It Doesnt Seem The Us Will Have To Attack Iran Afterall

[MTAFFI]

Bomb blast in Iran, police clash with gunmen 52 minutes ago

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Clashes broke out between police and an armed group following a bomb explosion in southeast Iran on Friday, the semi-official Fars news agency reported on Friday.

"The bandits were shooting at people after the bomb went off at a school. Clashes are still going on between police and the armed bandits," Fars said.

The agency said that after the explosion at about 1830 GMT in the city of Zahedan, capital of Sistan-Baluchestan province, electricity was cut off.

"Police have cordoned off the area and shooting can be heard in the area," Fars said.

The bombing in Zahedan was the second there in three days.

A booby-trapped car blew up a bus owned by Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards on Wednesday, killing at least 11 people.

Responsibility for the Wednesday attack was claimed by a shadowy Sunni group, Jundallah (God's soldiers), which Iran has said is linked to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network. Tehran has blamed Jundallah for past killings in the area, bordering Pakistan.

Iran has accused Britain and the United States of supporting ethnic minority rebels operating in the sensitive border areas in an attempt to destabilize the country.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070216/wl_nm/iran_bomb_dc

It seems the US will not need to attack Iran, for there meddling in Iraq at least, since the Sunni insurgency has now made its way into Iran. I do not think the Iranian government was anticipating this when it sent its weapons to Iraq. Isnt it Ironic? ;D

[Keltoi]

If I'm not mistaken, I think there is a fairly large Sunni community in Iran and Tehran in particular. This would be an interesting development if the Sunni insurgents in Iraq focus more on stopping Iranian control of their country.

[abdmez]

The Iranians are arming the Shia to slaughter our Sunni bro's and sis's so why would any Sunni group not view the Shia in Iran as an enemy?

[MTAFFI]

The Iranians are arming the Shia to slaughter our Sunni bro's and sis's so why would any Sunni group not view the Shia in Iran as an enemy?

I dont think they are viewing just the Shia, the article shows that they are targeting the government as well. (revolutionary guard) It will be interesting to see how this progresses and how the Muslim world will react.. will it divide or unite? Also I have to wonder, would the Sunni view the US as an ally if they now attacked Iran, probably not but it is something to think about

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Cognescenti]

Wow! This thread is 1 hr old and nobody has blamed the US yet.

Cool.

[NobleMuslimUK]

To be blunt any group calling themselves muslims and then producing their own texts as hadeeth, and bad mouthing and accusing the pious sahabah, also going against the fact that our beloved Prophet Mohammed PBUH was the last of prophets and Allah SWT's messenger, surely such a group cant be muslim. Then again I have many shia friends, I asked them all these questions, I even made one read the Kalimah. Another Interesting thing I saw when I went to a friends wedding, he was marrying an Iranian girl, during the Nikah, the mullah made the girl do shahadah. So a shia isnt really muslim then? I hope the shia's open their minds, they are being deluded, Ayatollah's have only made things worse. May Allah SWT guide the shia's. One question do shia's only pray salaah 3 times a day?
I think Iran has the right to have nukes, Israel is mounting pressure on their puppets in the whitehouse to deal with Iran before they get a nuke. Especially after the $2.5 billion US spent on Israel's defense system to take out missiles or warheads in the air, although that system failed badly when hezbolah shot Iranian rockets into Israel.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you NobleMuslimUK;

To be blunt any group calling themselves muslims and then producing their own texts as hadeeth, and bad mouthing and accusing the pious sahabah,

There is one God, who created all people, we should not be killing each other because we disagree with how someone else prays. We need to look beyond our differences and search for true justice for all people.

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric

[Eric H]

Greetings MTAFFI and may you find peace in your heart;

It seems the US will not need to attack Iran, for there meddling in Iraq at least, since the Sunni insurgency has now made its way into Iran. I do not think the Iranian government was anticipating this when it sent its weapons to Iraq. Isnt it Ironic? ;D

Is this any different to the thousands of Americans who murder other Americans every year on American soil? It does not seem right to kind of enjoy other people's misfortune.

In the spirit of speaking up for justice for all people

Eric

[Bittersteel]

The Iranians are arming the Shia to slaughter our Sunni bro's and sis's so why would any Sunni group not view the Shia in Iran as an enemy?

yes that's the mentality everyone has now in the ME.and that will keep the violence going for decades if changes do not occur.

This thread is 1 hr old and nobody has blamed the US yet.

it doesn't always have to be the Americans.It could be the Saudis and other Arabs in the region funding to limit Iranian influence.It could be the US but that's just conjecture from me.After all the world is grey.

[Keltoi]

The House of Saud is far from innocent in Middle Eastern affairs.

[Bittersteel]

and full of liberals and idiots.

[ManchesterFolk]

although that system failed badly when hezbolah shot Iranian rockets into Israel.

The rockets were to low to be shot down. A Missle from Iran would be at the correct height for the laser missle defense system to react.

[Cognescenti]

The rockets were to low to be shot down. A Missle from Iran would be at the correct height for the laser missle defense system to react.

That is indeed true about the trajectory of the Hezbollah artillery. Additionally, the Patriot (an anti-missile, missile) at $ 1M a copy isn't going to be fired at 20 year old, unguided Katyusha rounds, which are really just rocket artillery which are sprayed inaccurately over a general area hoping to get "lucky".

