dre Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 Tell me this... Pakistan is another extremist backwater and religious basket case. Its probably even less stable than Iran and shares many of the same "features". Do you think the region would be better now if we had encouraged India to start a massive war with an invasion intended to scuttle pakistans nuclear ambitions, and then trillions of dollars trying to help them win? The bottom line is that since both those countries aquired nuclear weapons, there has been the closest thing to peace between them in centries. Prior to proliferation those countries fought 4 extremely bloody open wars with each other. Since then we basically just have a few incidents of skirmishes on the border, and some incidence caused by covert action etc. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
olp1fan Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 (edited) No, I’d rather short term fluctuations in the price, then a sustained increase caused by Iran blockading access. LOL, you think a war with Iran = short term fluctuations? you realize to stop Iran you'd have to bomb 32 underground bunkers and labs? its not like when Israel bombed Iraq and Syria's reactors If Iran were attacked...Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Egypt, Lebannon, Turkey, Russia, China (dozens of other countries) would come to its aid if not militarily then with support Edited November 13, 2011 by olp1fan Quote
Guest Derek L Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 Tell me this... Pakistan is another extremist backwater and religious basket case. Its probably even less stable than Iran and shares many of the same "features". Do you think the region would be better now if we had encouraged India to start a massive war with an invasion intended to scuttle pakistans nuclear ambitions, and then trillions of dollars trying to help them win? The bottom line is that since both those countries aquired nuclear weapons, there has been the closest thing to peace between them in centries. Prior to proliferation those countries fought 4 extremely bloody open wars with each other. Since then we basically just have a few incidents of skirmishes on the border, and some incidence caused by covert action etc. It’s apples and oranges…….India and Pakistan aren’t in a position to dramatically affect the World’s fuel supply…..I don’t really care what they do. Quote
olp1fan Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 It’s apples and oranges…….India and Pakistan aren’t in a position to dramatically affect the World’s fuel supply…..I don’t really care what they do. remember what caused world war 1? a beef between 2 countries that meant nothing to the rest of the world Quote
Guest Derek L Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 LOL, you think a war with Iran = short term fluctuations? you realize to stop Iran you'd have to bomb 32 underground bunkers and labs? its not like when Israel bombed Iraq and Syria's reactors Not necessarily, several 1 MT bombs, detonated above Iran would end any potential threat posed by them, without killing a single Iranian, for a decade or better If Iran were attacked...Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Egypt, Lebannon, Turkey, Russia, China (dozens of other countries) would come to its aidif not militarily then with support So? Quote
dre Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 No, I’d rather short term fluctuations in the price, then a sustained increase caused by Iran blockading access. No because your course of action is the one that leads to that blockade. Iran isnt threatening any blockade, and such a blockade would hurt their interests just as much as it does ours. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Guest Derek L Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 remember what caused world war 1? a beef between 2 countries that meant nothing to the rest of the world You’re contradicting yourself…….Those two countries that “meant nothing to anyone else” obviously did……….Be it ethnic, economic and military ties……..The seeds of the First World were sown generations prior by a policy called Mercantilism, which begat Imperialism and colonization, to say nothing of nationalism, all policies that you’ve demonstrated, through various threads that you either support or don’t understand. Quote
olp1fan Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 (edited) Not necessarily, several 1 MT bombs, detonated above Iran would end any potential threat posed by them, without killing a single Iranian, for a decade or better So? So you want Israel to drop a nuke over Iran and the good news is it doesn't kill any Iranians for a decade? wow, good plan there Edited November 13, 2011 by olp1fan Quote
olp1fan Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 You’re contradicting yourself…….Those two countries that “meant nothing to anyone else” obviously did……….Be it ethnic, economic and military ties……..The seeds of the First World were sown generations prior by a policy called Mercantilism, which begat Imperialism and colonization, to say nothing of nationalism, all policies that you’ve demonstrated, through various threads that you either support or don’t understand. Meant nothing with regards to the global economy..the other countries were bound to them by treaties Quote
Guest Derek L Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 No because your course of action is the one that leads to that blockade. Iran isnt threatening any blockade, and such a blockade would hurt their interests just as much as it does ours. And why aren’t they threatening a blockade? (Western & Israeli)Deterrence……..Why do they want nuclear weapons? Deterrence…….. Quote
Guest Derek L Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 So you want Israel to drope a nuke over Iran and the good news is it doesn't kill any Iranians for a decade? wow, good plan there No, I'd want them to use an EMP weapon over Iran. Quote
olp1fan Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 (edited) No, I'd want them to use an EMP weapon over Iran. lol, according to some American politicans Iran is preparing to use an EMP @ the U,S http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2011/11/13/iran-practicing-for-an-emp-attack-on-the-u-s-say-u-s-lawmakers-but-how-credible-is-that-claim/ EMP attacks are useful, I've seen them used on the show 24 by terrorists quite a few times Edited November 13, 2011 by olp1fan Quote
Guest Derek L Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 Meant nothing with regards to the global economy..the other countries were bound to them by treaties Are you suggesting the Germans, United Kingdom, French, Austrians, Russians, and Americans didn’t have global interests at that time? Quote
Guest Derek L Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 lol, according to some American politicans Iran is preparing to use an EMP @ the U,S http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2011/11/13/iran-practicing-for-an-emp-attack-on-the-u-s-say-u-s-lawmakers-but-how-credible-is-that-claim/ EMP attacks are useful, I've seen them used on the show 24 by terrorists quite a few times They need nukes first.....Kinda the point of this thread no? Quote
olp1fan Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 Are you suggesting the Germans, United Kingdom, French, Austrians, Russians, and Americans didn’t have global interests at that time? No I meant the world probably didn't have much interests in the austria hungary or Serbia its just they had pacts with other nations that would defend them Quote
olp1fan Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 They need nukes first.....Kinda the point of this thread no? Iran isn't going to use the nukes, the nukes guarantee them security from being attacked by foreign countries as well as taken more seriously on international levels Quote
dre Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 And why aren’t they threatening a blockade? (Western & Israeli)Deterrence……..Why do they want nuclear weapons? Deterrence…….. Because they want avoid becoming the next Iraq. This goes back to what I said before about how our actions cause unintended results and make the problem worse. When we attacked Iraq, wiped out its government, most of its infrastructure, and a fair ammount of its inhabitants we made Iran more influencial in the region both by removing their main natural enemy (Iraq Baathists), and by dramatically increasing their oil revenues. So now we have to wack another mole... and another... and another. THe biggest chance we have of avoiding the blockade you mention is to use backchannels with the Israeli government to strongly discourage them from an active war that would damage the global economy and to make sure we dont do anything that might seen as encouragement. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Guest Derek L Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 No I meant the world probably didn't have much interests in the austria hungary or Serbia its just they had pacts with other nations that would defend them Ethnic ties, not only diplomatic……Serbs are of a common “Slavic stock” as the Russians, same as the Austrians and Germans of similar ties…….Said diplomatic alliances took into account each members various colonies and interests around the globe. Quote
Guest Derek L Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 Iran isn't going to use the nukes, the nukes guarantee them security from being attacked by foreign countries as well as taken more seriously on international levels Then if they will never use them, why do they need them? Deterrence isn’t very good strategy without the threat of force. Quote
Guest Derek L Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 Because they want avoid becoming the next Iraq. This goes back to what I said before about how our actions cause unintended results and make the problem worse. When we attacked Iraq, wiped out its government, most of its infrastructure, and a fair ammount of its inhabitants we made Iran more influencial in the region both by removing their main natural enemy (Iraq Baathists), and by dramatically increasing their oil revenues. So now we have to wack another mole... and another... and another. THe biggest chance we have of avoiding the blockade you mention is to use backchannels with the Israeli government to strongly discourage them from an active war that would damage the global economy and to make sure we dont do anything that might seen as encouragement. And that goes back to the crux of my argument…….Why not use said backchannels to encourage Iran to stop the development of nuclear weapons and their continued support of Hezbollah? Quote
olp1fan Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 Then if they will never use them, why do they need them? Deterrence isn’t very good strategy without the threat of force. probably because of U.S invading its neighbours... if someone kept breaking into houses around you aren't you going to guarantee yourself security in case they try yours? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 Iran isn't going to use the nukes, the nukes guarantee them security from being attacked by foreign countries It "guarantees" no such thing....see Falkland Islands. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
dre Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 Then if they will never use them, why do they need them? Deterrence isn’t very good strategy without the threat of force. Same reason every other nuclear country wanted them. They drastically reduce the likelyhood of you having to defend your country against a large conventional war or invasion. Same reason people some people want to have a handgun in the house. Its not necessarily becausing they are dying to shoot anyone. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
olp1fan Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 And that goes back to the crux of my argument…….Why not use said backchannels to encourage Iran to stop the development of nuclear weapons and their continued support of Hezbollah? its time to put tough sanctions both on israel and iran..both need to stop with its behaviour Quote
Guest Derek L Posted November 13, 2011 Report Posted November 13, 2011 probably because of U.S invading its neighbours... if someone kept breaking into houses around you aren't you going to guarantee yourself security in case they try yours? But why does Iran support Hezbollah and threaten Israel? America is pulling out of Iraq in the coming month completely, and Afghanistan in the coming years. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.