggressive act from Iran will be met with a very deadly response.Therefore, I don't buy the notion that Iran will control the Middle East if it decided to attack other nations. It'll be smashed to pieces shortly afterward.you think that everything is black or white.........its one big huge game...you just think that should Iran act aggresively we will 'smash' them.......why 'take it as read' about anything.....you carry on sitting there at your PC putting the world to right....meanwhile, in the real world, those of us whos work involves the region know slightly differently........just think of it as one huge game and we pay the price no matter what....(more than likely through our pockets these days).......any wobble from Iran and you watch fuel prices ROCKET.....they know this....our masters know this....everyone knows this....imagine the headache any UK government would have if one morning they wokr up and petrol was £2.50 at the pump..........you get my drift..? Edited 12 January, 2012 by Thedelldays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 I meant Iran is being ****ed with. Agree about Pakistani corruption, thats why its so dangerous for them to have the bomb. Anybody with a thick enough wad would be able to 'borrow' one. Not necessarily. It's often forgotten that Pakistan is firmly within China's sphere of influence, and in the last couple of years, that relationship has strengthened as the relationship with the Americans has crumbled. Hence Pakistani nuclear technology turning up in N Korea, for example. It would damage relations with China - now a vital ally and financial supporter - if the country started loaning out nuclear bombs here and there. Of course, whether the current civilian government or a military alternative are able to retain power against the Saudi-inspired and funded fanatics is another thing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Not necessarily. It's often forgotten that Pakistan is firmly within China's sphere of influence, and in the last couple of years, that relationship has strengthened as the relationship with the Americans has crumbled. Hence Pakistani nuclear technology turning up in N Korea, for example. It would damage relations with China - now a vital ally and financial supporter - if the country started loaning out nuclear bombs here and there. Of course, whether the current civilian government or a military alternative are able to retain power against the Saudi-inspired and funded fanatics is another thing... Sure its an exaggeration to make a point, but the core is true. Pakistan is very corrupt, but is also riddled by disparate cliques and opposing ideologies. In those conditions you would have to be more worried about access to nukes than in a more 'controlled' country like iran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 12 January, 2012 you think that everything is black or white.........its one big huge game...you just think that should Iran act aggresively we will 'smash' them.......why 'take it as read' about anything.....you carry on sitting there at your PC putting the world to right....meanwhile, in the real world, those of us who actually deal with the region know slightly differently........just think of it as one huge game and we pay the price no matter what....(more than likely through our pockets these days).......any wobble from Iran and you watch fuel prices ROCKET.....they know this....our masters know this....everyone knows this....imagine the headache any UK government would have if one morning they wokr up and petrol was £2.50 at the pump..........you get my drift..? Not really, TDD - but that's nothing new. So if the situation with Iran is so fragile, why is the West currently antagonising them? Why did the West, specifically the US, ignore the efforts made by Iranian reformists to thaw relations? The last ten years of US-led foreign policy have been imperialism under a different banner. This is no different, and at no stage during this thread have you demonstrated why Iran is a threat, or what they've done in the past which they may repeat again. Have you ever considered that it might be you who lacks perspective here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Sure its an exaggeration to make a point, but the core is true. Pakistan is very corrupt, but is also riddled by disparate cliques and opposing ideologies. In those conditions you would have to be more worried about access to nukes than in a more 'controlled' country like iran. I know that's how it looks from the outside. The truth is the nukes are firmly in the grasp of the Pakistani military - by far, the most powerful institution in Pakistan. There is no civilian governmental influence over their deployment or maintenance. And the military is certainly corrupt. However, the scandal over IQ Khan, the former head of the nuclear programme, has had a big impact on those in the military who might have once thought about profiteering from Pakistan's nuclear technology. As things stand, and somewhat unknown to the outside world, the nukes are 'co-secured' by the Americans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Have you ever considered that it might be you who lacks perspective here? not really, my work involves this region....i talk about and discuss it daily....so no, not really......trust me, there are plenty of issues that are simply not for this forum and I cant say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Knowing what TDD does at the moment, & where, I would suggest he's much more clued up than the majority. As for the background Verbal, to me at least, seems spot on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamsaint Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Technically he is correct as he mis-spelt & said Iraq.... But IF he meant Iran then it goes into the oh dear category of statements Typo. Meant to say Iran. The US and israel are the nuclear threats , not Iran. Count the warheads. The US constantly stirs things up in a problem/reaction/solution way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Typo. Meant to say Iran. The US and israel are the nuclear threats , not Iran. Count the warheads. The US constantly stirs things up in a problem/reaction/solution way. Poor widdle Iran. They havent got as many ICBMs as the U.S.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Poor widdle Iran. They havent got as many ICBMs as the U.S.. If you haven't got anything constructive to add to this debate Alpine then why bother? It seems you have taken exception to anybody levelling the slightest bit of criticism towards the US without offering any sensible reasons why. I'll ask again... do you believe the US is whiter than white? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 Iran is responsible for the rise of Islamic fundamentalism over the past 30 years and is therefore culpable or directly involved in the deaths of thousands via events such as 9/11, the Bali bombing, 7/7, etc. and now it wants nukes to do its bidding. Clueless, utterly clueless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 January, 2012 Share Posted 12 January, 2012 I'll ask again... do you believe the US is whiter than white? don't think anyone does...if they did they would be mental.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now