Pages: 1 2 3 4

 

2008-04-28 05:57:34
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6714|Éire
Take a look at this map...

https://www.leveesnotwar.org/Images/LNW_Iran.Map.gif

That's the Islamic Republic Iran. On it's left is Iraq, recently invaded by the US because they didn't like the regime that was there. On the right is Afghanistan, recently invaded by the US because they said the regime were harboring and aiding terrorists there. At the moment the US have been very vocal in their dislike of the Iranian 'regime' and have been using the same aggressive rhetoric that was used in the run up to the Iraq invasion.

Now does that map not look like a classic pincer attack to you? Is anyone here in the least bit surprised that Iran might want to develop weapons capabilities that would possibly deter the US from continuing their Middle Eastern operations with an Iranian attack? I don't blame them to be honest...I'm not happy that they are going down the road they appear to be going down but I can appreciate exactly why they are doing it. How would the US feel if Mexico and Canada were both invaded and by occupied Iranian troops?
2008-04-28 06:12:10
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,822|6530|eXtreme to the maX
Hmmm yeah.
Also if I had helped the Americans in their actions against Al Qaeda, offered to work with the US to help stabilise Iraq only to be rebuffed and told I'm part of the 'axis of evil' I'd definitely be concerned.
BTW you have to zoom out a long way to find America, actually I think maybe you have to turn it over.
Fuck Israel
2008-04-28 06:44:20
_raab
Member
+28|6658|Western Aust.
Nice observations.

But I think if Iran goes to war with America, we are all just fucked.
2008-04-28 06:49:37
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6577|what

Iran aren't worried. They've seen that Afghanistan and Iraq can't be held securely at the same time, let alone be the base for another attack.

In fact they are probably bolder now more than ever, because of it.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2008-04-28 07:11:24
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7025|132 and Bush

Iran has benefited. America now has the world justifying any and everything Iran does. Do you think Iran would be telling the whole world to screw off while they built Nuclear reactors 10 years ago? Do you think the International community would be looking for an excuse to accept British Sailors taken being hostage in international waters? ... No, playing the part of the victim has emboldened them. If they were worried they would be willing to listen to the world, including their long time friends.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2008-04-28 07:23:14
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6714|Éire

Kmarion wrote:

Iran has benefited. America now has the world justifying any and everything Iran does. Do you think Iran would be telling the whole world to screw off while they built Nuclear reactors 10 years ago? Do you think the International community would be looking for an excuse to accept British Sailors taken being hostage in international waters? ... No, playing the part of the victim has emboldened them. If they were worried they would be willing to listen to the world, including their long time friends.
You're right, In many ways they have benefited but one could also view their defiance on the nuclear issue as them saying 'screw what people think, we have to stop the US destroying us no matter what and that's our primary objective'. On the issue of the British 'kidnapping' I still think that was 6 of one and half a dozen of another as they say...did we really 'tolerate' some British sailors been giving new suits and an audience with the head of State? It wasn't exactly the Munich Olympics now was it? ...and those waters are disputed, the Iranians had every right to be defensive especially given the civilian airplane the US shot down in that region a number of years ago.
2008-04-28 07:34:14
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7025|132 and Bush

Braddock wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Iran has benefited. America now has the world justifying any and everything Iran does. Do you think Iran would be telling the whole world to screw off while they built Nuclear reactors 10 years ago? Do you think the International community would be looking for an excuse to accept British Sailors taken being hostage in international waters? ... No, playing the part of the victim has emboldened them. If they were worried they would be willing to listen to the world, including their long time friends.
You're right, In many ways they have benefited but one could also view their defiance on the nuclear issue as them saying 'screw what people think, we have to stop the US destroying us no matter what and that's our primary objective'. On the issue of the British 'kidnapping' I still think that was 6 of one and half a dozen of another as they say...did we really 'tolerate' some British sailors been giving new suits and an audience with the head of State? It wasn't exactly the Munich Olympics now was it? ...and those waters are disputed, the Iranians had every right to be defensive especially given the civilian airplane the US shot down in that region a number of years ago.
Winston Churchill is rolling in his grave. Something happened to the British Naval might. They could learn a thing or two from our friends.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2008-04-28 07:39:42
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6714|Éire

