Guest Peeves Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 Except that the theocratic regime is causing more hardship for its citizenry. I guess the sanctions are working. We need even more stringent sanctions. Punish any country doing business with Iran. After all it is a terrorist supporting rogue state. "Iran’s economy ‘on the verge of collapse’ as currency loses 1/4 of its value in seven days Iran’s rial plunged against the U.S. dollar in open-market trade on Monday, taking its loss in value over the past week to more than a quarter in further evidence that Western sanctions are shattering the economy. The freefall suggests sanctions imposed over Iran’s nuclear program are undermining its ability to earn foreign exchange and that its reserves of hard currency may be running low. The rial traded at 34,200 per dollar according to currency-tracking website Mazanex, down from about 29,720 on Sunday. It was trading at 24,600 last Monday, according to website Mesghal." National post today. Quote
GostHacked Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 The economic war on Iran has been going on for a few years now. Sanctions don't hurt the government, they hurt the citizens of the country. Quote
TimG Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 The economic war on Iran has been going on for a few years now. Sanctions don't hurt the government, they hurt the citizens of the country.So do you have a suggestion on how to target a government without hurting the people? Quote
GostHacked Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 So do you have a suggestion on how to target a government without hurting the people? You can't. Also, Iran does not need to be a target. I think the west has been attacking them in one way or another for the last 40-50 years and Iran still survives. Quote
TimG Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 Also, Iran does not need to be a target.So you think that a nuke armed Iran would be responsible and would never use those nukes? Quote
GostHacked Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 So you think that a nuke armed Iran would be responsible and would never use those nukes? Iran is not suicidal. If all your neighbouring countries were being invaded and taken over, what would you do? Iran is acting logical in the sense that the bomb would give them a sense of protection. We can see how quick the west backed off on North Korea once they obtained the ability. If you are worried about a nuke attack, I'd be concentrating on the trouble in Pakistan where they do have nukes and the country is in bad shape where the possibility of stolen nuclear material can happen much easier. I can say with certainty that Iran will not be throwing the first punch. But if they are attacked by anyone in the west, the you can be sure they will retaliate. Quote
TimG Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 Iran is not suicidal.The current economic problems because of the sanctions suggests that Iran *is* suicidal. Quote
cybercoma Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 This fear about Iran getting a nuke is ridiculous. Pakistan has nuclear weapons and we barely pay attention to them. The United States has been stomping all over the Middle east for the better part of 3 decades. Why wouldn't Iran try to procure a nuclear deterrent? And let's go through the scenario of Iran actually using a nuclear weapon on another state, say Israel. I think it's pretty clear that Russia, China, America, and every other capable state on the planet would destroy Iran. The day they dropped a nuke on another country would be the last day of their independence. Quote
GostHacked Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 The current economic problems because of the sanctions suggests that Iran *is* suicidal. How suicidal was Iraq and Afghanistan before they were invaded? The only people that are crying about Iran getting nukes is Israel. Quote
Wild Bill Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 This fear about Iran getting a nuke is ridiculous. Pakistan has nuclear weapons and we barely pay attention to them. The United States has been stomping all over the Middle east for the better part of 3 decades. Why wouldn't Iran try to procure a nuclear deterrent? And let's go through the scenario of Iran actually using a nuclear weapon on another state, say Israel. I think it's pretty clear that Russia, China, America, and every other capable state on the planet would destroy Iran. The day they dropped a nuke on another country would be the last day of their independence. I've heard this argument before. It still doesn't make sense to me! Why on earth would the other nuclear powers blow up Iran? Spread fallout all over the middle east, including allied countries? Kill hundreds of thousands if not millions of innocents? It would NEVER happen! Certainly we might see a conventional war to force a regime change in Iran. That could likely lead to other complications. No, what you describe seems an utter impossibility. Too many unintended consequences. You are talking about radiation deaths in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and a LOT of other countries! Tell us again how you think the other powers would do such a thing! Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
cybercoma Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 Who said anything about the other nuclear powers launching nukes against Iran? I said they would destroy Iran because that's precisely what they would do. Every other nation on the planet would band together to launch a military offensive against Iran the likes of which we haven't seen in more than a generation, if not ever. Do you think Russia and China would really sit back while they have a nuclear power acting as an aggressor within striking distance of them? Do you think India and Pakistan, both of whom have nukes, would stand by and do nothing? This wouldn't simply be the US, Canada, UK, and Israel retaliating. It would be an all out global domination of Iran. The nation would be toppled in a matter of hours. Quote
GostHacked Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 Who said anything about the other nuclear powers launching nukes against Iran? I said they would destroy Iran because that's precisely what they would do. Every other nation on the planet would band together to launch a military offensive against Iran the likes of which we haven't seen in more than a generation, if not ever. Do you think Russia and China would really sit back while they have a nuclear power acting as an aggressor within striking distance of them? Do you think India and Pakistan, both of whom have nukes, would stand by and do nothing? This wouldn't simply be the US, Canada, UK, and Israel retaliating. It would be an all out global domination of Iran. The nation would be toppled in a matter of hours. Russia and China don't have a problem with a nuclear Iran, since they both are backing Iran to some extent. India and Pakistan really don't care either way I am guessing, they have their own problems. Pakistan has already caused issues with one of their former scientists giving nuke tech know how to other countries. Iran won't be a bowl over, only half of the world is against Iran from what I can tell. Quote
cybercoma Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 Russia and China don't have a problem with a nuclear Iran, since they both are backing Iran to some extent. India and Pakistan really don't care either way I am guessing, they have their own problems. Pakistan has already caused issues with one of their former scientists giving nuke tech know how to other countries. Iran won't be a bowl over, only half of the world is against Iran from what I can tell. You're talking about something entirely different. You can be damn well sure that they would care if Iran launched a nuclear assault on another nation. China, Russia, Pakistan, and India don't care if Iran has a nuclear deterrent because they all do as well. You can be damn sure they would care if Iran actively used nukes. Quote
cybercoma Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) I should also note that a self-fulfiling prophecy is being created here. The US, Israel, Canada, and other escalate the rhetoric with Iran by shutting down embassies and creating embargoes. This forces Iran to become more defensive as it prepares for war, which will be painted by the aforementioned group as an act of aggression, allowing them to justify their war measures. Edited October 2, 2012 by cybercoma Quote
GostHacked Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 You're talking about something entirely different. You can be damn well sure that they would care if Iran launched a nuclear assault on another nation. That was not clear in your post. Countries will take issue if a nuke is used against or by Iran. China, Russia, Pakistan, and India don't care if Iran has a nuclear deterrent because they all do as well. You can be damn sure they would care if Iran actively used nukes. That clears things up. Iran knows they would be turned to glass if they lobbed a nuke at anyone. This is why most people understand that Iran is not suicidal. Quote
dre Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 PEople on both sides should act within the law. Right now neither side is. We need to drop the demand they end enrichment in exchange for full compliance with IAEA inspections. This approach would most likely be successful. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
dre Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 So you think that a nuke armed Iran would be responsible and would never use those nukes? Judging by its record post-revolution that seems like a pretty safe assumption yes. Of course... right now they have no nuclear weapons program.... But if they do decide to spin one up its because want a nuclear deterent to aggression, and they would be very rational to want that. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Guest Peeves Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) The current economic problems because of the sanctions suggests that Iran *is* suicidal. I think there are some that would have no compunction about using any available weapon to eradicate the country of Israel including the 6-7 million Jews and several million Arabs in the state. Not that I believe that many of the leaders that target Israel with their hate, but, fanatics certainly have suggested that course along with the return of the Imam Mahdi. You can't rationalize nor reason with crazy. http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/ayatollah-kill-all-jews-annihilate-israel/ Still, I can understand why NATO has sanctioned a country where crazies are a threat. Iran has no need of a nuke, and as many suggest they would not use it, why build it, why enrich uranium? And, if they did use it, their destruction wouldn't do Israeli's-Jews or Arabs that were wiped out any good. Would those taking a chance with another Holocaust put their existence on the line with the constant hate rhetoric of the Iranians and the charter agenda of Hamas and Hezbollah? I sure as hell wouldn't. Excerpt. It is the duty for all Muslims to participate in this defensive jihad, Forghani says. A fatwa by the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini made it clear that any political domination by infidels over Muslims authorizes Muslims to defend Islam by all means. Iran now has the ICBM means to deliver destruction on Israel and soon will have nuclear warheads for those missiles.In order to attack Iran, the article says, Israel needs the approval and assistance of America, and under the current passive climate in the United States, the opportunity must not be lost to wipe out Israel before it attacks Iran. Under this pre-emptive defensive doctrine, several Ground Zero points of Israel must be destroyed and its people annihilated. Forghani cites the last census by the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics that shows Israel has a population of 7.5 million citizens of which a majority of 5.7 million are Jewish. Then it breaks down the districts with the highest concentration of Jewish people, indicating that three cities, Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Haifa, contain over 60 percent of the Jewish population that Iran could target with its Shahab 3 ballistic missiles, killing all its inhabitants. Forghani suggests that Iran’s Sejil missile, which is a two-stage rocket with a trajectory and speed that make it impossible to intercept, should target such Israeli facilities as: the Rafael nuclear plant, which is the main nuclear engineering center of Israel; the Eilun nuclear plant; another Israeli reactor in Nebrin; and the Dimona reactor in the nuclear research center in Neqeb, the most critical nuclear reactor in Israel because it produces 90 percent enriched uranium for Israel’s nuclear weapons. Other targets, according to the article, include airports and air force bases such as the Sedot Mikha Air Base, which contains Jericho ballistic missiles and is located southwest of the Tel Nof Air Base, where aircraft equipped with nuclear weapons are based. Secondary targets include power plants, sewage treatment facilities, energy resources, and transportation and communication infrastructures. Finally, Forghani says, Shahab 3 and Ghadr missiles can target urban settlements until the Israelis are wiped out. Forghani claims that Israel could be destroyed in less than nine minutes and that Khamenei, as utmost authority, the Velayete Faghih (Islamic Jurist), also believes that Israel and America not only must be defeated but annihilated. Edited October 2, 2012 by Peeves Quote
Guest Peeves Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) Judging by its record post-revolution that seems like a pretty safe assumption yes. Of course... right now they have no nuclear weapons program.... But if they do decide to spin one up its because want a nuclear deterent to aggression, and they would be very rational to want that. If Israel has a nuke (likely), and military superiority, why would they EVER need use one unless there is an imminent threat of annihilation. I can think of NO scenario (except potential nuke attack),where Israel would be a threat to Iran. But, even other Middle East countries are concerned that Iran might get that capability. Sanctions should continue, and efforts to get Iran to accept inspectors must be somehow forced on Iran. Iran's leaders say they won't make a bomb. So if that's true then allow UN inspectors or be considered as liars. Easy for the rest of the world to stand back and risk Israel's existence, and Jews have no thought of allowing that to happen again. Would you? Edited October 2, 2012 by Peeves Quote
bud Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 Except that the theocratic regime is causing more hardship for its citizenry. I guess the sanctions are working. We need even more stringent sanctions. the sanctions on iraq created much suffering to the civilians but it never brought down saddam. so if the sanctions on iraq didn't work, why do you think they will work this time? Quote http://whoprofits.org/
bud Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 This fear about Iran getting a nuke is ridiculous. Pakistan has nuclear weapons and we barely pay attention to them. The United States has been stomping all over the Middle east for the better part of 3 decades. Why wouldn't Iran try to procure a nuclear deterrent? And let's go through the scenario of Iran actually using a nuclear weapon on another state, say Israel. I think it's pretty clear that Russia, China, America, and every other capable state on the planet would destroy Iran. The day they dropped a nuke on another country would be the last day of their independence. *ding* Quote http://whoprofits.org/
dre Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 You can't rationalize nor reason with crazy. The problem is we have a huge propoganda machine thats purpose is to make you think our adversaries are crazed animals with nothing on their mind but killing. Our governments do that because if we thought folks on the other side were just "other people" we wouldnt tolerate our government slaughtering them. So you need to ignore that all the rhetoric from our politicians, and try to be objective. Has Iran acted in a way that the really justifies that sort of "mad dog" stereotype? Not from what I can tell. And thats not what Israeli OR US intelligence thinks either. This is a situation where people should calm the hell down, and go by the letter of the law. Iran has a legal right as an NPT signatory to enrich. The IAEA has the legal right to open access to monitor facilities. That process broke down because we made unlawful demands, and now we marching towards a conflict. The iranians are being lead by fools, and we are being lead by fools and we are all gonna pay. Looks like Iraq all over again to me. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
dre Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 If Israel has a nuke (likely), and military superiority, why would they EVER need use one unless there is an imminent threat of annihilation. I can think of NO scenario (except potential nuke attack),where Israel would be a threat to Iran. But, even other Middle East countries are concerned that Iran might get that capability. They already ARE a threat. ISrael is openly talking about attacking Iran, even though Israeli intelligence says that all Iran has no nuclear program. They are threatening war with Iran over something Iran as an NPT signatory has the legal right to do... enrich uranium. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Wild Bill Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 They already ARE a threat. ISrael is openly talking about attacking Iran, even though Israeli intelligence says that all Iran has no nuclear program. They are threatening war with Iran over something Iran as an NPT signatory has the legal right to do... enrich uranium. I thought the issue was how MUCH enriched uranium Iran is making! Even if Iran does not use it in a bomb, it appears to be far more than what is needed for reactors. Why does Iran need so much? Is there a good reason? If they have such a surplus, are there unfriendly powers or groups that would buy it? Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Mr.Canada Posted October 2, 2012 Report Posted October 2, 2012 I'm sure Iran and the socialist apologists in Canada will say it's the fault of Israel. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
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.