LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksNo it wasn't but had you qualified your comments before , I wouldn't have needed to make themYou sounded like a typical Sun Reading Keyboard warrior.
I can understand your point of view based on your own experiences , but I don't agree with it.
Soon.
Very Soon.
Even Sooner Than That.
Maybe Not...
No it wasn't but had you qualified your comments before , I wouldn't have needed to make them
I can understand your point of view based on your own experiences , but I don't agree with it.
my Virtualisation Blog http://jfvi.co.uk Virtualisation Podcast http://vsoup.net
If you did agree, in fact, if everything here was agreed by all, these forums would be no fun.I can understand your point of view based on your own experiences , but I don't agree with it.
Its the difference of opinion that makes it interesting.
good
Why do you feel that we ( along with 'the coalition of the willing' ) should be policing the world ( or the bits of the world that seem to be predominatly oil bearing )
Isn't this what the UN is for ?
my Virtualisation Blog http://jfvi.co.uk Virtualisation Podcast http://vsoup.net
Originally Posted by Blitzen
Ah but 200 years ago...........With the French advancing the Dutch broke at the batle of Waterloo and the British had to fill in the gaps.............yeah I know absolutely irrelevent post.
2nd computer gigabyte P965ds3p, 7770 E2140@2.9ghz, corsair HX520 6 years stable, replaced now with E8400@3.9ghz and will overclock more when I'm bored.
good
Why do you feel that we ( along with 'the coalition of the willing' ) should be policing the world ( or the bits of the world that seem to be predominatly oil bearing )
Isn't this what the UN is for ?
I just think that sometimes we need to make a stand.
Imagine in the 2nd World War. What wouldve happened if we wouldve told the French to bugger off and fight your own battle and we waited for the invaders to turen up in Dover. Maybe a different story wouldve occured and we would all be called Fritz.
Im not saying for a moment that the reasons weren't shaded from public. But the good intentions were there i think.
Beleive me...there is nothing more demoralising than being in a foreign land, fighting shadows, and even the public from the streets where you grew up thinking you are wasting your time.
Personally, I rather doubt the US will attack Iran, at least until or unless a lot more goes wrong. I doubt if they've the stomach for it, given the farce that is Iraq.
More credible is that Israel, either with an informal US green light, or if necessary, in defiance of a red light, will do so, probably with specific targeted bombing.
But nor, funnily enough, do I see an Iranian nuke, if and when they get it, as actually that much of a threat. Sure, I'd much, much rather they didn't have them. But even if they do .... would they use them? Are they quite that rabid, or stupid?
They are a LONG way from being able to prevent the US, or even France or the UK, from turning Iran into a radioactive, glass-covered car park, and they know it. They might be able to inflict huge damage on others, most notably Israel, but they'll totally and completely unable to prevent a devastating retaliation. They may be able to pre-emptively take out Israel's ability to strike, but there's naff-all they can do about long-range missiles, and even less they can do about submarine launches.
So while I might believe they'd like to nuke Israel (though I'm far from convinced even of that) are they prepared to risk the highly plausible concept of an unstoppable nuclear retaliation? Are they so keen to meet Allah that they'll commit national suicide to do so?
I rather doubt it.
My assessment is that we don't really understand Iran, and we don't understand their culture or philosophy. Sure, I perceive Iran as a threat to the West, but Iran sure as hell has better motivation for perceiving the West as a threat to itself. And that, in my opinion, is why they want nukes .... and personally, I find their protestations about their nuclear program being entirely about power and not at all about weapons as highly lacking in credibility. Personally, I believe they're developing nukes as fast as they can. Given their situation, it's hardly surprising. I'd be doing the same in their shoes ..... and denying it, too.
One more thing. I have little doubt that the Iranian regime would love to see an end to "Zionism", but would a major nuclear event in an area that's, relatively speaking, on their doorstep, be an acceptable price? Geopolitically speaking, how much use would Israel be to anyone with a series of nuclear glows emanating from it? If they could wave a magic wand and have the Israeli state vanish, would they? Probably. But a nuclear war would seem like cutting off your nose, and gouging out both of your own eyes, to spite your face.
Nice anti-Israeli bias there. Perhaps you ought to look at the history of the middle east and find out who the aggressors have been. I'll give you a clue it's not Israel. They have conscription in Israel for a very good reason. Just because you "send in Mossad" does not automatically mean you "send in nukes". I suppose that you will waver Iran and their agents that are operating in Iraq/Lebanon/Palestine because they are not, a) George Bush b) Israel.
The trouble with Iran gaining nuclear weapons has nothing to do with Israel and I hate this whole "oooh they are doing such and such so we should allow so and so to do such and such" it's nonsense. Reasoning that just because one country has nukes so others should be allowed them is akin to giving every scoolchild a loaded semi-automatic with the safety glued off just because some 16 year old has a gun. Someone is gonna get hurt.