[Keltoi]

That is indeed true about the trajectory of the Hezbollah artillery. Additionally, the Patriot (an anti-missile, missile) at $ 1M a copy isn't going to be fired at 20 year old, unguided Katyusha rounds, which are really just rocket artillery which are sprayed inaccurately over a general area hoping to get "lucky".

The Patriot Missile Defense System worked fairly well in the first Gulf War, shooting down quite a few SCUDS before they hit their targets. I'm sure with the advent of new technology they would be even more effective now.

[Ubaidah]

There is one God, who created all people, we should not be killing each other because we disagree with how someone else prays.

I agree 100%.

[Pygoscelis]

The title of this thread shows massive bias. The US doesn't *HAVE* to attack Iran period. Iran isn't the agressor here, and has shown no signs of being a threat to the US. The only claims I've even heard about Iran involve a threat to Israel. I've yet to even hear pro-war propaganda about Iran attacking the US itself.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

The title of this thread shows massive bias. The US doesn't *HAVE* to attack Iran period.

You are so right; as an alternative to war Mr Bush might try following Lukes's Gospel to love and pray for your enemy.

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric

[MTAFFI]

The title of this thread shows massive bias. The US doesn't *HAVE* to attack Iran period. Iran isn't the agressor here, and has shown no signs of being a threat to the US. The only claims I've even heard about Iran involve a threat to Israel. I've yet to even hear pro-war propaganda about Iran attacking the US itself.

First off, you are right, it is bias, I can not stand Iran (or at least their government). Second, Iran is the aggressor, when has the US said they will attack Iran, Iran has said on multiple occasions that it would attack US interests around the world, and has threatened, very seriously i might add, US allies in the mid east. Iran is not only a threat to the US but the world. They have also taken an aggressive stance in a power struggle with the US in Iraq, that is making it more difficult for troops to do their job there. I wouldnt say the US has taken any kind of aggressive stance with Iran yet, but if they keeping popping off at the mouth, I would think they would get a response.

[Sami Zaatari]

lol this attack was conducted by a small group, nothing ground breaking, mtaffi u do know this has happened in iran before right? here and there they have been attacked by small groups such as this, lolllll u think this is the insurgents from iraq how funny, getting excited for nothing. i dont think iran which has 11 million soldiers is going to be really concerned with a small bus bombing and a small fire-fight with a group of bandits. lol u are very funny

and just to show how more funny u are, the attacks happened in THE EAST OF IRAN, NOT THE WEST, now why the heck wud insurgents in iraq travel ACROSS IRAN going all the way down to the south-east of iran which would take several days and lots of time when they cud just attack iran from the west! wowwwww man u really are funny seriously.

insurgents in iraq are trying to hold down their own areas etc etc, lol and mtaffi is suggesting that these same insurgents who are in daily battles to control their areas from iraqi-us forces had the time to cross into iran, travel across iran, travel all the way to the south-east of iran bordering pakistan, and to then launch an attack. hmmmmmmmmmmmmm not very bright.

[MTAFFI]

lol this attack was conducted by a small group, nothing ground breaking, mtaffi u do know this has happened in iran before right? here and there they have been attacked by small groups such as this, lolllll u think this is the insurgents from iraq how funny, getting excited for nothing. i dont think iran which has 11 million soldiers is going to be really concerned with a small bus bombing and a small fire-fight with a group of bandits. lol u are very funny

and just to show how more funny u are, the attacks happened in THE EAST OF IRAN, NOT THE WEST, now why the heck wud insurgents in iraq travel ACROSS IRAN going all the way down to the south-east of iran which would take several days and lots of time when they cud just attack iran from the west! wowwwww man u really are funny seriously.

insurgents in iraq are trying to hold down their own areas etc etc, lol and mtaffi is suggesting that these same insurgents who are in daily battles to control their areas from iraqi-us forces had the time to cross into iran, travel across iran, travel all the way to the south-east of iran bordering pakistan, and to then launch an attack. hmmmmmmmmmmmmm not very bright.

REALLY 11 MILLION SOLDIERS HUH?? LOL YOU ARE THE FUNNY ONE MY FRIEND! Iran doesnt have 1 million soldiers, it is just ready to throw everyone one of its people into battle, I guess the US has 300 million then huh? Also who says anyone traveled, ever heard of the internet? Email, regular mail, telephone conversations. Could these people be connected to the Sunni in Iraq, perhaps so, perhaps not either way I believe it may have something to do with recent events.

[Cognescenti]

Now, now....Sami may be right

1 million soldiers and 10 million volunteer minefield clearing engineers (without shoes)

Here are some more authoritative numbers from the FAS. Turns out Sami was only off by a factor of about 20...but thanks for playing, Sami

http://www.fas.org/main/content.jsp?...&contentId=161

Total Military Force
Active: 540,000
Reserves: 350,000

Army (350,000)
5 Corps HQ
4 Armored Divisions with 3 Armored 1 Mechinized Brigade, 4-5 Artillery Battalions
6 Infantry Divisions with 4 Infantry Brigades, 4-5 Artillery Battalions
2 Commando Divisions
1 Airborne Division

Navy (18,000)
Bases: Bandar-e Abbas (HQ), Bushehr, Kharg Island, Bandar-e Anzelli, Bandar-e Khomeini, Bandar-e Mahshahr, Chah Bahar

Air Force (52,000)
including 15,000 Air Defense

For a country the size of Iran..it is quite a big force. If I didn't know any better, I might suspect they wer up to something.:okay:

[Ninth_Scribe]

It seems the US will not need to attack Iran, for there meddling in Iraq at least, since the Sunni insurgency has now made its way into Iran. I do not think the Iranian government was anticipating this when it sent its weapons to Iraq. Isnt it Ironic? ;D

Hardly news since Al Baghdadi said on February 4th, 2007:

Iran ought to thank the Mujahideen in Iraq for giving them (indirectly) the chance of a life time to expand their influence in the region, pursue their nuclear program, and become a power to reckon with. They were able to accomplish this only because the Mujahideen have significantly worn down the American Giant and rendered it incapable of aggressive action against Iran. However, Iranians should not get too comfortable in that position because the Mujahideen are coming after them.

