Iran Arms Hezbollah with Long Range Mx
The Winners!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: France
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The winner?
I remember reading a study by a well documented Middle-East analyst.
His conclusion: the biggest danger in the area is an alliance between extreme fundamentalism, whichever obedience (Shia, Sunni) and the mass of poor uneducated people living in dictatorships where no right is allowed to them....
Thanks to Bush, Blair and Israeli military establishment, we can see this alliance is building itself, and if this policy of blunders and massacre goes on sometimes they will succed : a united front of Muslims led by the most dangerous and clever leaders, backed by an unanimous crowd of millions.........and no weapon will protect US allies there and then.
Better use your brain, and have an intelligent strategy than pouring undiscriminate bombings around which make only more ennemies in the future!
His conclusion: the biggest danger in the area is an alliance between extreme fundamentalism, whichever obedience (Shia, Sunni) and the mass of poor uneducated people living in dictatorships where no right is allowed to them....
Thanks to Bush, Blair and Israeli military establishment, we can see this alliance is building itself, and if this policy of blunders and massacre goes on sometimes they will succed : a united front of Muslims led by the most dangerous and clever leaders, backed by an unanimous crowd of millions.........and no weapon will protect US allies there and then.
Better use your brain, and have an intelligent strategy than pouring undiscriminate bombings around which make only more ennemies in the future!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: New York
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Several points of hard truth:
1. Hezbollah and many other Islamic terrorist and political organizations hold extermination of Israel and Jews and the world-domination of islam as their primary mission . . . . by their own open and public statements. They are proud and dedicated of this purpose. The Iranians mean what they say. If they develope a nuclear weapons and are able to deliver it, they will attack Israel. The consequences of this is not in their cross-check. These are single-minded fanatics.
2. Like the Nazis and Japanese during the 1930s, deluding oneself that the Iranians, Hezbollah, Hamas, etc, "don't really mean" what they say is stupid and naive in the extreme, or "ignoring" is done for other nefarious purposes, like tacit support for their cause.
3. Pretending that the leadership of Iran and some Arabic countries don't represent the "street" is also dangerously naive, intellectually dishonest, or an outright misrepresentation.
4. A recent poll in the UK showed that a substancial majority of muslims in the UK say they don't believe that muslims were involved in the World Trade Center atrocities. The truth is they KNOW that muslims committed the crimes, but are towing the lies that they are told to "believe." Those that want to live in truth are threatened and intimidated by the radial-majority thugs in their community mosques.
5. Muslim immigrants to western countries contribute little or nothing to the countries that host them. Very rarely will you find them serving the common good, such as military service. They are a very closed society.
6. The moderate islamic countries AND moderate muslim individually themselves have been totally irresponsible or impotent in permitting the religious fanatics from infecting muslim youth with hatred, blind obedience, and just plain stupidity.
1. Hezbollah and many other Islamic terrorist and political organizations hold extermination of Israel and Jews and the world-domination of islam as their primary mission . . . . by their own open and public statements. They are proud and dedicated of this purpose. The Iranians mean what they say. If they develope a nuclear weapons and are able to deliver it, they will attack Israel. The consequences of this is not in their cross-check. These are single-minded fanatics.
2. Like the Nazis and Japanese during the 1930s, deluding oneself that the Iranians, Hezbollah, Hamas, etc, "don't really mean" what they say is stupid and naive in the extreme, or "ignoring" is done for other nefarious purposes, like tacit support for their cause.
3. Pretending that the leadership of Iran and some Arabic countries don't represent the "street" is also dangerously naive, intellectually dishonest, or an outright misrepresentation.
4. A recent poll in the UK showed that a substancial majority of muslims in the UK say they don't believe that muslims were involved in the World Trade Center atrocities. The truth is they KNOW that muslims committed the crimes, but are towing the lies that they are told to "believe." Those that want to live in truth are threatened and intimidated by the radial-majority thugs in their community mosques.
5. Muslim immigrants to western countries contribute little or nothing to the countries that host them. Very rarely will you find them serving the common good, such as military service. They are a very closed society.
6. The moderate islamic countries AND moderate muslim individually themselves have been totally irresponsible or impotent in permitting the religious fanatics from infecting muslim youth with hatred, blind obedience, and just plain stupidity.
