Author Topic: Iran  (Read 1592 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Rella

  • ..
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
  • Manna: 649
  • It was 6. Apparently now is up to 7.
Re: Iran
« Reply #35 on: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 09:30:17 »
Sure did not take long for lefty ABC news to trot on over to talk to them.
____________________________________________

Iranian foreign minister says US 'will pay' for its 'act of war' originally appeared on abcnews.go.com

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif says the United States "will pay" for its actions and must "be prepared for the consequences" in the wake of the death of Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the head of Iran's elite Quds Force who was killed by an American airstrike in Iraq last week.

In a sit-down interview with Zarif in Tehran on Tuesday, ABC News Chief Global Affairs Correspondent Martha Raddatz asked, "Are you concerned that a strong response from Iran will end in an all-out war?"

"That depends on the United States," Zarif said. "The United States took an act of war against Iran; it will have to be prepared for the consequences. Then it will have to decide whether it wants to get itself into a quagmire or whether it wants to stop."

Zarif said his country is a "very patient" one and will take action "after necessary deliberation" and "at a time of our choosing." He added that Iran will announce and claim responsibility for whatever counteraction it decides to take.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/iranian-foreign-minister-says-us-pay-act-war-131147800--abc-news-topstories.html

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Iran
« Reply #35 on: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 09:30:17 »

Offline mommydi

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 9134
  • Manna: 719
  • Gender: Female
Re: Iran
« Reply #36 on: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 09:33:31 »
Striking our embassy was an "act of war."


Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 35629
  • Manna: 776
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Iran
« Reply #37 on: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 09:48:50 »
It certainly was. Except in the Left’s vernacular.

The party that needs to decide something is Soleimani’s replacement. Next on deck will be target number 2.
« Last Edit: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 09:51:18 by Jaime »

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12389
  • Manna: 218
  • Gender: Male
Re: Iran
« Reply #38 on: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 15:48:45 »
4WD I was not making a comment about being at war today.  I was disputing the idea that we won Viet Nam.  A piece treaty does not make a win.  Kids an South Viet Nam scrambling to get on planes because they knew they would be killed by the North.  Even after the treaty we had troops in Cambodia still crossing in and trying to win.  You win a war when the other side no longer has the will or means to fight.  That was not the case it was a political goat rope that got 58,000 Americans killed including 4 of my best friends.  NO in NO rational way did we win that war.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Iran
« Reply #38 on: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 15:48:45 »
Pinterest: GraceCentered.com

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1546
  • Manna: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Iran
« Reply #39 on: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 18:01:59 »
But we did win the Iraq war under G W Bush. It only cost us a trillion dollars and a few 1000 dead and mangled troupes, and strengthened Iran's power, but we showed that SOB Hussein and anyone else not to mess with the USA. Yeah, I was cheering Bush on in that war, but after the smoke cleared it was a very hollow victory. One of the biggest blunders an American Pres has ever made. Second only to Johnson's Vietnam. Both were justified to the American people through misinformation and deceit. If you want to go to war because somebody needs their butt kicked, go yourself on your own money.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Iran
« Reply #39 on: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 18:01:59 »



Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 35629
  • Manna: 776
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Iran
« Reply #40 on: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 18:27:02 »
That’s the point Trump won’t go to war like the Iraq war. Yes we will counter anything they do but we will not send hundreds of thousands of ground troops like in Iraq and Afghanistan. No need to if we don’t want to do regime change, which we don’t and won’t under Trump.

Also, I am convinced the WMD was in fact IN Iraq and moved to Syria. He had them and used them on his own people. Saddam unilaterally getting rid of his WMD is about as likely as Kim Jung Un unilaterally getting rid of his nukes. Bush was right but felt he couldn’t afford to incriminate the Russians for their role in moving the WMD. We had our hands full in Afghanistan and Iraq simultaneously. That was probably a blunder; however we did have the real culprits Iran completely surrounded on the East and the West and our ships in the Indian Ocean.
« Last Edit: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 21:28:36 by Jaime »

Offline Rella

  • ..
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
  • Manna: 649
  • It was 6. Apparently now is up to 7.
Re: Iran
« Reply #41 on: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 18:35:56 »
But we did win the Iraq war under G W Bush. It only cost us a trillion dollars and a few 1000 dead and mangled troupes, and strengthened Iran's power, but we showed that SOB Hussein and anyone else not to mess with the USA. Yeah, I was cheering Bush on in that war, but after the smoke cleared it was a very hollow victory. One of the biggest blunders an American Pres has ever made. Second only to Johnson's Vietnam. Both were justified to the American people through misinformation and deceit. If you want to go to war because somebody needs their butt kicked, go yourself on your own money.

Did we? Did we really show them not to mess with the USA? NOT.

I was glued to the tube in that war that was televised and everything seemed to scream USA,USA,USA. And thought highly of GW when things were seeming to go our way....

But I have not forgotten how Bin Laden pulled one over on us in late 2001 when he escaped through the Toro Bora mountains.

I remember, all too well, the 3 separate times that when our troops were on his heels and word came down to them that he was going to surrender the next day but wanted the night to get his ducks in a row. Our guys said fine, and the next morning Bin Laden had escaped.

So ramping up the search we tracked him down again and yet a 2nd one came where surrender was imminent but needing some time.  And it was granted.

Finally the third time came. and the request was made yet again only this time he had managed to disappear the next day.

I knew then that he was not to be caught, but I did not know why.... only that it had to be orders from DC and most likely GW.

And so much following 911 up to and even today just smells like a week old fish out of water.

But now we have someone who is not playing by the political rules. Not the rules that are not in writing but "understood" by the leaders around the world, but by those that are right and just.

Jaime said
Quote
       
Also, I am convinced the WMD was in fact IN Iraq and moved to Syria. He had them and used them on his own people. Saddam unilaterally getting rid of his WMD is about as likely as Kim Jung Un unilaterally getting rid of his nukes.     

100% agreement.

 

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 35629
  • Manna: 776
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Iran
« Reply #42 on: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 18:47:02 »
Bush was an idiot for not revealing that fact, but he didn’t want to expose the fact that Russia helped Saddam move the WMD to Syria according to One of Saddam’s generals that wrote a book about it. The only logical explanation.
« Last Edit: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 19:13:36 by Jaime »

Offline Rella

  • ..
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
  • Manna: 649
  • It was 6. Apparently now is up to 7.
Re: Iran
« Reply #43 on: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 19:25:36 »
Bush was an idiot for not revealing that fact, but he didn’t want to expose the fact that Russia helped Saddam move the WMD to Syria according to One of Saddam’s generals that wrote a book about it. The only logical explanation.

Was that the one about the rose garden?

I bought it, but it could not hold my interest.

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 35629
  • Manna: 776
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Iran
« Reply #44 on: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 19:32:26 »
It was Saddam’s Secrets by Gen. Georges Sada.

Offline Rella

  • ..
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
  • Manna: 649
  • It was 6. Apparently now is up to 7.
Re: Iran
« Reply #45 on: Tue Jan 07, 2020 - 19:57:33 »
It was Saddam’s Secrets by Gen. Georges Sada.

Not the same.

Mine was about bomb parts being buried under the roses in the rose garden.

The write up sounded quite plausible when I bought it... but was way more technical then I wanted to read at the time. Though I forget the rank of the man who wrote it. I think also was a general, but perhaps not

(CNN) -- The CIA has in its hands the critical parts of a key piece of Iraqi nuclear technology -- parts needed to develop a bomb program -- that were dug up in a back yard in Baghdad, CNN has learned.

The parts, with accompanying plans, were unearthed by Iraqi scientist Mahdi Obeidi who had hidden them under a rose bush in his garden 12 years ago under orders from Qusay Hussein and Saddam Hussein's then son-in-law, Hussein Kamel.

The Bomb in My Garden: The Secrets of Saddam's Nuclear Mastermind

https://www.amazon.com/Bomb-My-Garden-Secrets-Mastermind/dp/0471741272


Offline NorrinRadd

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2127
  • Manna: 119
  • Gender: Male
  • Everybody is somebody's heretic
Re: Iran
« Reply #46 on: Wed Jan 08, 2020 - 01:58:27 »
The only reason we have not won a war since WW2 is we quit fighting them to win.  The purpose of war it to blow up stuff and kill people until the enemy no loner has the will to resist.  But now we talk about non combatants , innocent civilians and rules of how to treat prisoner.  War is a terrible thing and should be a last resort but when it starts it has to be total commitment.  Where was the military target when we dropped the atomic bombs that ended WW2?  Where was the military target when we fire bombed Berlin?  I could give more examples but we simply have lost the desire to fight and end a war.

Completely agree.  I have never really understood or accepted the idea of "rules" of war.  More than anything, "rules of war" and especially "proportional responses" lead only to decades of quagmire.  If you're going to fight, unleash war in all its fury and horror; otherwise, just stay home and surrender.

AVZ

  • Guest
Re: Iran
« Reply #47 on: Wed Jan 08, 2020 - 04:20:30 »
But we did win the Iraq war under G W Bush.

I doubt it. From my point of view you are still fighting that war, have a military presence there and it cost you billions.
And now it looks like they want to boot you out.
So what is it that you won? Looks to me you never won anything but lost a lot.

Offline 4WD

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10469
  • Manna: 299
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Iran
« Reply #48 on: Wed Jan 08, 2020 - 05:28:04 »
4WD I was not making a comment about being at war today.  I was disputing the idea that we won Viet Nam.  A piece treaty does not make a win.  Kids an South Viet Nam scrambling to get on planes because they knew they would be killed by the North.  Even after the treaty we had troops in Cambodia still crossing in and trying to win.  You win a war when the other side no longer has the will or means to fight.  That was not the case it was a political goat rope that got 58,000 Americans killed including 4 of my best friends.  NO in NO rational way did we win that war.
We wouldn't have "won the war" with Japan if we all we did was drop the two bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and sign a treaty. It is necessary to conduct the relevant follow through.  In the case of Vietnam, the democrats took direct action to cut off all the relevant follow through.  So yes, the military did win that war, the [democrat] politicians gave it away.

Offline 4WD

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10469
  • Manna: 299
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Iran
« Reply #49 on: Wed Jan 08, 2020 - 05:31:16 »
I doubt it. From my point of view you are still fighting that war, have a military presence there and it cost you billions.
And now it looks like they want to boot you out.
So what is it that you won? Looks to me you never won anything but lost a lot.

We have a military presence in Japan and in Germany and it continues to cost us billions.  Are you suggesting that we did not win WWII with Japan and Germany?

Offline mommydi

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 9134
  • Manna: 719
  • Gender: Female
Re: Iran
« Reply #50 on: Wed Jan 08, 2020 - 09:48:37 »
If the Iranians start a mass slaughter of civilians, then it may be time to start talking about slaughtering their civilians, but until then the Pres needs to keep his mouth shut about it.

You mean like back in November when the Iranian regime murdered 1500 of their own people when they protested against their own government? Among the dead, were women and teens.
Or what about the Iranian militias who have murdered thousands in Eastern Syria?

I could go on with more examples, but does Norton the expert on foreign affairs give President Trump permission to open his mouth about these mass slaughters, or not?

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1546
  • Manna: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Iran
« Reply #51 on: Wed Jan 08, 2020 - 10:50:11 »
I doubt it. From my point of view you are still fighting that war, have a military presence there and it cost you billions.
And now it looks like they want to boot you out.
So what is it that you won? Looks to me you never won anything but lost a lot.
Exactly my point. We subdued their military. Captured and executed their leader, but still came out a loser.

Offline Rella

  • ..
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
  • Manna: 649
  • It was 6. Apparently now is up to 7.
Re: Iran
« Reply #52 on: Wed Jan 08, 2020 - 12:09:56 »
4WD I was not making a comment about being at war today.  I was disputing the idea that we won Viet Nam.  A piece treaty does not make a win.  Kids an South Viet Nam scrambling to get on planes because they knew they would be killed by the North.  Even after the treaty we had troops in Cambodia still crossing in and trying to win.  You win a war when the other side no longer has the will or means to fight.  That was not the case it was a political goat rope that got 58,000 Americans killed including 4 of my best friends.  NO in NO rational way did we win that war.
.

NO, we DID NOT win that war.

As to winning a war when the other side no longer has the will or means to fight... ::doh:: Not in this day and age. Wars are being waged these days not with boots on the ground but using technology that should never have been invented, but was necessary.

The "other side" will always have the will to fight.. ergo no wins.

As long as there are terrorists and terrorism in the world those people feel incumbent to keep it going for it is their devine rewards they believe in and when one is gone another will step up to the plate.

There is no solution. Life has turned into a Vietnam.

But I ask you what would you do. Would you withdraw all troops world wide and let whatever happens happen?


Offline Rella

  • ..
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
  • Manna: 649
  • It was 6. Apparently now is up to 7.
Re: Iran
« Reply #53 on: Wed Jan 08, 2020 - 12:15:17 »
Completely agree.  I have never really understood or accepted the idea of "rules" of war.  More than anything, "rules of war" and especially "proportional responses" lead only to decades of quagmire.  If you're going to fight, unleash war in all its fury and horror; otherwise, just stay home and surrender.

Fully agree.

But the heads of state have their agreements of what can and cannot be done.

Now we cannot hit IRANS cultural sites.  Whoopie... though in the past many places were destroyed in WW1 andWW2....

But does that not give them a pass... a pass to hide all things nuclear knowing we can never get to them?

POTUS said cultural sites would be targeted.

The DEMS cried foul... it is against the law... now so written.

POTUS backed down from that last night on the public news.

And God forbid we would target a leader of a nation we are now at war with.... It is true insanity.

Offline Rella

  • ..
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
  • Manna: 649
  • It was 6. Apparently now is up to 7.
Re: Iran
« Reply #54 on: Wed Jan 08, 2020 - 12:17:18 »
I doubt it. From my point of view you are still fighting that war, have a military presence there and it cost you billions.
And now it looks like they want to boot you out.
So what is it that you won? Looks to me you never won anything but lost a lot.

                                                                                             .


And I mean every word of that.

Offline Rella

  • ..
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
  • Manna: 649
  • It was 6. Apparently now is up to 7.
Re: Iran
« Reply #55 on: Wed Jan 08, 2020 - 12:19:25 »
You mean like back in November when the Iranian regime murdered 1500 of their own people when they protested against their own government? Among the dead, were women and teens.
Or what about the Iranian militias who have murdered thousands in Eastern Syria?

I could go on with more examples, but does Norton the expert on foreign affairs give President Trump permission to open his mouth about these mass slaughters, or not?

No, he does not.

He leans too far away from understanding and is blinded by his jumbled mind to comprehend the whys, much less the wherefores. rofl

Offline Rella

  • ..
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
  • Manna: 649
  • It was 6. Apparently now is up to 7.
Re: Iran
« Reply #56 on: Wed Jan 08, 2020 - 12:20:31 »
Exactly my point. We subdued their military. Captured and executed their leader, but still came out a loser.

It takes one to know one....

You give new meaning to "The Biggest Loser".

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1546
  • Manna: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Iran
« Reply #57 on: Wed Jan 08, 2020 - 16:57:25 »
It takes one to know one....

You give new meaning to "The Biggest Loser".
Yes I know, everyone who does not praise Trump is a loser. You are getting the language down just right.
« Last Edit: Wed Jan 08, 2020 - 16:59:42 by Norton »

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 35629
  • Manna: 776
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Iran
« Reply #58 on: Wed Jan 08, 2020 - 17:18:54 »
Doesn’t it work the other way for your side with Obama and Hillary et al? Let’s at least be original! Trump is not perfect by any stretch. Can we find common ground on the many good things he has done. I can think of several things to criticize him about. Can YOU come up with several criticisms of Obama or any Establishment Republican for that matter? Any reasonable person must admit that the impeachment thing in the House was incredibly unfair and the media’s Trump derangement syndrome is wearing thin. If not then those people ARE in fact  unreasonable and losers. Try to give the man SOME credit, he deserves a lot. I’ll give you the criticisms of him saying women lets you grab their genitals, or when he gives his political enemies tacky nicknames. But all of Donald is bad all the time is simply stupid. I concluded with all his faults, he is hands down a better choice than any Democrat or Republican in 2016 or 2020. Ted Cruz would bave been great, but unelectable and beating Hillary was ALL IMPORTANT. Much moreso in 2020 with his accomplishments and promises kept. No one here worships Trump. An obvious admonition to anyone especially the anti-Trump all the time morons. Not saying anyone particularly is here, but I‘m starting to worry. Even Dems found a way to make Soleimani sound praiseworthy.
« Last Edit: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 06:00:07 by Jaime »

AVZ

  • Guest
Re: Iran
« Reply #59 on: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 00:57:26 »
You mean like back in November when the Iranian regime murdered 1500 of their own people when they protested against their own government? Among the dead, were women and teens.
Or what about the Iranian militias who have murdered thousands in Eastern Syria?

I could go on with more examples, but does Norton the expert on foreign affairs give President Trump permission to open his mouth about these mass slaughters, or not?

Just to put things in perspective.
- The Iranian government as it is today is the product of meddling with internal politics in Iran by Western powers (UK & US)
- The reason why people take to the streets in Iran is due to the sanctions, issued and now increased by the US

The whole reason for Trump to tear up the agreement was to exercise not only international pressure, but also national pressure on the Iranian Government.
Do you really think Trump did not expect, know and perhaps even hoped for demonstrations with violent results when he abandoned the agreement?

This whole mess we are facing today in the ME is due to western powers dividing up the region for their own interests.
The UK and France however seem to have been a hell of a lot smarter than the US. They packed up and left a long time ago already.

Why do you think there is so much hatred against the USA in the ME?
Because you are the last colonial power that is still there meddling in politics, and if necessary by force.

In an amazing display of wisdom however has Trump made the sacrifice of the protesters in Iran a sacrifice in vain.
By taking out a prominent member of the government has he united the people of Iran again.

And finally, nobody cares about 1500 people (if it was that many). It makes for good political rhetoric, but do you really think anyone in the US government cares about 1500 Iranians?
We read it in the newspaper, shake our heads and have forgotten about it the next day.
Any idea how many people died by the hands of Saddam Hussein who was put in place by the US? Did anyone care?

I tell you what the US cares about in the ME. Three words...oil, power, money
Everything else is just noise.

Offline 4WD

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10469
  • Manna: 299
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Iran
« Reply #60 on: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 04:50:46 »
The whole reason for Trump to tear up the agreement was to exercise not only international pressure, but also national pressure on the Iranian Government.
The reason Trump took us out of the Iran Nuclear deal was because it did nothing whatsoever to prevent Iran producing nuclear weapons.  All it did was given them 10 years from the start of the agreement [about five years from now] to develop the technology needed to build a nuclear weapon. And just as important as the weapon itself, there is the need for a means of delivering the weapon, namely, ballistic missiles.  The Iran Nuclear Deal did absolutely nothing to prevent Iran from developing ballistic missiles.

And on top of that, the Deal gave Iran one and a half a billion dollars and lifted all sanctions allowing them both money and opportunity to exercise their role as the number one country in the planning, organizing and exercise of terrorism throughout the ME and beyond.  It was a really stupid deal. 

Maybe, just maybe, Trump can correct a little of the damage done by Obama in entering into that Deal. However, the Democrats are fighting him every step of the way.  They are so bad that they are now even taking issue with his getting rid of Qasem Soleimani.  They praised Obama for getting rid of Osama Bin Laden who was probably much less effective enemy against the U.S. than was Soleimani.

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 35629
  • Manna: 776
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Iran
« Reply #61 on: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 05:50:53 »
50 yrs ago our stance on Iran WAS probably about oil, money and keeping the Russians out of Iran. Now as we are virtually oil independent, our Iran stance is or should have been even with Obama about their worldwide sponsor of terrorism and the likely potential the will get a nuke  to add to their terrorism toys. As we have seen, Obama’s apology tour and disasterous deal with Iran only only project weakness. We have zero need for their oil or money and this President rightly has no desire for endless wars there especially hundreds of thousands of boots on the ground. I DO believe he WILL do whatever it takes to prevent Iran getting a nuke. I’m convinced most of the Iranian citizens are tired of the 7th century mullahs mucking up their lives. And I’m sure they don’t want us running their lives. We can get along with most Iranians. The longer the Mullahs stay in power, the less likely the Iranian people will flourish.

We can’t undo mistakes of the pat, but we also don’t have to repeat our mistakes of the past. We don’t need the Iran policies of the 1970’s and we certainly don’t need W Bush policies in the ME and we certainly do NOT need Obama’s Iranian policy or appeasement. I suspect Trump’s strength will result in some real negotiated progress. The last thing Trump needs is protracted war in and around Iran. And the Iranian people deserve better than what the Mullahs have wrought on them. Maybe the mullahs will see a little light.
« Last Edit: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 05:53:35 by Jaime »

AVZ

  • Guest
Re: Iran
« Reply #62 on: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 06:16:24 »
50 yrs ago our stance on Iran WAS probably about oil, money and keeping the Russians out of Iran. Now as we are virtually oil independent, our Iran stance is or should have been even with Obama about their worldwide sponsor of terrorism and the likely potential the will get a nuke  to add to their terrorism toys. As we have seen, Obama’s apology tour and disasterous deal with Iran only only project weakness. We have zero need for their oil or money and this President rightly has no desire for endless wars there especially hundreds of thousands of boots on the ground. I DO believe he WILL do whatever it takes to prevent Iran getting a nuke. I’m convinced most of the Iranian citizens are tired of the 7th century mullahs mucking up their lives. And I’m sure they don’t want us running their lives. We can get along with most Iranians. The longer the Mullahs stay in power, the less likely the Iranian people will flourish.

We can’t undo mistakes of the pat, but we also don’t have to repeat our mistakes of the past. We don’t need the Iran policies of the 1970’s and we certainly don’t need W Bush policies in the ME and we certainly do NOT need Obama’s Iranian policy or appeasement. I suspect Trump’s strength will result in some real negotiated progress. The last thing Trump needs is protracted war in and around Iran. And the Iranian people deserve better than what the Mullahs have wrought on them. Maybe the mullahs will see a little light.

This has nothing to do with the US not needing access to Iran's resources, but it has everything to do with keeping the rest of the world away from it.
In particular Russia, China and Japan.

As far as terrorism is concerned, if you don't want terrorism...just leave!
And yes, there is a likely potential Iran will get either nuclear energy or nuclear weapons, especially now that Trump tore up the agreement that allowed control!

Finally, Iran actually is a very moderate Islamic country compared to for example Saudi Arabia.
Which very much proves that a country most certainly can flourish even under strict Muslim regime.

If you want the Iranian people to stop suffering and if you want them to flourish...lift the sanctions and let them become part of the international (trading) community!
If you would actually take the time to listen to the Iranian people themselves, that's exactly what they are asking for.
So if your concern is with the Iranians, don't try to take away their Mullahs. They do not want that and they do not need you to do that.
What they want is access to trade and commerce....but that is exactly what you take away from them.

Offline Rella

  • ..
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
  • Manna: 649
  • It was 6. Apparently now is up to 7.
Re: Iran
« Reply #63 on: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 07:03:10 »
This has nothing to do with the US not needing access to Iran's resources, but it has everything to do with keeping the rest of the world away from it.
In particular Russia, China and Japan.

As far as terrorism is concerned, if you don't want terrorism...just leave!

If you want the Iranian people to stop suffering and if you want them to flourish...lift the sanctions and let them become part of the international (trading) community!

If you would actually take the time to listen to the Iranian people themselves, that's exactly what they are asking for.
So if your concern is with the Iranians, don't try to take away their Mullahs. They do not want that and they do not need you to do that.

What they want is access to trade and commerce....but that is exactly what you take away from them.

 ::doh::

There is so much wrong with these statements but be happy... I will not expound. You do not have the intelligence to understand why you are so wrong here.

We could give them what you seem to think they want. It would never happen as the powers that be would block progress for the people.

Offline 4WD

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10469
  • Manna: 299
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Iran
« Reply #64 on: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 07:10:33 »
You are so right, Rella.  That entire post, being as nice as possible, was a post of naivete.  Putting it more realistic it was a post of ignorance.  Iran, and much of the ME, is lead by radical Islamists.  Islam is not just a religion; but it is also a political philosophy. It is a political philosophy which is seeking world domination and central control from the top.

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 35629
  • Manna: 776
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Iran
« Reply #65 on: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 07:41:01 »
Not only that but the Shiite Muslims hate the Sunni Muslims almost as much as they hate the US and Israel. The Iranian Mullahs are not interested in peacefully co-existing with us OR its neighbors. We would much rather deter their aggression with strength rather than hope for their goodwill in the face of our appeasement and weakness. Which sensible people know doesn’t work.

If Russia or China could ensure the free  flow of oil for the rest of the world, great but we all know they wouldn’t do that. Russia uses their natural gas as a bludgeon against Eastern Europe and would LOVE that for Western Europe as well. Angela Merckel was hell bent on latching onto the the Russian Bear’s gas teat. The Russians don’t play nice with resources they control, neither does China. We don’t want to take their oil, just don’t screw up the free flow of oil out of the Persian Gulf  and hence the world economy. Everyone’s economy is inextricably linked. We have recently attained pretty much energy independence. But our economy is linked to everyone elses.
« Last Edit: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 08:24:12 by Jaime »

AVZ

  • Guest
Re: Iran
« Reply #66 on: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 10:14:32 »
Not only that but the Shiite Muslims hate the Sunni Muslims almost as much as they hate the US and Israel. The Iranian Mullahs are not interested in peacefully co-existing with us OR its neighbors. We would much rather deter their aggression with strength rather than hope for their goodwill in the face of our appeasement and weakness. Which sensible people know doesn’t work.

If Russia or China could ensure the free  flow of oil for the rest of the world, great but we all know they wouldn’t do that. Russia uses their natural gas as a bludgeon against Eastern Europe and would LOVE that for Western Europe as well. Angela Merckel was hell bent on latching onto the the Russian Bear’s gas teat. The Russians don’t play nice with resources they control, neither does China. We don’t want to take their oil, just don’t screw up the free flow of oil out of the Persian Gulf  and hence the world economy. Everyone’s economy is inextricably linked. We have recently attained pretty much energy independence. But our economy is linked to everyone elses.

You are in fact quite mistaken.
The most strict and aggressive form of Islam is in Wahhabism, which is the dominant religion in Saudi Arabia.
And yet the Saudi's are your allies.
Once again, what again was the dominant origin of the terrorists that plunged themselves into the Twin Towers?

There are far more comparatives between Shia and Sunni. They may hate each other a lot...they hate Wahhabi's more.
It just shows that it is perfectly possible to live in co-existence with strict Islam, proven by your relationship with the Saudis.

The problem with the US is that they refuse to meet any of the Arabs on their terms, instead the Arabs are required to meet the Americans on their terms.
In centuries past many conquerors have tried to submit the Arabs and Persians to their rule...none ever succeeded.
The US will not succeed either.

The one and only reason why the US (for now) has a footing in the Middle East, is because you have the weaponry to suppress other countries.
If you would not have that armory, you would have been disposed off a long time ago.
For decades has the US been waging war in the region and besides everybody in the Middle East hating you more than ever before, you have not gained an inch.

It is quite strange you blame China and Russia for not assuring free flow of commodities, whilst the only person in recent history who has been obstructing free trade is Donald Trump.
As far as the world aconomy is concerned, the main aggressor at the moment in neither Russia nor China...it is in fact the USA.

Offline 4WD

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10469
  • Manna: 299
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Iran
« Reply #67 on: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 10:42:02 »
It is quite strange you blame China and Russia for not assuring free flow of commodities, whilst the only person in recent history who has been obstructing free trade is Donald Trump.
you think China is actually in favor of the free flow of commodities?  That is a laugh; it is more than a laugh; it is sheer ignorance.
Quote
As far as the world aconomy is concerned, the main aggressor at the moment in neither Russia nor China...it is in fact the USA.
I don't really know what you even mean by an aggressor of the world economy.

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 35629
  • Manna: 776
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Iran
« Reply #68 on: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 10:53:43 »
Trump is trying to get fair trade with China. I think he will achieve it.

And yes Wahabiism is definitely a huge problem. I don’t believe it is a state sponsored terrorism like with Iran.

We don’t need to “conquer” Arabs or Persians. We would like for them to live in peace. We would have been perfectly happy to leave Afghanis to their poppy fields and such but when they became Al Queda’s training base, that’s a no go. Same with Iran. I am in total favor of letting them live peaceably IF they would. We don’t need them as a punching bag.

I do agree with something you said a few days ago about the problems in the Middle East began with the random map drawing of the British Empire. And of course oil has muddied the water. Between haves and have nots in the region.

I do believe we can have peace with the Iranians, but it will always be from a position of strength, or an imposed peace. From a position of weakness, the Arabs and Persians would have long ago wiped each other out.

And we learned that secular strong men like Saddam are not all bad in controlling their radical religious factions.

When we were separated by vast oceans in a world of telegraphs etc who would cate what went on in these countries. Now with ease travel and missile technology, it matters where ever in the world the trouble spot is. I would assume the best we could hope for is a slow boil in these countries. As long as we are strong, we will try to affect behavior. When we are weak, bad behavior will overtake the world.

The disaster of WWII was largely because of isolationist and appeasers. Millions of lives later, things were righted, but a lot could have been prevented by not falling back on appeasement. It NEVER works.





« Last Edit: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 14:27:43 by Jaime »

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 35629
  • Manna: 776
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Iran
« Reply #69 on: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 11:00:23 »
4WD, I would say AVZ’s country, whatever it is, is an aggressor of the world economy. If he does’t want to share what his home country is, anything we say is fair game. I’m guessing he lives in one of those S-hole countries that Trump spoke about. He’s welcome to prove he doesn’t.
« Last Edit: Thu Jan 09, 2020 - 16:19:28 by Jaime »