Besides this, I don't know why America is whining about Iranian involvement. They didn't seem to complain about Iran when the Badr brigades (Iranian Shiite militia) helped them to destroy the Sunni people of Tel Afar back in 2005... in fact, they took full advantage of the great sectarian divide!

But it won't work this time.

Ninth Scribe

BTW: The weapons Iran sent into Iraq were intended for the Shiite militias, not the Sunni ones. They have their own toys!

[MTAFFI]

Hardly news since Al Baghdadi said on February 4th, 2007:

Iran ought to thank the Mujahideen in Iraq for giving them (indirectly) the chance of a life time to expand their influence in the region, pursue their nuclear program, and become a power to reckon with. They were able to accomplish this only because the Mujahideen have significantly worn down the American Giant and rendered it incapable of aggressive action against Iran. However, Iranians should not get too comfortable in that position because the Mujahideen are coming after them.

Besides this, I don't know why America is whining about Iranian involvement. They didn't seem to complain about Iran when the Badr brigades (Iranian Shiite militia) helped them to destroy the Sunni people of Tel Afar back in 2005... in fact, they took full advantage of the great sectarian divide!

But it won't work this time.

Ninth Scribe

BTW: The weapons Iran sent into Iraq were intended for the Shiite militias, not the Sunni ones. They have their own toys!

To bad they havent worn down the american giant as bad as their own people huh? US is complaining because Iran is placing weapons in the hands of these Shia designed specifically to target the US in this case. If the Sunni insurgents over there werent such morons they would already realize this

[Sami Zaatari]

lolll u are so funny, now now smarties let me silence u on irans soldier statistics, u americans should stop being so cocky because it always backfire, u see u two only counted the number active and reserve force, u forgot to count the paramillitary, iran has 11 million of those, which is why iran is counted as the number one country in terms of soldiers, totalling to a total of 12 million. :) so busted.

and it is funny the only thing u bothered to reply back to was the number of soldiers in the iranian army, ur silliness on attributing this to the iraqi insurgency was soundly debunked by me which is evident from your lack of response to my point on it, which is why in the world would iraqi insurgents travel ACROSS IRAN all the way to the east when they can just pop over the iraqi iran border in the west and easily attack there, hmmmmmmm mtaffi u prove u have no sense of direction or world locations which is typical of most north americans so i dont blame u.

and again go learn abit about iran, since this has been happening even before any war happened, but u are an ignorant american who has never been to iran, i on the other hand am half iranian i have been there and i know what goes on there, so keep your fox news and yahoo stories for yourself since u just make urself look as smart as ur president when he tried to argue that Iraq had WMD'S

[Sami Zaatari]

let me further bust u mtaffi for contradicting your own position you first state:

It seems the US will not need to attack Iran, for there meddling in Iraq at least, since the Sunni insurgency has now made its way into Iran. I do not think the Iranian government was anticipating this when it sent its weapons to Iraq. Isnt it Ironic?

so note you claim that the weapons iran sent INTO IRAQ are now being used against them, obviously for those weapons which were SENT INTO Iraq to be used on iranians means that these weapons which WERE SENT INTO Iraq had to then be transfered across iran all the way to the south-east of the country! u later change ur stance and contradict yourself when u say:

Also who says anyone traveled, ever heard of the internet? Email, regular mail, telephone conversations.

ermmmmmm can u email weapons through the computer? can i email an ak-47 to a hotmail account and it will magically appear? lollllll ur so funny u contradict urself because u dont know what ur saying, u first say the weapons iran are SENDING INTO IRAQ are now being used against them, logically this means the weapons were sent back into iran by the insurgents and sent all the way across iran to the south-east which makes no sense! then u contradict urself saying no nooooo i meant they just talk with each other thats all! lollllll ur so funny go make ur mind up.

[Ninth_Scribe]

The title of this thread shows massive bias. The US doesn't *HAVE* to attack Iran period. Iran isn't the agressor here, and has shown no signs of being a threat to the US. The only claims I've even heard about Iran involve a threat to Israel. I've yet to even hear pro-war propaganda about Iran attacking the US itself.

The threat to Israel alone would be enough for Bush!

Ninth Scribe

[Pygoscelis]

Iran is the aggressor, when has the US said they will attack Iran

I strongly suggest you educate yourself on past US operations in Iran. I suggest you read up on it, but here it is in a nutshell:

1. Iran achieved democracy and elected representatives.

2. The Iranian government decided to nationalize their oil. This angered US oil companies.

3. The US destroyed the elected representatives of Iran and installed a dictator, the Shah.

4. People didn't like the Shah very much. In order to stay in power, he did some pretty horrible things to his people.

5. The Iranian people were really upset, understandably I'd say. They eventually managed to overthrow the Shah (and started having elections again), and an angry mob captured the US embassy.