Grandpa,
As you so rightly state.....
How many Islamic states have you just described?
Under Saddam, Iraq would qualify....but not now....after all the Purple Fingers prove the individual has a say in the government now.
As you so rightly state.....
I remember reading a study by a well documented Middle-East analyst.
His conclusion: the biggest danger in the area is an alliance between extreme fundamentalism, whichever obedience (Shia, Sunni) and the mass of poor uneducated people living in dictatorships where no right is allowed to them....
His conclusion: the biggest danger in the area is an alliance between extreme fundamentalism, whichever obedience (Shia, Sunni) and the mass of poor uneducated people living in dictatorships where no right is allowed to them....
Under Saddam, Iraq would qualify....but not now....after all the Purple Fingers prove the individual has a say in the government now.
I'm afraid some of you have very short memories.
There was this thing called a peace deal between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The right wing israelis assassinated the Prime Minister that negotiated it with Arafat and then welched on the deal.
Then Sharon famously tramped around the dome of the rock after being warned that this would cause rioting.
We have since seen a continuously escalating procession of tit for tat violence aided and abetted by some of the worst diplomatic decisions ever made by all countries involved, these included the failure of the U.S. to engage with a democratically elected Hamas government and talk some sense into them.
It may have escaped your attention, but the Israelis have been pounding the cr*p out of Gaza and Hamas for some months and Hezbollah's original attacks on Israel were in support of Hamas.
Israel then responded in a totally disproportionate manner against the State of Lebanon which was in no position to force Hezbollah to disarm.
In effect Israel was waging a proxy war against Iran since they back Hezbollah. As for Israel "fighting for its existence' they always say this while they are kicking in the heads of defencelss Arabs - Goliath pretending to be David. How the heck can any country crush israel since it is armed with nuclear weapons?
Now of course this is seen as a good thing by George Bush, since his administration is praying that Iran will react and provide a casus belli. War with Iran would be good because its more "creative chaos' leading to the birth of Condi Rices "New Middle East" and incidently helping Republicans hold on to their seats at the November elections. Of course the "New Middle East" will sell its oil to America, which is all they really care about anyway.
Now you may think I'm cynical, but I fear for the lives of every one of the 130,000+ troops in Iraq if the balloon goes up in Iran. I also think that if Iran hasn't got a nuclear weapons program now, it will have one ten microseconds after the first American bombs fall.
I also don't like the idea of fighting enraged muslims in a never ending and unwinnable and self defeating "war on terror", although I'm sure it will give many of you guys wonderful opportunities for promotion as well as the satisfaction of using all that expensive kit and training to drop bombs everywhere.
Frankly Israel, Hamas and hezbollah deserve each other. Perhaps now that Israel has a bloody nose at the hands of Hezbollah we could hope that perhaps now it will consider being more conciliatory towards the Palestinians, although I'm not holding my breath. My preferred solution is to build a wall around this chunk of the Middle east and leave them to it so we can all get on with the rest of our lives.
I also expect that since Iran has not responded to Israel's less than subtle invitation to join it in general mayhem, an international incident will now be manufactured to justify the desired result.
There was this thing called a peace deal between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The right wing israelis assassinated the Prime Minister that negotiated it with Arafat and then welched on the deal.
Then Sharon famously tramped around the dome of the rock after being warned that this would cause rioting.
We have since seen a continuously escalating procession of tit for tat violence aided and abetted by some of the worst diplomatic decisions ever made by all countries involved, these included the failure of the U.S. to engage with a democratically elected Hamas government and talk some sense into them.
It may have escaped your attention, but the Israelis have been pounding the cr*p out of Gaza and Hamas for some months and Hezbollah's original attacks on Israel were in support of Hamas.
Israel then responded in a totally disproportionate manner against the State of Lebanon which was in no position to force Hezbollah to disarm.
In effect Israel was waging a proxy war against Iran since they back Hezbollah. As for Israel "fighting for its existence' they always say this while they are kicking in the heads of defencelss Arabs - Goliath pretending to be David. How the heck can any country crush israel since it is armed with nuclear weapons?