Deal with the issue of Iran wanting the bomb and nothing else.
The problem with a nuclear armed Iran is not an Israeli/Iranian nuclear conflict, but the long term stability of the middle east. A nuclear armed Iran would be unchallengeable by other middle eastern countries. The IRG would be free to act with impunity and you'd see a nutter like armoured-dinnerjacket wielding that new power. Saudi Arabia and Egypt would then go hell for leather in acquiring nuclear weapons and proliferation would accelerate.
Iran's populace and their wishes are not represented by their government. Remember we are dealing with radical Islamists. This was mentioned in another thread - http://forums.hexus.net/general-disc...errorists.html
No one is saying that Iran shouldn't have access to civil nuclear power, infact if they had used the same process using the IAEA that Brazil has done they would already have working reactors by now (even though they don't need them due to sitting on tons of black stuff - no not guinness!)
The USA is acting appropriately and within the law by using sanctions. The world should follow their lead. Bombing of Iran will not take place soon. It will take place, but probably not until late next year before the Presidential election. Infact, I'd probably get good odds that it'll be upto Hilary to do it, which would be ironic. America will have a lot more diplomatic and military manoeuvring to do before they are in such a position, but when it comes it will make "shock and awe 2003" look like a kid's backyard birthday firework display. They really will go after the Iranian military (and any nuclear facilities) and lets hope that when they do it will allow the Iranian people a chance for regime change and to govern themselves. Full blown invasion is off the cards, but there might be a hit and run on Iran's main nuclear facilities if they cannot guarantee their destruction form the air.
Lets not forget that we currently have SF on the Iraq/Iran border killing Iranians/Iraqis that are smuggling weapons and explosives across the border which are used to kill British troops in Iraq, who incidentally, are there under a UN mandate. Yes, you and I may not like the war for what ever reason, but the fact is we are there now and are fully justified in defending ourselves. As are the Americans.
Last edited by iranu; 26-10-2007 at 05:25 PM.
"Reality is what it is, not what you want it to be." Frank Zappa. ----------- "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." Huang Po.----------- "A drowsy line of wasted time bathes my open mind", - Ride.
Look, it's really, really, really simple.
Leave them all alone and bugger off to New Zealand.
If the Iranians kick off against the Israelies of vice versa, sure, it'll make getting to see the pyramids a bit tricky but at least there won't be anyone arguing.
And you know what? Yes, it's a grim, self-centred view that is basically advocating the nuclear destruction of two countries and millions of deaths of innocent men, women and children but until THEY change their views there's not a lot any of us can do about it.
Am I obliquely burying my head in the sand? I guess you could say so but what can I do about it? Write a letter to my MP? Maybe to my EMP? What good would that do?
Oh hang on, if we ALL do it it'll surely bring about change? Yeah? And we'll ALL do it? dream on.
The only time that anyone will get involved and really, honestly start to be concerned is when this kind of thing starts to have a real relevance to them... it's essentially why the US invaded Iraq, cos it's a great way to get cheap oil.
Shouldn't we be rather more worried about Russia upping her forces? That **** IS right on our doorstep... but no, the news is full of stuff going on in a country that few of us have visited and has little impact on our daily lives.
You could call me apathetic but you'd be wrong. I'm being realistic. The conflict has been going on for DECADES people... don't you think that enough time, resources and LIVES have already been thrown into solving this problem with no results whatsoever?
Let 'em fight. Let them fight until finally someone in either country sees sense and calls it a day.
True meaningful change can only come from within, and we're not within so we can't make a change.
We would then be debating where it went wrong.
Is Iran that much closer to getting nukes than North Korea? I am inclined to think that the US will not start another war if only because of the current situation in Iraq and they've not attacked North Korea.
about five years behind, assuming assorted sources are accurate (iran are 3-8 years from functional kit at best, pdrk may already have built prototypes, but maybe not, the evidence is pretty iffy)
about 50 years ago, when Israel occupied part of Palestine...
when *we* gave them part of palestine that wasn't ours to give
erm I thought the UK washed it's hands of the area because our troops were being attacked by Arabs and Jews and they also couldn't stop them killing each other, and it was all handed over to the UN................. but a civil war broke out and it was solved that way.
Also the Israelis say they bought most of the land off the Arabs who were living in Israel (Palestine), well at least in the last 30 years.
2nd computer gigabyte P965ds3p, 7770 E2140@2.9ghz, corsair HX520 6 years stable, replaced now with E8400@3.9ghz and will overclock more when I'm bored.
it's more complicated than that. There's plenty of information out there. Wiki has a balanced article to start with.
"Reality is what it is, not what you want it to be." Frank Zappa. ----------- "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." Huang Po.----------- "A drowsy line of wasted time bathes my open mind", - Ride.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