6. This is when the US populace decided to start paying attention.

7. Iran has been painted the villain ever since, and Iranians have not much liked the US since either.

8. Dislike of the US due to the actions above in large part led to the election of the current Iranian leader everyonein the US is always going on about. Interesting side note is that he is limited in actual power.

9. The US, the nation with the most WMDs in the world, the only country I know of to actually use them (on Japan), the most powerful military, and a country that just invaded Iran's neighbour on false pretexts, is now talking all tough at Iran, making it quite clear that Iran may be its next target.

10. The US, on the other side of the globe from Iraq, having just invaded Iraq and currently occupying Iraq, complains that Iran MAY (this isn't even proven) have forces in Iraq, its neighbour.

11. Meanwhile a country that used to be high on the US's hit list (labelled as part of the Axis of Evil) has been dealt with with a more diplomatic approach.

12. The nation above (North Korea) happens to have nuclear weapons. The Nation invaded i paragraph 9 above didn't. Logically, the US suspects that Iran will try to develop WMDs, to protect itself from the US if nothing else.

13. Meanwhile, another country in the region (Israel), also armed to the teeth, and supplied by the US has some bad blood with the rest of the region.

14. As part of the propaganda war, laying the framework for a possible invasion of Iran, the US and Israel have spun the leader of Iran to be some suicidal (he'd have to be) and genocidal nutter who wants to nuke Israel. One genious spin they did was take a quote from that leader and interpret it to say he wants to "Whipe Israel off the map". This was actually not his words, but him quoting somebody, and it didn't refer to a nucler strike, but a prediction of (not even a call for) the fall of the current Israeli "zionist" regime.

15. More recently, Iran has stated that it would not roll over limp if the US took military action against it. It stated it will strike at US interests around the Globe. I would too.

Iran is not only a threat to the US but the world.

They may well be. It is hard to see through US smokescreen. Its like the boy who cried wolf. There is so much propaganda circulating that its hard to see the genuine concerns.

They have also taken an aggressive stance in a power struggle with the US in Iraq

What exactly have they done to directly oppose the US forces there? I agree that they probably shouldn't be in Iraq, but neither should the US. If both are there they are equally out of place.

[Pygoscelis]

iran is counted as the number one country in terms of soldiers

This is news to me. Iran has more soldiers than China?

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you all,

Possibly at this stage it seems pointless blaming the other side, so much injustice has happened. It is unlikely that a solution can be found that will solve the problems of the adult generation in Iraq and Iran. A vision for the future for the children and grandchildren is required.

America does not seem to be in a position to bring about peace because very few people in Iraq and Iran respect Americans for what they have already done. There needs to be a time of prayer, forgiveness and reconciliation, an Islamic solution is required. Attempts at this have been tried but they need more support.

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth.

Eric

[Sami Zaatari]

yes, iran is number one in terms of soldiers because of its huge paramillitary which numbers at 11 million.

[MTAFFI]

let me further bust u mtaffi for contradicting your own position you first state:

It seems the US will not need to attack Iran, for there meddling in Iraq at least, since the Sunni insurgency has now made its way into Iran. I do not think the Iranian government was anticipating this when it sent its weapons to Iraq. Isnt it Ironic?

so note you claim that the weapons iran sent INTO IRAQ are now being used against them, obviously for those weapons which were SENT INTO Iraq to be used on iranians means that these weapons which WERE SENT INTO Iraq had to then be transfered across iran all the way to the south-east of the country! u later change ur stance and contradict yourself when u say:

Also who says anyone traveled, ever heard of the internet? Email, regular mail, telephone conversations.

ermmmmmm can u email weapons through the computer? can i email an ak-47 to a hotmail account and it will magically appear? lollllll ur so funny u contradict urself because u dont know what ur saying, u first say the weapons iran are SENDING INTO IRAQ are now being used against them, logically this means the weapons were sent back into iran by the insurgents and sent all the way across iran to the south-east which makes no sense! then u contradict urself saying no nooooo i meant they just talk with each other thats all! lollllll ur so funny go make ur mind up.

Sami,

Exactly how old are you, I am not sure you can read. I said in my post above

Also who says anyone traveled, ever heard of the internet? Email, regular mail, telephone conversations

I never mentioned the Iranians sending anything into Iraq, I was referring to the attacks by the Sunnis in Iran, that could have been coordinated through, email, telephone, etc. As for my first response, what I thought was ironic was that Iran is trying to help Iraqi Shia fight the US and then Iraqi Sunni attack them, which I find somewhat amusing because the very people they are trying to "help" (speaking in terms of all of Iraq and not just the different religious factions) are now fighting against them. (also please note i never said the Sunni in Iran were using the weapons they gave in Iraq to them)Which was in response to your comment, "Why would they travel all the way across Iraq and Iran" or if you want the exact quote it went like this:

the attacks happened in THE EAST OF IRAN, NOT THE WEST, now why the heck wud insurgents in iraq travel ACROSS IRAN going all the way down to the south-east of iran which would take several days and lots of time when they cud just attack iran from the west!

So once again Sami, as you do in most posts that I notice of yours you have made a complete and utter fool out of yourself. By the way, do you know what the paramilitary is? I dont think you do, if I were Iran I would hope and pray that my countries welfare didnt come down to the paramilitary defending it... lol.. Again you type without thinking first. Irans military is not even close to being even comparable to the US, in fact if you asked anyone who knows what they are talking about they would tell you a military offensive against Iran would last maybe a few months or a year. No occupation, no hiding in holes or caves, utter destruction would be Iran. I would feel bad for the people of Iran.

[MTAFFI]

I strongly suggest you educate yourself on past US operations in Iran. I suggest you read up on it, but here it is in a nutshell:

1. Iran achieved democracy and elected representatives.

2. The Iranian government decided to nationalize their oil. This angered US oil companies.

3. The US destroyed the elected representatives of Iran and installed a dictator, the Shah.

4. People didn't like the Shah very much. In order to stay in power, he did some pretty horrible things to his people.

5. The Iranian people were really upset, understandably I'd say. They eventually managed to overthrow the Shah (and started having elections again), and an angry mob captured the US embassy.

6. This is when the US populace decided to start paying attention.

7. Iran has been painted the villain ever since, and Iranians have not much liked the US since either.

8. Dislike of the US due to the actions above in large part led to the election of the current Iranian leader everyonein the US is always going on about. Interesting side note is that he is limited in actual power.

9. The US, the nation with the most WMDs in the world, the only country I know of to actually use them (on Japan), the most powerful military, and a country that just invaded Iran's neighbour on false pretexts, is now talking all tough at Iran, making it quite clear that Iran may be its next target.

10. The US, on the other side of the globe from Iraq, having just invaded Iraq and currently occupying Iraq, complains that Iran MAY (this isn't even proven) have forces in Iraq, its neighbour.

11. Meanwhile a country that used to be high on the US's hit list (labelled as part of the Axis of Evil) has been dealt with with a more diplomatic approach.

12. The nation above (North Korea) happens to have nuclear weapons. The Nation invaded i paragraph 9 above didn't. Logically, the US suspects that Iran will try to develop WMDs, to protect itself from the US if nothing else.

13. Meanwhile, another country in the region (Israel), also armed to the teeth, and supplied by the US has some bad blood with the rest of the region.

14. As part of the propaganda war, laying the framework for a possible invasion of Iran, the US and Israel have spun the leader of Iran to be some suicidal (he'd have to be) and genocidal nutter who wants to nuke Israel. One genious spin they did was take a quote from that leader and interpret it to say he wants to "Whipe Israel off the map". This was actually not his words, but him quoting somebody, and it didn't refer to a nucler strike, but a prediction of (not even a call for) the fall of the current Israeli "zionist" regime.

15. More recently, Iran has stated that it would not roll over limp if the US took military action against it. It stated it will strike at US interests around the Globe. I would too.



They may well be. It is hard to see through US smokescreen. Its like the boy who cried wolf. There is so much propaganda circulating that its hard to see the genuine concerns.



What exactly have they done to directly oppose the US forces there? I agree that they probably shouldn't be in Iraq, but neither should the US. If both are there they are equally out of place.

all of this may be true but when did the US say it would attack Iran? When has the US been the aggressor, we never took over 200 Iranians hostage for 2 years, how would the Iranians look at the US if this were done? It has been a bad relationship on both sides, but as far as relating to current events, Iran has been much more the aggressor, with its leader who makes threats on a monthly basis. These threats may be, supposedly in retaliation, but why make them if no one has threatened you? For attention? It is a serious thing to say you will wipe a country or a people off of a map, and to question and hold conferences about whether or not a genocide truly happened, is this the type of man that should have a nuclear "deterent", especially given his track record of hate speeches. Imagine if Hitler had a nuclear deterent, probably more extreme than Ahmadinejad, but crazy none the less.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you all

There has been lots of talk here about who has the biggest army, best weapons, who is in the right.

Any mention of searching for a peaceful solution keeps getting overlooked.

It almost seems we deserve to live in conflict because we seem incapable of searching for justice and peace, maybe we prefer fighting.

Were is our faith in God?

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric

[Sami Zaatari]

mtaffi ur hopeless, and very cocky, if iran gets touched or destroyed as u say, dont worry dont feel sorry for them but for urself because dont think iran will just let u walk all over them, indeed an arrogant cocky enemy always falls and falls in a very bad way, which is what will happen to you and ur country if u start another war which u cant finnish.

[Pygoscelis]

When has the US been the aggressor

Infliltrations, assasinations, forcing a dictator on people, you don't find these things aggressive? The attack on the US embassy was predictable given the US actions that preceeded it.

how would the Iranians look at the US if this were done?

If Iran killed the US president and installed a dictator, and the US then attacked the Iranian embassy you mean? Or does the present situation of the US picking people up and holding them indefinitely without charges qualify?

Iran has been much more the aggressor, with its leader who makes threats on a monthly basis.

Please substantiate this as I have't seen much of it. What little I have seen has been in direct response to the US and Israel. For example the recent statement that Iran will respond to any US attack by attacking US interests worldwide. What else has the leader of Iran had so say on a monthly basis?

These threats may be, supposedly in retaliation, but why make them if no one has threatened you?

The very title of this thread suggests otherwise. THe US has talked repeatedly about a possile attack on Iran. US behaviour in Iraq has further set a precedent.

If you were living in Tehran would you feel safe from the US? I wouldn't. And ifI was the Iranian government, I'd sure be scrambling for some sort of deterrant. Ironically, it may be US agression that turns an Iranian nuke into a self fulfilling prophecy.

It is a serious thing to say you will wipe a country or a people off of a map

Iran has never, to my knowledge, said it will whipe a country or a people off a map. Clearly you caught the soundbite and US propagandized version of what I was refering to in my post above. And clearly you chose to ignore or didn't read what I wrote there about it.

Imagine if Hitler had a nuclear deterent, probably more extreme than Ahmadinejad, but crazy none the less.

There no real comparison. In fact, the comparison between Iran and Hitlers Germany is further apart than the comparison between George Bush's US and Hitler's Germany.

The US, like Germany was, is a world power. The US, like Germany exploited a disaster to galvanize public support for aggressive military action and went on to invade foreign lands. The US, like Germany, created a bogeyman as the root of all evil and set out to eradicate people. But then, unlike Bush, Hitler was elected by popular vote.

The US/Germany comparison has a lot of holes. I'm no making the case here tht they are truly comparable (they are not), but they are certainly more comparable than Iran/Germany, so to invoke Hitler only turns this right back at the US.

[MTAFFI]

mtaffi ur hopeless, and very cocky, if iran gets touched or destroyed as u say, dont worry dont feel sorry for them but for urself because dont think iran will just let u walk all over them, indeed an arrogant cocky enemy always falls and falls in a very bad way, which is what will happen to you and ur country if u start another war which u cant finnish.

Sami you are ignorant to the truth of things, Iran wouldnt let the US do anything, it would just happen that way. I am not saying that this is what I want, but I feel Iran wants it (or the leaders of Iran). Personally I wish Iran would just close their mouth and put their nuclear plans on pause for a little bit, to prove to those who are concerned that their ambitions, that they are for energy only. If this were truly the case, then why not pause for a moment? Maybe because they are cocky, overly confident, arrogant (you can pick the word and fill in the blank). Lets hope they dont "fall in a very bad way"... The US has the means to back their talk, does Iran? I notice you had no real response to my post, did you do your paramilitary research? Did you re-read the previous posts and notice your own lack of understanding?

[MTAFFI]

Infliltrations, assasinations, forcing a dictator on people, you don't find these things aggressive? The attack on the US embassy was predictable given the US actions that preceeded it.

My problem with this is, it happened 30 years ago, before Ahmadinejad relations with Iran were better

Please substantiate this as I have't seen much of it. What little I have seen has been in direct response to the US and Israel. For example the recent statement that Iran will respond to any US attack by attacking US interests worldwide. What else has the leader of Iran had so say on a monthly basis?

The very title of this thread suggests otherwise. THe US has talked repeatedly about a possile attack on Iran. US behaviour in Iraq has further set a precedent.

I named this thread the way I did because of the discussions that I have been reading on this forum. Many think the US wants to attack Iran, I personally dont think the US wants to or will. The threats I am speaking of are not direct, they are the threats of attacking US interests. The US's initial reaction to the remarks was essentially nothing, but after the 2nd or 3rd time they were made the US had to respond.

If you were living in Tehran would you feel safe from the US? I wouldn't. And ifI was the Iranian government, I'd sure be scrambling for some sort of deterrant. Ironically, it may be US agression that turns an Iranian nuke into a self fulfilling prophecy.

Not with Ahmadinejad as my leader

Iran has never, to my knowledge, said it will whipe a country or a people off a map. Clearly you caught the soundbite and US propagandized version of what I was refering to in my post above. And clearly you chose to ignore or didn't read what I wrote there about it.

I read your previous post, I just dont agree with it, personally I think it is Iran that is twisting its comments. Whether Ahmadinejad meant the Zionist, the Jews, or the name Israel, he said it should not be there. No matter how you cut it, it isnt right.

There no real comparison. In fact, the comparison between Iran and Hitlers Germany is further apart than the comparison between George Bush's US and Hitler's Germany.

This is an interesting point, the similarities at least, however my comment was necessarily directed at the actions taken, it was meant to be directed more at the type of fanatic that Ahmadinejad is, he is a good speaker, he likes to talk of war and power, land under religious law. There are similarities no doubt, but my main point is that guy should not have WMD under any circumstance.

[aamirsaab]

...It almost seems we deserve to live in conflict because we seem incapable of searching for justice and peace, maybe we prefer fighting.

Nail on the head there Eric.

Were is our faith in God?

Excellent question.

I would recommend to all members, unless your post is constructive, do not bother replying. Though, if you enjoy high blood pressures and heart attacks, by all means continue.

[MTAFFI]

I would recommend to all members, unless your post is constructive, do not bother replying. Though, if you enjoy high blood pressures and heart attacks, by all means continue.

LOL :D :giggling: ;D :lol:

[Keltoi]

Anyway...if we can return to the topic before a mod has a heartattack.

There is no impending war against Iran. period..full stop. The U.S. Congress would never authorize such a move, and furthermore, Bush is more worried about his legacy as far as Iraq goes.

[MTAFFI]

Anyway...if we can return to the topic before a mod has a heartattack.

There is no impending war against Iran. period..full stop. The U.S. Congress would never authorize such a move, and furthermore, Bush is more worried about his legacy as far as Iraq goes.

WELL SAID,

also I would like to add (because I am not sure if my post was deleted) this thread is titled the way it is because of discussions that I have had and read with people on this forum that believe the US is out to attack Iran. It was supposed to be sarcastic

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you aamirsaab;

I would recommend to all members, unless your post is constructive, do not bother replying. Though, if you enjoy high blood pressures and heart attacks, by all means continue

I think my posts are invisible, you may suffer the same problem.

In the spirit of seeking a greater interfaith understanding and friendship

Eric

[MTAFFI]

Greetings and peace be with you aamirsaab;



I think my posts are invisible, you may suffer the same problem.

In the spirit of seeking a greater interfaith understanding and friendship

Eric

I can see you Eric! Also I think your posts are probably some of the best on this site. You seem to have a good outlook on life, although i disagree with some of your political standpoints (ie Iraq). I think if everyone thought like you, we wouldnt have the problems we have today.

PEACE

[Cognescenti]

I strongly suggest you educate yourself on past US operations in Iran. I suggest you read up on it, but here it is in a nutshell:

1. Iran achieved democracy and elected representatives.

2. The Iranian government decided to nationalize their oil. This angered US oil companies.

3. The US destroyed the elected representatives of Iran and installed a dictator, the Shah.

4. People didn't like the Shah very much. In order to stay in power, he did some pretty horrible things to his people.

5. The Iranian people were really upset, understandably I'd say. They eventually managed to overthrow the Shah (and started having elections again), and an angry mob captured the US embassy.

6. This is when the US populace decided to start paying attention.

7. Iran has been painted the villain ever since, and Iranians have not much liked the US since either.

8. Dislike of the US due to the actions above in large part led to the election of the current Iranian leader everyonein the US is always going on about. Interesting side note is that he is limited in actual power.

9. The US, the nation with the most WMDs in the world, the only country I know of to actually use them (on Japan), the most powerful military, and a country that just invaded Iran's neighbour on false pretexts, is now talking all tough at Iran, making it quite clear that Iran may be its next target.

10. The US, on the other side of the globe from Iraq, having just invaded Iraq and currently occupying Iraq, complains that Iran MAY (this isn't even proven) have forces in Iraq, its neighbour.

11. Meanwhile a country that used to be high on the US's hit list (labelled as part of the Axis of Evil) has been dealt with with a more diplomatic approach.

12. The nation above (North Korea) happens to have nuclear weapons. The Nation invaded i paragraph 9 above didn't. Logically, the US suspects that Iran will try to develop WMDs, to protect itself from the US if nothing else.

13. Meanwhile, another country in the region (Israel), also armed to the teeth, and supplied by the US has some bad blood with the rest of the region.

14. As part of the propaganda war, laying the framework for a possible invasion of Iran, the US and Israel have spun the leader of Iran to be some suicidal (he'd have to be) and genocidal nutter who wants to nuke Israel. One genious spin they did was take a quote from that leader and interpret it to say he wants to "Whipe Israel off the map". This was actually not his words, but him quoting somebody, and it didn't refer to a nucler strike, but a prediction of (not even a call for) the fall of the current Israeli "zionist" regime.

15. More recently, Iran has stated that it would not roll over limp if the US took military action against it. It stated it will strike at US interests around the Globe. I would too.


.

I agree with much of your timeline but I do quibble with your emphasis.

i) You make "nationalization" of foreign assets in Iran (ie stealing :smile: ) sound like something akin to a frathouse prank.

ii) The US didn't invent the Shah. They didn't invent monarchist sentiment in Iran either. They just gave it a little boost. :smile: There are millions of Iranians now living in the US who shared a similar hatred for the regime which replaced the Shah.

iii) Interesting take about Amadinajad being "misquoted". It is possible. Translations from Farsi always seem so awkward in English...but there is the totality of his behavior which has an unmistakable anti-US, anti-Israel flavor to it.

iv) Re. the no attack on the PRK thingy. You will note the US also did not attack the PRK when the illegally captured a US warship (Pueblo) or when they threatened to develop nukes. The correct lession is it is good from a deterrent standpoint to have a major city with millions of inhabitants (Seoul) within standard artillery range of your border. In the event, the test of the PRK nuke was a semi-dud. All it did was tick off the Chinese who are now really putting the pressure on.

[Ninth_Scribe]

To bad they havent worn down the american giant as bad as their own people huh? US is complaining because Iran is placing weapons in the hands of these Shia designed specifically to target the US in this case. If the Sunni insurgents over there werent such morons they would already realize this

How much inuendo does one have to repeat in order to reach the center of a tootsie pop? I can watch CNN myself, if that was my idea of the 'most trusted name in news' - I don't need the verbatum. Trouble is, the picture of America as the great spirit of freedom who defends the world from oppression and tyranny - it's such a lie. The truth is, they've destroyed more Iraqi lives than the Sunni and Shia combined, and well over half the attacks that were blamed on Sunni and Shiite 'insurgents' weren't even caused by 'insurgents' but by foreign meddlers!

The only weapons of mass destruction that were in Iraq came with the U.S. military, who used them freely... on civilians! Yes, all the time! The ones who were actually caught making hay on the civilians amounts to a box of Cheerios compared to the real total. In fact, I have yet to hear the U.S. make one complaint against Iraqi insurgents, that it hasn't been equally guilty of. As far as I'm concerned, the Sunnis in Iraq have had to fight the U.S. even though they were innocent of the charges that were made against them, and they're being asked to forfeit their country in the name of a democracy that doesn't even exist in America! Technically 'white folks' are a minority in the U.S. and since real democracy is based soley on numb3rs, how is it that only white male presidents make office?

You know, I feel sick when I see what's happened. It's not bad enough that Bush is intent to wage a Global War because he wants divine province, but to hear people who sit back in their comfy houses with heat and hot water, coffee and cocktails, reaming a bunch of people over the equivilent of house-wife gossip... that's just plain sad!

There are two sides to the story. But I'd be wasting my breath. In 25 years a collection of documents will magically become 'declassified' and you'll know then, what I know now. It's a pity that 90% of the people those documents concern won't be alive by the time you can read them.

Ninth Scribe

[Ninth_Scribe]

There is no impending war against Iran. period..full stop. The U.S. Congress would never authorize such a move, and furthermore, Bush is more worried about his legacy as far as Iraq goes.

The only thing stopping Bush from attacking Iran is a suitable excuse (ie: a lie). In case you haven't realised this yet, the man is a total fruit-cake! If he wanted to 'have at' Iran, he would.... and he wouldn't give a rat's @ss if Congress 'liked' it or not.

My bet is he's going play the parties for what they're worth. He got the Shiites to wipe out the Sunnis and next he'll pit the Jews against the Shia. By the time everyone is done wiping the opposition out he'll just bring in the moderates (oil buddies) and talk shop.

Ninth Scribe

[Keltoi]

The only thing stopping Bush from attacking Iran is a suitable excuse (ie: a lie). In case you haven't realised this yet, the man is a total fruit-cake! If he wanted to 'have at' Iran, he would.... and he wouldn't give a rat's @ss if Congress 'liked' it or not.

My bet is he's going play the parties for what they're worth. He got the Shiites to wipe out the Sunnis and next he'll pit the Jews against the Shia. By the time everyone is done wiping the opposition out he'll just bring in the moderates (oil buddies) and talk shop.

Ninth Scribe

Yeah right. Bush is a total fruit cake, but somehow managed to see his evil master plan come to be....Bush got the Shiites to "wipe" out the Sunnis, and then he's going to pit the Jews against the Shia. Wow...

Now that we've gotten the Michael Moore hour out of the way, can we get back to reality?

[Ninth_Scribe]

WELL SAID,

also I would like to add (because I am not sure if my post was deleted) this thread is titled the way it is because of discussions that I have had and read with people on this forum that believe the US is out to attack Iran. It was supposed to be sarcastic

Oh sure. Very amusing to joke about a potential threat. So, I suppose the new "moral waivers" for army recruitment are just for fun as well. Or did you even know the U.S. is trying to up it's muscle count? Hmm. Seems any moron can join the armed services now. It doesn't matter if you have a criminal record and you don't even need a high school diploma anymore! They've done away with all that red tape. But, you all doubt this for any real military objective. They probably just need more guys for the inter-state ping pong championship, right?

Whatever.

[NobleMuslimUK]

Iran is a bit complicated as it is a Shia country. Dictator Bush and his henchmen told us that Iraq is linked to Al Queda due to the minority sunni population there. Since the Al qaeda tag cannot be applied to Iran its better to apply the nuclear tag, now anything that can remotely be linked to Iran is being used.

[MTAFFI]

Oh sure. Very amusing to joke about a potential threat. So, I suppose the new "moral waivers" for army recruitment are just for fun as well. Or did you even know the U.S. is trying to up it's muscle count? Hmm. Seems any moron can join the armed services now. It doesn't matter if you have a criminal record and you don't even need a high school diploma anymore! They've done away with all that red tape. But, you all doubt this for any real military objective. They probably just need more guys for the inter-state ping pong championship, right?

Whatever.

right... a potential threat... It is pretty obvious you have no idea what you are talking about, unless Iran does something to provoke the US, the US will not be in Iran, and by provoking I mean they would have to do more than just talk. As far as the US military, I wonder who the insurgency recruits? I wonder how intelligent the people must be that blow themselves up everyday? I wonder if they went to high school or have any criminal records, what red tape do they have? Besides where are you even getting this information, do you know this for a fact?

[Cognescenti]

The only thing stopping Bush from attacking Iran is a suitable excuse (ie: a lie). In case you haven't realised this yet, the man is a total fruit-cake! If he wanted to 'have at' Iran, he would.... and he wouldn't give a rat's @ss if Congress 'liked' it or not.

My bet is he's going play the parties for what they're worth. He got the Shiites to wipe out the Sunnis and next he'll pit the Jews against the Shia. By the time everyone is done wiping the opposition out he'll just bring in the moderates (oil buddies) and talk shop.

Ninth Scribe

So Bush is at once a "fruitcake" and the new Nostradamus. Why, that is quite a combination.

Given his remarkable clairvoyance, when he has finished his Presidency, he won't need to go on a paid speaking tour like Clinton...he could just bet the horses.



BTW...you didn't mention Halliburton....you know.. page 12 of the playbook. Its not as much fun if you dont mention Halliburton.

[NobleMuslimUK]

Noble;

You forgot to take your "nice pill" today. When you use phrases like "Dictator Bush and his henchmen", you sound like some bug-eyed chap trying to stay warm in a subway station.

Do you mean to say there is no link between the situation in Iraq and Al Quaeda today (which is preposterous) or do you mean there was no link before 9-11 (which is at least arguable)? FYI, nobody argued a command and control link between SH and Al Quaeda.

I cant stress enough the western governments have adopted fascism with new tactics. You probably dont feel comfortable around certain looking people, because its whats dictated to you, I know I would certainly feel uncomfortable around certain types of people. Its a looping thought works both ways.

[wilberhum]

And silly me was wondering why half the world is aligning against the west.

Is that half of the world that is aligning against the west, the East?
Then is half of the world aligning against the East?
Just wondering. :rant:

[Keltoi]

Is that half of the world that is aligning against the west, the East?
Then is half of the world aligning against the East?
Just wondering. :rant:

Ahmadenijad, Chavez, Kim Jong Ill. Wow what a trio. The West better watch it.