Now of course this is seen as a good thing by George Bush, since his administration is praying that Iran will react and provide a casus belli. War with Iran would be good because its more "creative chaos' leading to the birth of Condi Rices "New Middle East" and incidently helping Republicans hold on to their seats at the November elections. Of course the "New Middle East" will sell its oil to America, which is all they really care about anyway.
Now you may think I'm cynical, but I fear for the lives of every one of the 130,000+ troops in Iraq if the balloon goes up in Iran. I also think that if Iran hasn't got a nuclear weapons program now, it will have one ten microseconds after the first American bombs fall.
I also don't like the idea of fighting enraged muslims in a never ending and unwinnable and self defeating "war on terror", although I'm sure it will give many of you guys wonderful opportunities for promotion as well as the satisfaction of using all that expensive kit and training to drop bombs everywhere.
Frankly Israel, Hamas and hezbollah deserve each other. Perhaps now that Israel has a bloody nose at the hands of Hezbollah we could hope that perhaps now it will consider being more conciliatory towards the Palestinians, although I'm not holding my breath. My preferred solution is to build a wall around this chunk of the Middle east and leave them to it so we can all get on with the rest of our lives.
I also expect that since Iran has not responded to Israel's less than subtle invitation to join it in general mayhem, an international incident will now be manufactured to justify the desired result.
Last edited by Sunfish; 13th Aug 2006 at 21:02.
Now of course this is seen as a good thing by George Bush, since his administration is praying that Iran will react and provide a casus belli. War with Iran would be good because its more "creative chaos' leading to the birth of Condi Rices "New Middle East" and incidently helping Republicans hold on to their seats at the November elections. Of course the "New Middle East" will sell its oil to America, which is all they really care about anyway.
Just what are we supposed to fight the Iranians with? Perhaps you have not been keeping up with the readiness levels of the US military units not engaged in the Iraqi operations.
The last thing we want is war with Iran. The damage to our economy alone argues against it. We do not have the military capability to cope with both Iraq and Iran simultaneously unless we revert to a war economy, mobilzie all of the reserves, enact conscription, fund a buildup of the military, pull all of the ships out of mothballs, and somewhere in there, train the troops for combat. Never mind having one other small handicap.....convincing the American people all that is necessary.
That being said....it is closer to the Med by road than it is to Kuwait...if one goes via Damascus.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm very afraid that this is all going to end in tears, and, unfortunately, with a mushroom cloud or two.
It is only a matter of time before some radical group gets enough nuke material to create a bucket of sunshine. It doesn't take much and there need be no sophistication in triggering such a device - suicide bombers are ten-a-penny in that part of the world.
Just one sniff of this scenario and Israel will create a number of glass-filled craters...
It is only a matter of time before some radical group gets enough nuke material to create a bucket of sunshine. It doesn't take much and there need be no sophistication in triggering such a device - suicide bombers are ten-a-penny in that part of the world.
Just one sniff of this scenario and Israel will create a number of glass-filled craters...
Sasless, I agree that we do not have the capacity to fight a ground war in Iran, but that does not seem to have blunted the neoconservatives opinion that Iran needs a good bombing.
My concern of course is that there re going to be Iranians left alive after a good bombing that are going to be very angry indeed, not to mention the rest of the muslim world.
From the little I have read, it is apparently the U.S. airforce that is pushing the "can-do" Airpower-can-do-everything line against the Army (which has to keep Iraq under some semblance of control) and the U.S. Navy (which has to keep the Straits of Hormuz open).
I suppose I could get really paranoid and suggest that maybe Bush loves his role as a 'war president' so much that he would entertain the bombing idea. Then of course America has resuscitated its draft boards. There are those that believe conscription and a good dose of military discipline will solve Americas problems. All the whiny liberals can be locked up for sedition as well.
P.S. Of course nothing can happen until Blair comes back from holidays.
My concern of course is that there re going to be Iranians left alive after a good bombing that are going to be very angry indeed, not to mention the rest of the muslim world.
From the little I have read, it is apparently the U.S. airforce that is pushing the "can-do" Airpower-can-do-everything line against the Army (which has to keep Iraq under some semblance of control) and the U.S. Navy (which has to keep the Straits of Hormuz open).
I suppose I could get really paranoid and suggest that maybe Bush loves his role as a 'war president' so much that he would entertain the bombing idea. Then of course America has resuscitated its draft boards. There are those that believe conscription and a good dose of military discipline will solve Americas problems. All the whiny liberals can be locked up for sedition as well.
P.S. Of course nothing can happen until Blair comes back from holidays.
Then Sharon famously tramped around the dome of the rock after being warned that this would cause rioting.
Last time I dared to suggest this, I was severely rebuked by the "High Heid Yin"
Typical of the bleeding heart liberal to accuse Sharon of visiting the Temple Mount as the trigger for the intefada. A suitable hook for Arafat to hang his excuse for the incitement to martyrdom for the suicide bombers.There is NO EXCUSE for sending suicide bombers to murder innocent civilians. You are the bigot for somehow trying to justify the actions of indoctrinated suicide bombers who believe that they are going to be rewarded for their murderous actions in their afterlife. Once again you try to make some sort of excuse for their actions.
Lets wait and see if he is still in denial
Sunfish,
Do you think Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon(s) is in anyway a benefit to the chances of peace in the Middle East? Should we not recall the years leadiing up to the start of the last World War and consider the current situation in light of what we know from the past?
Appeasement does not work. It only kicks the can a bit further down the road and allows the problem to grow in size and complexity.
Where do we draw the line? What do we do if the Iranians do in fact obtain nuclear weapons?
Do you think Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon(s) is in anyway a benefit to the chances of peace in the Middle East? Should we not recall the years leadiing up to the start of the last World War and consider the current situation in light of what we know from the past?
Appeasement does not work. It only kicks the can a bit further down the road and allows the problem to grow in size and complexity.
Where do we draw the line? What do we do if the Iranians do in fact obtain nuclear weapons?
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Hyperspace...
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then Sharon famously tramped around the dome of the rock after being warned that this would cause rioting.
I think it was the nature of his armed, booted, ill-advised and militarily accompanied visit that did the damage. Sort the order out any way you wish.
Added to which, he certainly pissed off someone, because the current intifada started right after his visit.
Coincidence or what ?
Added to which, he certainly pissed off someone, because the current intifada started right after his visit.
Coincidence or what ?
Sunfish,
What was that feller's name....the one that got his picture taken standing there with a piece of paper held high proclaiming Peace had been achieved with that Hitler guy?
What you just said is the exact same mindset personified anew and proves my point.
The next step would be....well it is only a few Nukes and they really won't use them, right?
At some point....the truth would surface at the cost of millions of lives.
Far better we fight them with conventional weapons than ever have an exchange of nuclear weapons.
What was that feller's name....the one that got his picture taken standing there with a piece of paper held high proclaiming Peace had been achieved with that Hitler guy?
What you just said is the exact same mindset personified anew and proves my point.
The next step would be....well it is only a few Nukes and they really won't use them, right?
At some point....the truth would surface at the cost of millions of lives.
Far better we fight them with conventional weapons than ever have an exchange of nuclear weapons.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Hyperspace...
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it was the nature of his armed, booted, ill-advised and militarily accompanied visit that did the damage. Sort the order out any way you wish.
Added to which, he certainly pissed off someone, because the current intifada started right after his visit.
Coincidence or what ?
Added to which, he certainly pissed off someone, because the current intifada started right after his visit.
Coincidence or what ?
Silly me, my mistake.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: France
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are no such things as "good weapons".......all are bad!
An Iranian nuke would be as bad as the allready existing Israel ones.
If my memory is still good, I remember, Israel and Egypt came to peace agreement after decades of aggressivness because both parties came to the conclusion they could badly harm themselve and it was time for negociation.
Maybe an Iranian nuke could convince Israel hawks the balance of threats is turning and it is time to negociate with Palestine in order to have one ennemy less, and cut the grass under fundamentalist feet?
If my memory is still good, I remember, Israel and Egypt came to peace agreement after decades of aggressivness because both parties came to the conclusion they could badly harm themselve and it was time for negociation.
Maybe an Iranian nuke could convince Israel hawks the balance of threats is turning and it is time to negociate with Palestine in order to have one ennemy less, and cut the grass under fundamentalist feet?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
An Iranian nuke would be as bad as the allready existing Israel ones.
