Pages: 1 2 3 4 … 6

 

2008-01-07 10:20:28
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|7056|London, England
These guys are clearly a bunch of idiots. Gunboats vs Destroyers and Frigates? Even I know you're asking for suicide there.

Good on the Americans for showing restraint (I'm genuinely surprised they didn't open fire), these dickheads seem to want war with all the kidnappings and provocation. They don't understand just how badly they'll get defeated if they ever really did start with the USN and its Allies.
2008-01-07 10:21:00
(T)eflon(S)hadow
R.I.P. Neda
+456|7264|Grapevine, TX

IRONCHEF wrote:

Oh boy!  Bill 'the bloody' Kristol and Dick Cheney will be frothing at the mouth on their Fox interviews today!!
I being the war-mongering, conservative hate monger, baby seal-eating guy that I am, cant wait to hear it! Plus it's always entertaining to hear the Democrats get "tough" on the Iranian situation. Hilarious Jon Stewart remarks to follow
2008-01-07 10:23:54
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|7056|London, England
If anyone is being the war-mongering conservative monkeys at the moment, it's the Iranians. Obviously the US Gov are up there, but the Iranians seem to be worse.
2008-01-07 10:26:25
G3|Genius
Pope of BF2s
+355|7061|Sea to globally-cooled sea
is iran trying to make friends somewhere?  with anyone??
2008-01-07 10:31:34
(T)eflon(S)hadow
R.I.P. Neda
+456|7264|Grapevine, TX

PureFodder wrote:

The US are clearly the aggressors by default, anything the Iranian navy does just brings them up the US level.

...the real question is why is the US government deciding to throw a hissy fit over a regular occurance?
the audacity of some folks... Where do you people like you come from with thoughts like this? You think it's an "everyday" occurrence that Iranian boat skippers threaten to "explode" US Navel ships... ?
2008-01-07 10:38:04
MrCookie
good times
+31|6432|In a wheelchair.

sergeriver wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

WW3?  Aren't you exaggerating a little bit?
Did you miss history class in school?
WW1 ok, but invading Poland isn't a minor episode.
germany had conquered some other countries (former Tjekkoslovakia (spelling??)) before invading Poland...
i assume u are talkning bout WWII
2008-01-07 10:39:18
MrCookie
good times
+31|6432|In a wheelchair.

G3|Genius wrote:

is iran trying to make friends somewhere?  with anyone??
I dont think so...
2008-01-07 10:47:04
c14u53w172
Member
+31|6433|tomania

sergeriver wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

WW3?  Aren't you exaggerating a little bit?
Did you miss history class in school?
WW1 ok, but invading Poland isn't a minor episode.
killing franz ferdinand was just the straw that broke the camel's back. ww 1 would also have started without the assassination of the austrian heir to the throne

btw: ww 2 would haven taken place without germany invading poland. fascist, nationalsocialist germany and communist soviet union would have clashed at all events
2008-01-07 10:47:38
PureFodder
Member
+225|6720

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

The US are clearly the aggressors by default, anything the Iranian navy does just brings them up the US level.

...the real question is why is the US government deciding to throw a hissy fit over a regular occurance?
the audacity of some folks... Where do you people like you come from with thoughts like this? You think it's an "everyday" occurrence that Iranian boat skippers threaten to "explode" US Navel ships... ?
Is it an everyday occurance to have an unfriendly country's carrier group sitting off your coastline. In Irans case, yes it is. If Iran decided to stick a bunch of missiles on a boat and send them to sit a few miles off the US coast do you think that would be classes as aggressive? Think 'the Cuban missile crisis'.

All we have is an unnamed US official's word about the radio messages stuff, and by now surely we've all learned just how far that bollocks can be trusted. If something even vaguely resembling proof turns up I may believe it, until then I'm assuming it's more crap.
2008-01-07 10:50:06
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6434|...

PureFodder wrote:

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

The US are clearly the aggressors by default, anything the Iranian navy does just brings them up the US level.

...the real question is why is the US government deciding to throw a hissy fit over a regular occurance?
the audacity of some folks... Where do you people like you come from with thoughts like this? You think it's an "everyday" occurrence that Iranian boat skippers threaten to "explode" US Navel ships... ?
Is it an everyday occurance to have an unfriendly country's carrier group sitting off your coastline. In Irans case, yes it is. If Iran decided to stick a bunch of missiles on a boat and send them to sit a few miles off the US coast do you think that would be classes as aggressive? Think 'the Cuban missile crisis'.

All we have is an unnamed US official's word about the radio messages stuff, and by now surely we've all learned just how far that bollocks can be trusted. If something even vaguely resembling proof turns up I may believe it, until then I'm assuming it's more crap.
You know that Iran has being doing a whole load of shady things the past few years which considerably give me more trust in the american pentagon rather than ahmoudinejad&friends.
inane little opines
2008-01-07 11:01:34
PluggedValve
Member
+17|6775

dayarath wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:


the audacity of some folks... Where do you people like you come from with thoughts like this? You think it's an "everyday" occurrence that Iranian boat skippers threaten to "explode" US Navel ships... ?
Is it an everyday occurance to have an unfriendly country's carrier group sitting off your coastline. In Irans case, yes it is. If Iran decided to stick a bunch of missiles on a boat and send them to sit a few miles off the US coast do you think that would be classes as aggressive? Think 'the Cuban missile crisis'.

All we have is an unnamed US official's word about the radio messages stuff, and by now surely we've all learned just how far that bollocks can be trusted. If something even vaguely resembling proof turns up I may believe it, until then I'm assuming it's more crap.
You know that Iran has being doing a whole load of shady things the past few years which considerably give me more trust in the american pentagon rather than ahmoudinejad&friends.
Of course thats the info you got from Fox and CNN.  They say its Iran doing shady things but they dont report the shady activities of the US.  Dont believe everything your told because inevitably some is just BS.
2008-01-07 11:05:21
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6434|...

PluggedValve wrote:

dayarath wrote:

PureFodder wrote:


Is it an everyday occurance to have an unfriendly country's carrier group sitting off your coastline. In Irans case, yes it is. If Iran decided to stick a bunch of missiles on a boat and send them to sit a few miles off the US coast do you think that would be classes as aggressive? Think 'the Cuban missile crisis'.

All we have is an unnamed US official's word about the radio messages stuff, and by now surely we've all learned just how far that bollocks can be trusted. If something even vaguely resembling proof turns up I may believe it, until then I'm assuming it's more crap.
You know that Iran has being doing a whole load of shady things the past few years which considerably give me more trust in the american pentagon rather than ahmoudinejad&friends.
Of course thats the info you got from Fox and CNN.  They say its Iran doing shady things but they dont report the shady activities of the US.  Dont believe everything your told because inevitably some is just BS.
I don't see kidnapping british sailors and marines then releasing them as a gift to the brits as bullshit.

I don't see toying around with numbers involving nuclear energy and transportation as bullshit.

I don't see swearing to decimate an entire country as bullshit.

the list goes on long, ofcourse I don't believe all that fox and CNN say but Iran has way more bad traits in it's government than you'd suspect, they're a danger to their people and to us.
inane little opines
2008-01-07 11:09:02
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|7125|Tampa Bay Florida
World War 3?  Ummmmmmmm k.
2008-01-07 11:41:32
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6880|The Land of Scott Walker
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast … nes.crash/

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Two U.S. Navy F-18 Super Hornets -- flying off the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman -- crashed Monday night in the Persian Gulf, U.S. Navy officials said.

The aircrafts' three aviators were recovered safely after they ejected from the jets -- a single-seat F-18E and two-seat F-18F.  The U.S. Navy did not immediately know the cause of the F-18 crash.  There is no indication of hostile fire action, the officials said.  The incident is not related to Sunday's confrontation between three U.S. Navy warships and five Iranian boats, Navy officials said.
2008-01-07 11:44:01
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6990
My take is that Iran have been off the front pages for a while which is not what Bush & co want, so now they're back on the front pages... Damn Pakistanis stealing all the headlines...