Kmarion wrote:

Braddock wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Iran has benefited. America now has the world justifying any and everything Iran does. Do you think Iran would be telling the whole world to screw off while they built Nuclear reactors 10 years ago? Do you think the International community would be looking for an excuse to accept British Sailors taken being hostage in international waters? ... No, playing the part of the victim has emboldened them. If they were worried they would be willing to listen to the world, including their long time friends.
You're right, In many ways they have benefited but one could also view their defiance on the nuclear issue as them saying 'screw what people think, we have to stop the US destroying us no matter what and that's our primary objective'. On the issue of the British 'kidnapping' I still think that was 6 of one and half a dozen of another as they say...did we really 'tolerate' some British sailors been giving new suits and an audience with the head of State? It wasn't exactly the Munich Olympics now was it? ...and those waters are disputed, the Iranians had every right to be defensive especially given the civilian airplane the US shot down in that region a number of years ago.
Winston Churchill is rolling in his grave. Something happened to the British Naval might. They could learn a thing or two from our friends.
Lol...go Australia!
2008-04-28 10:46:13
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6915|Northern California

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Iran aren't worried. They've seen that Afghanistan and Iraq can't be held securely at the same time, let alone be the base for another attack.

In fact they are probably bolder now more than ever, because of it.
Yep.  They know we've cycled most of our 2 millionish military force through Iraq and Afghanistan and they all have PTSD, brain injuries, and lost limbs.  The know we've run out of money, that our money is becoming worthless, they see how poorly we handle Iraq (size of California) and they realize we could never take Tehran (let alone the rest of the country which is the size of the western third of the US..and like the Rockies).  I'd take courage too if i were Imadinnerjacket.
2008-04-28 11:14:59
jsnipy
...
+3,277|6946|...

It won't happen. War is not war, it has turned into how does it look on <insert news service here>. If killing everything for stretches was in style, well it might have already happened. Besides, karma is not our side.
2008-04-28 11:18:03
maef
Member
+67|7107|Tulln, Austria
There's no way the US should dare to mess with Iran right now. They're struggling with what they already have going in Iraq and Afghanistan and more and more people consider those missions a mistake.
Taking on a force like this right now would simply brake their neck.
2008-04-28 11:26:45
JahManRed
wank
+646|7052|IRELAND

Kmarion wrote:

Do you think the International community would be looking for an excuse to accept British Sailors taken being hostage in international waters? ... No, playing the part of the victim has emboldened them. If they were worried they would be willing to listen to the world, including their long time friends.
The MOD just admitted that their sailors were in "contested" waters as stated by the Iranians.
"But a report obtained under the Freedom of Information Act has shown that the Navy personnel were taken in disputed territory rather than in Iraqi waters, as Parliament was told
The sea boundary had been decided by coalition forces without the Iranian authorities being informed, the internal report claimed.
The internal MoD paper, headed "Why the Incident Occurred", was sent to the Chief of the Defence Staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup.It stated that since the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s there had been "no formal ratified" border in the area.
"While it may be assumed that the Iranians must be aware of some form of operational boundary, the exact coordinates to the Op Line have not been published to Iran," said the report written a week after the sailors returned."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh … raq317.xml

It seams that the Coalition decided themselves were the boundary was and didn't tell the Iranians. Kinda stupid and bound to cause an incident eventually. Which was probably the reason for not telling them.



Edit:Sir Jock Stirrup..........what a name. lol

Last edited by JahManRed (2008-04-28 11:29:54)

2008-04-28 12:55:12
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7025|132 and Bush

The absence of a formal ratified border is no reason to allow your service personnel to be taken captive. By the same logic the British can start rounding up all the rogue Iranian gunboats in the undefined waters. It is fortunate it worked out in the end (after the Iranians put on a nice show). They should have never taken them if it was in fact questionable. That is how wars are started.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2008-04-28 14:04:23
JahManRed
wank
+646|7052|IRELAND

Kmarion wrote:

The absence of a formal ratified border is no reason to allow your service personnel to be taken captive. By the same logic the British can start rounding up all the rogue Iranian gunboats in the undefined waters. It is fortunate it worked out in the end (after the Iranians put on a nice show). They should have never taken them if it was in fact questionable. That is how wars are started.
I agree. If the world was a harmonious place, the Iranians would have called up the Brits and asked them politely to leave said waters. Unfortunately it isn't, so the whole incident was exploited for political gain. By the British too.
Though I think the story I quoted highlights how our governments are misinforming us intentionally to demonise the Iranians. Which, when you look at the "evidence" told in the run up to the Iraqi invasion and put the current rhetoric in that context, its obviously worrying. More because the west can't wage a conventional war, so what are they building up to?

Last edited by JahManRed (2008-04-28 14:07:17)

2008-04-28 14:46:35
d4rkst4r
biggie smalls
+72|6877|Ontario, Canada
The American's will be in big trouble if they invade Iran. Even though I totally disagree with everything Iran stands for, they sure as have the right to tell America to GTFO. This military occupation needs to end.
"you know life is what we make it, and a chance is like a picture, it'd be nice if you just take it"
2008-04-28 16:14:05
Deadmonkiefart
Floccinaucinihilipilificator
+177|7130
Iraq ignored the UN's demands to allow inspectors in to do their job.  There was no way to know whether Saddam still had WMDs.  The UN and the US had been threatening Iraq for years and had never acted.  Saddam was a genocidal maniac and the people of Iraq are much better off with him dead.  According to the 9/11 commission, Saddam had been in contact with several terrorist organizations that had attacked the US. I don't agree with that particular war, but I think that it could be considered justified. 

Iran has little to fear from the US imo at the moment.  There is little to gain from attacking a backward country that is filled with a bunch of religious fanatics that loath you.  Really, I'm not sure what to think, but I know that many Americans just want to get out of the ME right now
2008-04-28 16:33:36
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6714|Éire

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

Iraq ignored the UN's demands to allow inspectors in to do their job.  There was no way to know whether Saddam still had WMDs.  The UN and the US had been threatening Iraq for years and had never acted.  Saddam was a genocidal maniac and the people of Iraq are much better off with him dead.  According to the 9/11 commission, Saddam had been in contact with several terrorist organizations that had attacked the US. I don't agree with that particular war, but I think that it could be considered justified.
What many people dislike about US foreign policy is that when it suits them they arm these despots and the minute their interests are compromised they send in the bombs and act like the great heroes saving the day for democracy and freedom...utter hypocrisy.

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

Iran... a backward country
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Azadi1.jpg
The impressive Shahyad Tower.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/74/Tehran_skyline_may_2007.jpg
The Tehran skyline, one of the first cities in Iran which was modernized in the Pahlavi era.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Azadistadium_tehran_iran.jpg
The Azadi Stadium in Tehran (90'000 capacity)
https://www.iranianhotline.com/IranPhotos/11.jpg
The Dizin skiing resort, Iran
https://jadi.civiblog.org/_photos/tehran_metro_station.jpg
A station on the Tehran metro system.

A pretty insulting and seemingly ill-informed judgement on your behalf. The Iranians aren't a bunch of simpletons rolling around in the sand throwing rocks at each other you know.
2008-04-28 16:52:38
Lotta_Drool
Spit
+350|6607|Ireland
This forum is filled with idiots.
2008-04-28 16:56:08
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6714|Éire

Lotta_Drool wrote:

This forum is filled with idiots.
It just got a little more crowded!
2008-04-28 17:46:43
TSI
Cholera in the time of love
+247|6405|Toronto

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

Iraq ignored the UN's demands to allow inspectors in to do their job.  There was no way to know whether Saddam still had WMDs.  The UN and the US had been threatening Iraq for years and had never acted.  Saddam was a genocidal maniac and the people of Iraq are much better off with him dead.  According to the 9/11 commission, Saddam had been in contact with several terrorist organizations that had attacked the US. I don't agree with that particular war, but I think that it could be considered justified. 

Iran has little to fear from the US imo at the moment.  There is little to gain from attacking a backward country that is filled with a bunch of religious fanatics that loath you.  Really, I'm not sure what to think, but I know that many Americans just want to get out of the ME right now
1. There is a way for the US to know about WMD, and there was in 2003. It's called the CIA and ELINT.
2. The US and the UN had imposed sanctions--I think that's acting. Plus, the first Gulf war, maybe?
3. There was a report published by TIME in 04/05 stating that the average Iraqi fared better under Saddam than under the US--better security, better living spaces, an actual public infrastructure...I'm not condoning Saddam, I'm just saying that the US has botched it, and made it worse for the civvies.
4. Yup, Iran has the upper hand. America's out of money, troops and willpower...Iran has got all that. The US would die. A bit like Afghanistan for the Russians.
I like pie.
2008-04-28 18:04:33
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6835|'Murka

Why does anyone think a conflict with Iran would be anything remotely like Iraq and Afghanistan?
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-04-28 18:08:04
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6835|'Murka

TSI wrote:

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

Iraq ignored the UN's demands to allow inspectors in to do their job.  There was no way to know whether Saddam still had WMDs.  The UN and the US had been threatening Iraq for years and had never acted.  Saddam was a genocidal maniac and the people of Iraq are much better off with him dead.  According to the 9/11 commission, Saddam had been in contact with several terrorist organizations that had attacked the US. I don't agree with that particular war, but I think that it could be considered justified. 

Iran has little to fear from the US imo at the moment.  There is little to gain from attacking a backward country that is filled with a bunch of religious fanatics that loath you.  Really, I'm not sure what to think, but I know that many Americans just want to get out of the ME right now
1. There is a way for the US to know about WMD, and there was in 2003. It's called the CIA and ELINT.
2. The US and the UN had imposed sanctions--I think that's acting. Plus, the first Gulf war, maybe?
3. There was a report published by TIME in 04/05 stating that the average Iraqi fared better under Saddam than under the US--better security, better living spaces, an actual public infrastructure...I'm not condoning Saddam, I'm just saying that the US has botched it, and made it worse for the civvies.
4. Yup, Iran has the upper hand. America's out of money, troops and willpower...Iran has got all that. The US would die. A bit like Afghanistan for the Russians.
The CIA does HUMINT (human intelligence). ELINT is one form of Signals Intelligence (SIGINT). Read up on it then come back with your arguments.

BL: ELINT doesn't ID WMD. It finds RF emitters and characterizes their signals. Of all the intel disciplines out there, it's probably the least useful in finding indications of WMD.

And again...any conflict with Iran wouldn't be like Iraq or Afghanistan. There would just be a shortage of airpower over Iraq or Afghanistan for a bit...
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-04-28 18:36:08
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6748|New Haven, CT

FEOS wrote:

Why does anyone think a conflict with Iran would be anything remotely like Iraq and Afghanistan?
Because they don't realize Iran is a more conventional enemy more susceptible to sustained air attacks?
2008-04-28 19:12:15
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6915|Northern California

nukchebi0 wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Why does anyone think a conflict with Iran would be anything remotely like Iraq and Afghanistan?
Because they don't realize Iran is a more conventional enemy more susceptible to sustained air attacks?
yeah because they haven't learned our EVERY move in dealing with the damned near impossible to find enemies we're fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq...so naturally Iran would fight us conventionally...  lol

IRAN> USA
2008-04-28 19:14:52
HurricaИe
Banned
+877|6385|Washington DC

Braddock wrote:

http://www.iranianhotline.com/IranPhotos/11.jpg
The Dizin skiing resort, Iran
what the fuck

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard