BF2S Forums U.N. Nuke Chief: Mideast Could Burn If Iran Attacked

Lotta_Drool wrote:

The UN is already showing what PUSSIES they are.  Iran is going to do WTF they want to now, this is like a green light.

We've all known what a bunch of pussies the UN were from their complete inability to act against Israel despite their complete defiance of accepted International codes of practice in relation to the development and stockpiling of nuclear weapons.

Lotta_Drool wrote:

PEACE AT ALL COST, appeasement workds so well.  I just hope the US stays out of the shit unless we carpet bomb Iran the day they anounce they have nukes.  Not on fucking US soldier should ever step into that shit hole country that is run by Islamofucktards itching for war with Israel and the west.

I agree with you that not a single US soldier should set foot in Iran because they have no fucking business being there but Iran is not a shithole country as you claim, it is a progressive (by Middle Eastern standards), modern, moderate Islamic nation full of normal, reasonable people the same as most other countries in the world. I'm sure there are nutjobs and extremists and people who truly believe that Israel should be destroyed but the attitude and rhetoric of resident idiot Imadinnerjacket should not be taken to be the position of the Iranian people as a whole...is everyone in America a God-loving, right wing, redneck simpleton, who believes wholeheartedly in the 'war on terror' like George Bush? I think not. And at the end of the day they want probably nukes because their continually aggressive neighbour Israel have them and they've also just seen two of their neighbouring countries invaded and destroyed by the US, they have a right to be paranoid.

Lotta_Drool wrote:

Sorry, but Iran should have no beef with Israel or the west.  They have been told they are not allowed to have nukes already, just wait and fuck em up when they get them.

Why were Israel not 'fucked up' when it was found out that they had nuclear weapons? One rule for one country and another rule for everyone else...well the rest of the world doesn't work that way. Nuclear weapons are probably the only thing that would completely guarantee Iran saftey from a US attack and hence that is why they are probably pursuing them.

CameronPoe wrote:

Oh and Lotta - try reading Persian history from 1800 onwards to see why Iran would 'have a beef' with the west.

Especially the Arabs from the West, they're the ones that did the most damage out of all of them.

CameronPoe wrote:

Lotta seems to forget the fact that a strike on Iran will reduce western economies to ashes. Unless we develop a way to harness 'fart power'.

At the end of the day the NPT is a pile of bollocks aimed at keeping the west in charge of the world. Eventually nuclear technology will belong to anyone who wants it - when nuclear power becomes the only viable source of electricity the west will simply not be able to police it, nor should they be afforded the right to compromise the sovereignty of others.

Oh and Lotta - try reading Persian history from 1800 onwards to see why Iran would 'have a beef' with the west.

Iran doesn't have that much oil.

So it is not how Iran is treated now, it is how they were in the past and that is why Iran should fuck with American troops in Iraq and threaten Israel.  Your a real turd monger to think that way.  I guess the world should still be after Germany because of the '40s and Indians should still be raiding settlements in the US.

Give it a rest.

CameronPoe wrote:

Lotta_Drool wrote:

Iran doesn't have that much oil.

So it is not how Iran is treated now, it is how they were in the past and that is why Iran should fuck with American troops in Iraq and threaten Israel.  Your a real turd monger to think that way.  I guess the world should still be after Germany because of the '40s and Indians should still be raiding settlements in the US.

Give it a rest.

The US is a threat to Iran, you need only go as far back as the 50s, 60s and 70s for proof. And now the US military are on both the western and eastern borders of Iran. Israel currently occupies the third holiest shrine in the Islamic world and is armed to the teeth by the US. Now if I was an Iranian leader I would have to be stupid not to be pushing for a means of preventing the US from attacking me or compromising my country. It would make sense to arm those who have the US as a common enemy. It would make sense to develop nuclear weapons. What is so hard to comprehend here? Are you slow or something?

Oh and...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves#Iran

10% of the world's total proven petroleum reserves.

PS The world fully took Germany to task for their indiscretions. Native Americans have been shat on from upon high and the only reason why them taking such action wouldn't be justified is because it would be like pissing into the wind, completely futile.

3rd holiest shrine eh, and this is why Iran should threaten Israel eh? Do you realise how stupid you sound spouting this crap? 

What is the US currently doing to Iran that justifies them being hostile toward the US? 

Trying to develop nukes seems like it is working well deter hostilities?

Israel currently occupies the third holiest shrine in the Islamic world

Yeah, which was built ontop of the destroyed ruins of one of Judaism's holiest shrines!

Those crafty Muslims, they're lucky the Jews haven't destroyed it and built a third temple

Lotta_Drool wrote:

3rd holiest shrine eh, and this is why Iran should threaten Israel eh? Do you realise how stupid you sound spouting this crap? 

What is the US currently doing to Iran that justifies them being hostile toward the US? 

Trying to develop nukes seems like it is working well deter hostilities?

OK I'll paint you the picture seeing as you're too lazy to read into why Iran are deeply deeply suspicious of the US. I'll start in 1951.

1951: Democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran Mohammed Mossadeq nationalises the Iranian oil industry after the parliament of Iran unanimously agreed to such a measure following massive popular domestic pressure.

1953: The US initiate Operation Ajax, now declassified, whereby the CIA organised a coup against Mossadeq. First attempt failed, second attempt worked. This led to the death of a democratic Iran with Reza Shah Pahlavi elevated to status of absolute monarch (dictator) with his own imperial guard and secret police (a la KGB).

1953-1979: Under US tutelage Pahlavi attempted to westernise Iran (cultural imperialism) and had extremely close economic and diplomatic relations. Some 30,000 Americans resided in Iran at this time, collaborating with the dictatorship. The sentiment was that the US had essentially taken the country hostage - the driver for the Iranian hostage crisis: "You have no right to complain, because you took our whole country hostage in 1953.” A major populist backlash against the US puppet regime led to the popular Islamic revolution in 1979. The Islamic Republic was founded and the dictator Pahlavi was deposed through grassroots activism and university movements.

1980-1988: Iraq invades Iran unprovoked. USA supplies Iraq with military equipment and logistical support. The US skirmishes with Iranian troops in the in the Persian Gulf and attacks Iranian offshore oil platforms as part of Operation Nimble Archer. The US also shoot down a civilian Iranian airliner. Iraq ultimately fail to topple Iran and the US is back to square one with its imperial ambitions in the region.

1989-Now: US sponsor numerous UN resolutions sanctioning Iran and trying to undermine Iranian sovereignty. During the Iraq war a number of Iranian diplomats, in Iraq on legitimate grounds, are abducted by the US and released 305 days later. The US oust regimes to the west and east of Iran and station several hundred thousand troops, tanks and warplanes within easy striking distance of Iran.

Now, you tell me: why would Iran not like the US?

PS Are you really too stooopid to understand mutually assured destruction or are you just ignorant?

PPS Interestingly Iran have never travelled several thousand miles from home to sponsor a coup of the US, install a dictator in the US, support Mexico in a war against the US, invade Mexico and Canada and menacingly station troops in each country or attempt to prevent the US implementing nuclear technologies. Did somebody say hypocrisy?

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-22 14:12:53)

lol Cam defends Iran, I love it.

I mean, I know they give money to your suicide bomber friends, but come on.

I bet you stand up and cheer every time a bomber blows up a coffee shop.

to much Saber Rattle from all sides. Either get on with it, or let them have their puny nukes. The minute they use them, we will rock their snot box.

*  A new, much more dire Israeli assessment that Iran will have the ability to build an atomic bomb by 2009 (earlier reports had drifted toward 2010 or later).
   
* The flagging of U.S.-European efforts to pressure Iran economically and isolate it. The Bush administration's Iran point man, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns, has just retired from the State Department—leaving a huge vacuum—and many Israelis have a growing sense that Washington is figuring out how to live with an Iranian nuclear capability. Meanwhile, European companies are making new multibillion-dollar investments in Iran's energy sector, including Austria's OMV and Switzerland's EGL.
   
* The ongoing rebuilding of Hizbullah's missile armada in nearby Lebanon, which gives Iran an ever greater retaliatory capability the longer the Israelis wait.
   
* Iran's Scheherazade-like efforts to endlessly prolong an investigation by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) into the history and intent of its nuclear program. A new IAEA report is due by the third week of May, and Iran has agreed to deliver comments on the agency's ongoing investigation, but the issue is not expected to be resolved by then.
   
* Russia's willingness to supply Tehran with close-range surface-to-air defense missiles, even as it declares it is willing to join sanctions against Iran. Rumors continue to circulate, though Moscow denies it, that Russia is negotiating to sell Iran longer-range S-300 antiaircraft systems. These very sophisticated defenses, once installed, would dramatically alter the odds against Israeli air strikes.

usmarine2 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

usmarine2 wrote:

lol Cam defends Iran, I love it.

I mean, I know they give money to your suicide bomber friends, but come on.

I bet you stand up and cheer every time a bomber blows up a coffee shop.

Listen you intellectual equivalent of a bag of spanners - I don't cheer suicide bombers and I don't have any suicide bomber friends. Perhaps you might read my logical rational explanation of why Iran doesn't like the US and would feel the need to have nukes and respond with a sensible rational post for once in your simplistic miserable knuckle-dragging fucking life.

Get an education - I'm sure your military service will pay for one for you.

blah blah blah.  You and your friends dont fool some of us here.

lol Champion debater. Just brilliant.

usmarine2 wrote:

yes, because that is my goal in life.  post links and bitch about israel.  I think I will go take a debate course because I truly deeply care about it.

Yeah well don't complain when you get ridiculed for your shit posts.

usmarine2 wrote:

oh, my god I feel so bad.  I feel terrible when the ginger man types a paragraph. 

/shivering.

I'm just wondering why you bother posting here (and so often) when you purport to care so little. You might not post paragraphs but you do manage the odd sentence.

usmarine2 wrote:

entertainment value.  something to do between commercials.

You must watch a helluva lot of commercials.