Iranian ex-presidents annouced uranium enrichment at industrial level. - Page 5




 
--
Boots
 
April 16th, 2006  
bulldogg
 
 
You know Saddam and Bagdad Bob were spouting this same sort of bravado induced crap too... funny how people are unable to learn from the mistakes of others.
April 16th, 2006  
Missileer
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldogg
You know Saddam and Bagdad Bob were spouting this same sort of bravado induced crap too... funny how people are unable to learn from the mistakes of others.
Don't forget Quadaffi, he learned from a costly mistake by letting a rowboat butt get overloaded by a battleship mouth. Don't these people get History Channel? If they think what's going on in Iraq is our best shot, they will be sadly mistaken.
April 17th, 2006  
bulldogg
 
 
Aye, I think that they are confusing a "small war" operation with a full scale war. The latter being the way I would hope we were to tackle Iran should the need arise.
--
Boots
April 17th, 2006  
centurion_ue
 
 
u know,all this tough talk abt carrying out military action against the iranians isn't helping.rather,it makes everything worse.everyone seems to have forgotten that the iranian population are strongly behind their president when it comes to this nuclear issue.as a matter of fact,it's a source of national pride.
also,don't expect the iranians to give into western demands anytime soon `cos frm what i've seen,they're allergic to bullying.
i don't even want to think abt the consequences if the US carries out any attack on the iranians.they truth is that most western countries will bear the brunt of the -ve consequences.the only option is see is dialogue,and not demands.
finally,if - God forbid - there's a possible military strike against iran,please note this:
  • if the US is having a lot of problems with little iraq,what on God's green earth makes u think that iran will be a walk in the park.remember,they have a large and professional military men and women that are fiercely patriotic.they've also had time to study u guys,and believe it or not,i seriously doubt that they'll just sit down watch if u guys try to do anything to their installations.
  • do not 4get that the standing of the US in the eyes of the pple in the middle-east is at it's all time low.any military strike will simply drive it further down,create more militants groups within the region,and make the region more unstable.
  • they see all this as real double-standard `cos u want to take away their rights while countries like isreal,india, & pakistan have theirs.
April 17th, 2006  
PJ24
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by centurion_ue
u know,all this tough talk abt carrying out military action against the iranians isn't helping.rather,it makes everything worse.everyone seems to have forgotten that the iranian population are strongly behind their president when it comes to this nuclear issue.as a matter of fact,it's a source of national pride.
also,don't expect the iranians to give into western demands anytime soon `cos frm what i've seen,they're allergic to bullying.
i don't even want to think abt the consequences if the US carries out any attack on the iranians.they truth is that most western countries will bear the brunt of the -ve consequences.the only option is see is dialogue,and not demands.
Iran is doing the blustering, we're reacting to it. Any nation that's as unstable and unpredictable as Iran that's going to jump in the media an instantly challenge anyone that might disagree with their nuclear weapons procurement is going to get some questions and opposition.


Quote:
finally,if - God forbid - there's a possible military strike against iran,please note this:
if the US is having a lot of problems with little iraq,what on God's green earth makes u think that iran will be a walk in the park.remember,they have a large and professional military men and women that are fiercely patriotic.they've also had time to study u guys,and believe it or not,i seriously doubt that they'll just sit down watch if u guys try to do anything to their installations.
You seem to underestimate the US military. That's good. We like it when people do that. If you notice, Iraq hasn't even had but a tiny taste (and that was at the start of the war) of our conventional might. We're not treating Iraq like a military campagin. Any war with Iran wouldn't be handled like Iraq.

It's good they've studied us, especially in Iraq, I'd like for them to assume we'd use the same tactics. Oh, and btw, we've studied them too.

Quote:
do not 4get that the standing of the US in the eyes of the pple in the middle-east is at it's all time low.any military strike will simply drive it further down,create more militants groups within the region,and make the region more unstable.


I'll agree with this one 100%. But then, name a time since the 80s when US standing in the Middle East wasn't at an all time low. Iran has no desire to negoiate or compromise with the US, they never have.

Iran is a huge terror network supplier and supporter, as well. Many of the problems we have in Iraq and Middle East are fueled by the Iranians and Pakistanis.

Quote:
they see all this as real double-standard `cos u want to take away their rights while countries like isreal,india, & pakistan have theirs.


And it is a double standard, and I personally believe we should be just as heavy on Pakistan about nuclear weapons as we should be Iran. Both are a threat to US interests. Israel and India aren't so much.

This isn't a game where the rules have to be fair, it's about who is a threat and who isn't.

I'd like nothing more than for us to be able to "talk" things out with Iran, but it's obvious they aren't willing to be open to it and we aren't willing to let them have carte blanch on terrorising the entire region with the threat of nuclear weapons, btw, Europe will be well within range of Iran's new toys.

Let's not forget that Iran has a helping hand in fueling the insurgency within Iraq, and who can ignore that they've already called for Israel to be "wiped off of the map." It's not like some innocent, peace loving country has decided to develope nuclear weapons capabilities just because they want to protect themselves.

Iran wants a war, but they want Israel to start it. This would unite all Muslims against them, and consequently, the US and yes, even Europe. Watch their comments in the press, they're baiting.
April 18th, 2006  
bulldogg
 
 
A further note is that there are many very credible sources that contradict the notion of the Iranian people being in full support of their government and their actions. The demonstrations held in support of any police state within its own borders can never be considered genuine.
April 18th, 2006  
Ted
 
 
Well Centurion_ue, usually I am the dove in this company of hawks and my views are European instead of American. But in this case I do like to make a remark or two:
Quote:
also,don't expect the iranians to give into western demands anytime soon `cos frm what i've seen,they're allergic to bullying.
This is something I have said to some of the American posters, but the stakes are raised with the nuclear part in the equation. Of course it is a source of national pride, but Iran is alos debet to the bullying bit. President A. knows how to handle a microphone and the things he says certainly qualify as bullying too. His war rethorics aren't helping very much for a dialogue.

Quote:
do not 4get that the standing of the US in the eyes of the pple in the middle-east is at it's all time low.
You alternate between the US and the West, the West also includes Europe... And I can tell you that the rethorics are not falling well in Europe either. Talking about the destruction of Isreal like you are discussing mondaynight football makes us fear the worst. Where president A. first had some good-will, it is his own doing that this has evaporated. And just like the US we are afraid of nukes in the hands of this man. I reckon that we prefer a conventional, low-intensity conflict anyday over a nuclear holocaust.