Expect an Iranian retaliatory 'media salvo' in the next week or two.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-01-07 11:47:00)

2008-01-07 11:48:27
Lai
Member
+186|6586

Mek-Izzle wrote:

These guys are clearly a bunch of idiots. Gunboats vs Destroyers and Frigates? Even I know you're asking for suicide there.
Cheap Explosives + Speedboat = Jihad RIB > Bye Bye Frigate!
2008-01-07 11:50:52
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|7079
who cares who is right and wrong.  this shit doesnt matter when you have cable news networks
2008-01-07 12:07:37
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7196

Spearhead wrote:

World War 3?  Ummmmmmmm k.
Thanks for your input.
2008-01-07 12:15:52
Ajax_the_Great1
Dropped on request
+206|7081
WW3? Who is on Iran's side?
2008-01-07 12:18:18
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6434|...

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

WW3? Who is on Iran's side?
a number of arab nations and a big red sleeping bear + a potential dragon.
inane little opines
2008-01-07 12:56:30
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|7079
where is this defense pact russia has with iran?

iran just doesnt want to fire the first official shots.
2008-01-07 13:30:55
Lai
Member
+186|6586

dayarath wrote:

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

WW3? Who is on Iran's side?
a number of arab nations and a big red sleeping bear + a potential dragon.
Why would Russia and/or China possibly side with Iran?
2008-01-07 13:33:34
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,991|7067|949

dayarath wrote:

PluggedValve wrote:

dayarath wrote:

You know that Iran has being doing a whole load of shady things the past few years which considerably give me more trust in the american pentagon rather than ahmoudinejad&friends.
Of course thats the info you got from Fox and CNN.  They say its Iran doing shady things but they dont report the shady activities of the US.  Dont believe everything your told because inevitably some is just BS.
I don't see kidnapping british sailors and marines then releasing them as a gift to the brits as bullshit.

I don't see toying around with numbers involving nuclear energy and transportation as bullshit.

I don't see swearing to decimate an entire country as bullshit.

the list goes on long, ofcourse I don't believe all that fox and CNN say but Iran has way more bad traits in it's government than you'd suspect, they're a danger to their people and to us.
PureFodder's analysis is the most sound in this thread.  We (U.S.) have a carrier group in international water right outside Iran - that is being aggressive.  Sure, it could be protecting our (economic and industrial) interests, nonetheless it is still aggressive.

I don't see the U.S. kidnapping Iraqi, German, Canadian, and Afghani citizens and allegedly torturing them then releasing them as great foreign policy either.  Not to mention taking a U.S. citizen into military custody and naming him an unlawful combatant not subject to law and procedure afforded all U.S. citizens under the Constitutiton.

Iran's people (nor its leaders) have ever swore to decimate an entire country.  That line of yours IS bullshit.  In fact, I would say the current Bush Administration (and a few presidential candidates) have been more aggressive in their comments about the international landscape than Iran.

Perception and interpretation is what people need to understand.  Iranian media and government are going to spin the incident one way, US media and government another.  The fact of the matter is, Iran is trying to show it too has power in the region, something the US has been doing rather effectively for at least the last 20 years.  Personally, I do not think a unipolar power arrangement internationally is a good thing at all, because all the focus internationally is on the U.S. - which is what you have here.

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2008-01-07 14:32:51)

2008-01-07 13:33:43
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|7079

Lai wrote:

dayarath wrote:

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

WW3? Who is on Iran's side?
a number of arab nations and a big red sleeping bear + a potential dragon.
Why would Russia and/or China possibly side with Iran?
for some reason, we have some fairy tales about a russian defense pact with iran.

Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2008-01-07 13:33:55)

2008-01-07 13:34:06
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6990

Lai wrote:

dayarath wrote:

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

WW3? Who is on Iran's side?
a number of arab nations and a big red sleeping bear + a potential dragon.
Why would Russia and/or China possibly side with Iran?
Not that I entertain any of this ludicrous WWIII jazz but China and Russia would side with Iran or at least side against the US (not militarily, clandestinely perhaps and certainly before any US action took place) because it would upset the natural resource balance of power with the US being able to hold China to ransom and severely weaken Russia's influence in the energy world with its hegemony over Iranian natural resource wealth.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-01-07 13:36:18)

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 … 6

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard