Is Iran a Threat?

VDKMS said:
I thought we are arguin here on equal terms. I respect der alte as much as you do. His articles are very well thought out but I diasagree with im on this tread. I can't see what's arogant about that.
Click to expand...
Same terms - but not same level.
Some will always possess a more substantial knowledge through their profession. I don´t mean that you can´t argue with such a person, obviously one can.

It may well be that I'm talking out of my ass, but IMHO your answer to der alte is not an argument but only contradictions.

But never mind!
I know which horse wins Ascot!
 
hamidreza said:
RayManKiller3:
I hope Israel carry out this attack lonely or with her friends as soon as possible. As I see the results of US-Afghanistan, US-Iraq and Israel-Hezbollah wars, I've found that you have much more clever politician than I thought before!

RayManKiller3:
Don't be worry. We won't block the Strait if the US doesn't enter the war. And if the US enter the war, since the main battlefield will be in Persian Gulf, the Strait will be closed automatically, because no tanker will dare to pass through a battlefield.(at least the west tankers).

RayManKiller3:
You have the largest nukes stockpiles, you have the most advanced WMD, you used the nukes in WWII, you threaten the other countries' integrity, you start a war each ten years in the world( in the average), you prevent the countries to achieve their legal rights, .... And also you are care about world peace!
I think you are too care and it is not good for your health. It is not necessary to kill all evils at this century. Leave some of them for posterity. They might fight with each other if they don't find any evils.
Click to expand...
From an Iranian point of view, this is an answer I can understand.

VDKMS said:
It would be better to put your clerics where they belong, in mosques instead of government. Comply to the IAEA and the danger for an attack vaporizes.
Click to expand...
If you have knowledge of Middle Eastern rhetoric, you will observe that the answer by hamidreza is very subdued.
 
hamidreza said:
Der Alte you have good information about ME, especially Iran. I don't know where is your source but I am sure it isn't west media (or at least most of them).
Click to expand...
I keep an eye on you bandits ;-)

I have a background where you do not reveal your sources :cool:
But you're right - I use the ME media a lot in conjunction with the information coming from the western world.
 
What I am interested is to see who takes more direct interest in Iran in the future.

With China and India both having a rapidly emerging middle classes.

It's only natural for both countries to need more and more resources currently being guzzled by the west, especially the U.S.

With peak production already behind us. More people are going to be fighting for first dibs on the oil taps. So natural China and India's competition for their growing economies may mean they will both take much more interest in oil rich nation's like Iran.

Meaning Iran may have a new benificiary finacial benefactor or economic ally, or two.

As demand drives the prices up, currently dependent U.S. citizens are going to be pissed, their lifestlyes based on cheap energy will be threatened and this can trickle up to the highest levels of government.

I am afraid we have been dependent on cheap oil for so long that we don't know how to live life without it. With two more major economic powers wanting the same rights to the same amount of production in the Persian gulf area, we my find ourselves with a very very voilitile situation.

Becuase I heard this line in a B movie once.

"Desperation is a stinky cologne."
 
Last edited:
New unions are emerging against the west unilateralism policies such as Shanghai Accord or BIRCS. The condition will be more difficult for west that were used to get their purposes with force. Now the necessity and the importance of energy are increasing rapidly for all countries especially for the large developing countries like China and India and I am sure they don’t let the west to play on the world stage as before.
 
hamidreza said:
New unions are emerging against the west unilateralism policies such as Shanghai Accord or BIRCS. The condition will be more difficult for west that were used to get their purposes with force. Now the necessity and the importance of energy are increasing rapidly for all countries especially for the large developing countries like China and India and I am sure they don’t let the west to play on the world stage as before.
Click to expand...

Here is the problem that line of thinking, both China and India are consumer goods manufacturers they require the West to buy their goods because the do not have wealthy populations that can make them self sufficient.

Now you might say that as money flows into both these countries the population will become wealthier but in reality the more money people have the more they spend and as such people want to paid more, more infrastructure is needed to meet demand, more freedoms are demanded to be able to spend their money and as prices rise it becomes more economical for the West to buy items from else where.

So in short the West will play on the world stage until such time as it can no longer afford to buy the cheap products at which time both East and West will collapse and while I have no doubt religons the world over would like to think their particular deity rules the world the reality is that money does.
 
Last edited:
Some of the worst IED tech in Iraq was brought from Iran.

They have launched documented excursions into ME AOs operated by US troops.

A high profile failed assassin attempt on American soil.

State sponsored terrorism carried out by Iran through its proxies and its QUDs forces.

Currently enriching Uranium well beyond the limits needed for nuclear power plants.

Iran is a threat but to what degree is debatable. The government apears at times to lack unity and allot of the West finds this troubling.
 
Last edited:
Big_Z said:
Some of the worst IED tech in Iraq was brought from Iran.

They have launched documented excursions into ME AOs operated by US troops.

A high profile failed assassin attempt on American soil.

State sponsered terrorism carried out by Iran through its proxies and its QUDs forces.

Currently enriching Uranium well beyond the limits needed for nuclear power plants.

Iran is a threat but to what degree is debatable. The government apears at times to lack unity and allot of the West finds this troubling.
Click to expand...

The problem here is however one of double standards because Western countries are doing exactly the same thing as is at least one ME country and we turn a blind eye to that.

Lets be honest here:
How many "assassinations" has Israel carried out in the last few years, but we pass that off as "right of self-defence".

The USA has invaded two ME countries in the last twelve years so I think it could be equally said that US and NATO forces are operating in an environment that Iranian forces were also in.

I am prepared to bet that if you look at a lot of IED's you will find almost all of the killing components have a made in China, Russia or USA stamp on them somewhere and all the technical components say made in Japan or Korea.

The fact is that from a Western point of view you are right but that is only one side of a two headed coin and it is a double standard to complain about things we are equally as guilty of.
 
Big_Z said:
Some of the worst IED tech in Iraq was brought from Iran.

They have launched documented excursions into ME AOs operated by US troops.

A high profile failed assassin attempt on American soil.

State sponsered terrorism carried out by Iran through its proxies and its QUDs forces.

Currently enriching Uranium well beyond the limits needed for nuclear power plants.

Iran is a threat but to what degree is debatable. The government apears at times to lack unity and allot of the West finds this troubling.
Click to expand...

Lest we forget sometimes "threats" have their uses.

Iran was mentioned as a threat to the U.S. because the U.S. wants to announce it.

Can you imagine how many high profile assasination attempts go completly unnanouced each year?

To some degree the U.S. benifits from having Iran as the continual precieved threat, and although long term policy may not be geared toward this, short policy seems to be quite tailored to having and ensuring Iran is , and stays the bad guy.
 
MontyB said:
The problem here is however one of double standards because Western countries are doing exactly the same thing as is at least one ME country and we turn a blind eye to that.

Lets be honest here:
How many "assassinations" has Israel carried out in the last few years, but we pass that off as "right of self-defence".

The USA has invaded two ME countries in the last twelve years so I think it could be equally said that US and NATO forces are operating in an environment that Iranian forces were also in.

I am prepared to bet that if you look at a lot of IED's you will find almost all of the killing components have a made in China, Russia or USA stamp on them somewhere and all the technical components say made in Japan or Korea.

The fact is that from a Western point of view you are right but that is only one side of a two headed coin and it is a double standard to complain about things we are equally as guilty of.
Click to expand...

The IED designs Iran funneled into Iraq was an act of aggression. It's not about specific parts, the Iranians were using military developed and funded technologies against US personel. It was dilberate and personal.

I know neither side is completely innocent and I see this situaition as reconcilable if they give up their nuclear ambitions.
 
Last edited:
Fair enough however I don't see the situation as reconcilable as neither side is prepared to step outside their own mindset long enough to understand the other sides opinion.

However as long as Israel do not do anything silly I doubt anything will become of the posturing even if Iran go down the nuclear weapons path, in the end Iran knows that to fire a nuclear weapon at someone or give one to a third party that will use it is certain destruction and the one thing people in power have in common is the desire to stay there at any cost.
 
MontyB said:
The problem here is however one of double standards because Western countries are doing exactly the same thing as is at least one ME country and we turn a blind eye to that.

Lets be honest here:
How many "assassinations" has Israel carried out in the last few years, but we pass that off as "right of self-defence".

The USA has invaded two ME countries in the last twelve years so I think it could be equally said that US and NATO forces are operating in an environment that Iranian forces were also in.

I am prepared to bet that if you look at a lot of IED's you will find almost all of the killing components have a made in China, Russia or USA stamp on them somewhere and all the technical components say made in Japan or Korea.

The fact is that from a Western point of view you are right but that is only one side of a two headed coin and it is a double standard to complain about things we are equally as guilty of.
Click to expand...


You forget to mention that
- Israel assasinates only people who attacked Israel.
- the Iraqis were very happy that the US coalition removed Saddam.
- the US forces fought alongside an Afgan tribal coalition.

The stronger IED's do come from Iran made with Iranian components.

These conflicts have nothing to do with double standards but with religious fanatics who don't want non-muslim boots on muslim ground. They want a muslim caliphate and the US coalition stands in the way.
 
Yossarian said:
Lest we forget sometimes "threats" have their uses.

Iran was mentioned as a threat to the U.S. because the U.S. wants to announce it.

Can you imagine how many high profile assasination attempts go completly unnanouced each year?

To some degree the U.S. benifits from having Iran as the continual precieved threat, and although long term policy may not be geared toward this, short policy seems to be quite tailored to having and ensuring Iran is , and stays the bad guy.
Click to expand...

The Iranian global threat is not that they are working on nuclear ICBM's to attack everyone but that they are becoming a very strong force so they could reign over the ME oil supplies, and that is a global threat.
 
VDKMS said:
The Iranian global threat is not that they are working on nuclear ICBM's to attack everyone but that they are becoming a very strong force so they could reign over the ME oil supplies, and that is a global threat.
Click to expand...

It's a global threat only when the west has something their they want.

Massacres , huge refugee camps, and tyrants rising and falling from power have devestated other parts of the globe.

But they failed to reach the newslines because there are no minerals resources, commodities of fossil fuels worth extracting there.

And this nonsense about Iranian forces possibly intruding in American AO's in the Middle East.

Well what did you think would happen?

You set up on thier borders and deploy in their neighborhood so what makes American policy maker's think Iran wouldn't scope things out in their own back yard?

And that was before the drone mishap.
 
VDKMS said:
You forget to mention that
- Israel assasinates only people who attacked Israel.
- the Iraqis were very happy that the US coalition removed Saddam.
- the US forces fought alongside an Afgan tribal coalition.

The stronger IED's do come from Iran made with Iranian components.

These conflicts have nothing to do with double standards but with religious fanatics who don't want non-muslim boots on muslim ground. They want a muslim caliphate and the US coalition stands in the way.
Click to expand...

No that is the Israeli interpretation of who they are killing just like if we were to look at how few civilian casualties there were in Iraq and Afghanistan primarily because the dead suddenly become insurgents and in Israel they are militants.

As for Caliphates and grand empires, here is a thought I am prepared to bet that the King of Jordan wants to stay the King of Jordan as does the King of Saudi Arabia, the President of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Turkey and just about every leader in the ME world so if none of them plan to give up power how do you think you will get this Caliphate?

Stop with the children's scary stories and focus on reality here will you.
 
Yossarian said:
It's a global threat only when the west has something their they want.

Massacres , huge refugee camps, and tyrants rising and falling from power have devestated other parts of the globe.

But they failed to reach the newslines because there are no minerals resources, commodities of fossil fuels worth extracting there.

And this nonsense about Iranian forces possibly intruding in American AO's in the Middle East.

Well what did you think would happen?

You set up on thier borders and deploy in their neighborhood so what makes American policy maker's think Iran wouldn't scope things out in their own back yard?

And that was before the drone mishap.
Click to expand...


National interest will always come before advancing humanity. There is plenty of mineral resources in Africa and we been there for awhile now, it just gets less publicity. Basically, I am saying it is not because this region do not have resources that it do not receive much attention. A lot of people know what is going on in Africa, but they look at it in a realistic perspective. What will we get from it? Is it worth risking our men's lives for it? People lose faith in the regions of M.E and Africa as they hear nothing, but bad news about it. Just like you said, the only reason we keep ourselves in M.E is because of oil. You must not forget we can't help the whole world and it will always be a mindset of risk/benefit calculations. U.N was made to decrease war and end genocide, it have no true power (itself) to just take out some African leader who treats his people poorly. This depends on the nations willing to risk their people for something that they might see as not truly worth it.

We tried helping Somalia and got guns pointed in our face.

The only global threat Iran is, is to the oil supply, which that threat will decrease everyday as we become less dependent on it. I still do not want them with a Nuke and it has been stated by Leon Panetta that they are not seeking a nuclear weapon, just nuclear capabilities. I also would like U.S to negotiate more fairly with Iran.

There is said to have been a secret letter written from Iran to U.S that they would stop aiding Hamas, Hezbollah, and allow more compromises on their nuclear energy. This letter has been said to have been thrown away by the Bush administration. The Obama administration I believe is against a strike on them as well.

Another reason I don't want a Republican in power at this current time. I have only seen rhetoric speeches against Iran in Republican speeches. Not something we need at the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top