So,does anyone have a start date for the Israeli- Iranian war ?
- Share on Facebook
- Share on Twitter
- Share on Pinterest
- Share on LinkedIn
- Share on Reddit
- Copy Link to Topic
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Former Member
Not gonna happen anytime soon, Iran is BLUFFING about having a Nuke program the mad mullahs WANT desperately to be ATTACKED so the regime can deflect Iranian public attention from itself and STAY in POWER for another 30 yrs. I suspect the Drone that "fell" into Iran is a plant much like MI-6 dropping off a dead body of a British "officer" on the Spanish coast with "plans" to invade Greece when if fact the allies ended up invading Sicily.
Former Member
Gwynne Dyer: Reports of Iran's nuclear ambitions sound like a repeat of Iraq eight years ago
By Gwynne Dyer, November 9, 2011
âWe will not build two (nuclear) bombs in the face of (Americaâs) 20,000,â said Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in response to an International Atomic Energy Agency report this week that accuses Iran of doing just that. He called Yukiya Amano, the head of the IAEA, a U.S. puppet, saying: âThis person does not publish a report about America and its allies' nuclear arsenals.â
Well, thatâs true, actually. Amano will never publish a report about Americaâs nuclear weapons (only 5,133 of them now, actually). He hasnât said anything about Israelâs, Britainâs, and Franceâs weapons of mass destruction either. And his report is largely based on information fed to him by Western intelligence agencies.
But apart from that, Amano is as impartial and free from U.S. influence as you would expect a career Japanese diplomat to be. Only cynical people will see any resemblance to Colin Powellâs performance at the United Nations in 2003, when the U.S. defense secretary held up a test tube and assured us all that Iraq really was working on germ warfare.
Iraq was allegedly working on nuclear weapons, too: former president George Bushâs famous âsmoking gun,â which also subsequently went missing. And on the basis of this âintelligenceâ about Iraqâs âweapons of mass destruction,â the United States and its more gullible allies invaded the country. Hundreds of thousands died, no weapons were found, and nothing was learned.
Here we go again.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. The same intelligence agencies are producing the same sort of reports about Iran that we heard eight years ago about Iraqâs nuclear ambitions, and interpreting the information in the same highly prejudiced way.
Many people in the West realise that they are being hustled into yet another attack on a Middle Eastern country, but they donât really worry about it too much. After all, it will only be air strikes, and we all know that an air-only war is practically casualty free for the side with air superiority. Look at Libya, for example.
But how many citizens of the United States or Britain know that Iran has ten times as many people as Libya? Maybe one in 10, maybe one in 20. How many know that Iran is a partially democratic, technologically proficient state with no history of attacking its neighbours, not a tinpot dictatorship run by a vicious loon? About the same number. How many realise that the war would not end with a few days of air strikes? Practically none.
The interesting exception to all this is Israel, where people do know those things, and where there is a vigorous debate about whether attacking Iran is a good idea. A lot think it is not, and that also goes for both of Israelâs intelligence agencies, Mossad and Shin Bet. Meir Dagan, the recently retired head of Mossad, said last January that an attack on Iran was âthe stupidest ideaâ he had ever heard.
So Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and defence minister Ehud Barak, who do both want to attack Iran (or rather, have the United States do it for them), have gone public. If the Western powers donât act at once, they warn, then Iran will get nuclear weapons and Armageddon will be just around the corner.
There are two things wrong with this proposition. One is the evidence. If you believe it all, it shows that Iran wants the knowledge and equipment that would let it build a nuclear weapon very quickly if necessary: an Israeli nuclear threat, a military coup in nuclear armed Pakistan that brings young Shia-hating officers to power, whatever.
The evidence does not show that Iran is actually building a nuclear weapon now, or has any present intention of doing so. And having the knowledge and equipment that would let you do so fast in an emergency is entirely legal under IAEA rules.
The other problem with the accusations against Iran is the logic behind them. Building a nuclear weapon now would be extremely costly for Iran in terms of economic sanctions, global diplomatic isolation and the like if it became known. But it would be completely pointless from a deterrence point of view if it remained secret.
Deterrence is the only logical reason that Iran would ever want nuclear weapons, since it would be suicidal for it to attack anybody with them. As Mahmoud Ahmadnejadi pointed out (above), it would have at the most a few nuclear warheads.
The United States has thousands of them, Israel has hundreds of them, and even Pakistan has dozens.
If Iranâs leaders were completely logical in their thinking, they wouldnât waste a minute thinking about nuclear deterrence.
Theyâd just rely on the fact that their military can completely shut the Gulf to oil traffic and bring the global economy to its knees if anybody attacks them. However, they are still a lot more rational than their Western counterparts or at least than their Western counterparts can afford to seem in public.
You heard about that recent exchange between French president Nicolas Sarkozy and U.S. president Barack Obama that went out on an open microphone? Sarko said âI canât stand (Netanyahu) any more. Heâs a liar.â
And Obama replied: âYou're sick of him? I have to deal with him every day.â What about? One gets you 10 that itâs about bombing Iran.
By Gwynne Dyer, November 9, 2011
âWe will not build two (nuclear) bombs in the face of (Americaâs) 20,000,â said Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in response to an International Atomic Energy Agency report this week that accuses Iran of doing just that. He called Yukiya Amano, the head of the IAEA, a U.S. puppet, saying: âThis person does not publish a report about America and its allies' nuclear arsenals.â
Well, thatâs true, actually. Amano will never publish a report about Americaâs nuclear weapons (only 5,133 of them now, actually). He hasnât said anything about Israelâs, Britainâs, and Franceâs weapons of mass destruction either. And his report is largely based on information fed to him by Western intelligence agencies.
But apart from that, Amano is as impartial and free from U.S. influence as you would expect a career Japanese diplomat to be. Only cynical people will see any resemblance to Colin Powellâs performance at the United Nations in 2003, when the U.S. defense secretary held up a test tube and assured us all that Iraq really was working on germ warfare.
Iraq was allegedly working on nuclear weapons, too: former president George Bushâs famous âsmoking gun,â which also subsequently went missing. And on the basis of this âintelligenceâ about Iraqâs âweapons of mass destruction,â the United States and its more gullible allies invaded the country. Hundreds of thousands died, no weapons were found, and nothing was learned.
Here we go again.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. The same intelligence agencies are producing the same sort of reports about Iran that we heard eight years ago about Iraqâs nuclear ambitions, and interpreting the information in the same highly prejudiced way.
Many people in the West realise that they are being hustled into yet another attack on a Middle Eastern country, but they donât really worry about it too much. After all, it will only be air strikes, and we all know that an air-only war is practically casualty free for the side with air superiority. Look at Libya, for example.
But how many citizens of the United States or Britain know that Iran has ten times as many people as Libya? Maybe one in 10, maybe one in 20. How many know that Iran is a partially democratic, technologically proficient state with no history of attacking its neighbours, not a tinpot dictatorship run by a vicious loon? About the same number. How many realise that the war would not end with a few days of air strikes? Practically none.
The interesting exception to all this is Israel, where people do know those things, and where there is a vigorous debate about whether attacking Iran is a good idea. A lot think it is not, and that also goes for both of Israelâs intelligence agencies, Mossad and Shin Bet. Meir Dagan, the recently retired head of Mossad, said last January that an attack on Iran was âthe stupidest ideaâ he had ever heard.
So Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and defence minister Ehud Barak, who do both want to attack Iran (or rather, have the United States do it for them), have gone public. If the Western powers donât act at once, they warn, then Iran will get nuclear weapons and Armageddon will be just around the corner.
There are two things wrong with this proposition. One is the evidence. If you believe it all, it shows that Iran wants the knowledge and equipment that would let it build a nuclear weapon very quickly if necessary: an Israeli nuclear threat, a military coup in nuclear armed Pakistan that brings young Shia-hating officers to power, whatever.
The evidence does not show that Iran is actually building a nuclear weapon now, or has any present intention of doing so. And having the knowledge and equipment that would let you do so fast in an emergency is entirely legal under IAEA rules.
The other problem with the accusations against Iran is the logic behind them. Building a nuclear weapon now would be extremely costly for Iran in terms of economic sanctions, global diplomatic isolation and the like if it became known. But it would be completely pointless from a deterrence point of view if it remained secret.
Deterrence is the only logical reason that Iran would ever want nuclear weapons, since it would be suicidal for it to attack anybody with them. As Mahmoud Ahmadnejadi pointed out (above), it would have at the most a few nuclear warheads.
The United States has thousands of them, Israel has hundreds of them, and even Pakistan has dozens.
If Iranâs leaders were completely logical in their thinking, they wouldnât waste a minute thinking about nuclear deterrence.
Theyâd just rely on the fact that their military can completely shut the Gulf to oil traffic and bring the global economy to its knees if anybody attacks them. However, they are still a lot more rational than their Western counterparts or at least than their Western counterparts can afford to seem in public.
You heard about that recent exchange between French president Nicolas Sarkozy and U.S. president Barack Obama that went out on an open microphone? Sarko said âI canât stand (Netanyahu) any more. Heâs a liar.â
And Obama replied: âYou're sick of him? I have to deal with him every day.â What about? One gets you 10 that itâs about bombing Iran.
Former Member
quote:Originally posted by kidmost:
So,does anyone have a start date for the Israeli- Iranian war ?
Probably around March, when the weather gets warmer.
Former Member
The Iranian currency dropped to an all time low in two decades after Obama announced more sanctions last Saturday. I doubt there will be war as Iran is on the brink of economic disaster 1500 rial to 1 US dollar.
America should NEVER forget. In that region of the world, God has used the people to punish one another for disobeying His Statutes. God doan discriminate.
Someday,America is going to get a good blow. I love the country, but their government appeasing policies of ungodly actions has reprecussion.
Maybe Iran is David!
Someday,America is going to get a good blow. I love the country, but their government appeasing policies of ungodly actions has reprecussion.
Maybe Iran is David!
Former Member
quote:Originally posted by seignet:
America should NEVER forget. In that region of the world, God has used the people to punish one another for disobeying His Statutes. God doan discriminate.
Someday,America is going to get a good blow. I love the country, but their government appeasing policies of ungodly actions has reprecussion.
Maybe Iran is David!
Dem Iran man betta wach out. America need a regional war to boost deh economy. America gon bruk up the whole ME and den do a Marshall Plan, USA sponsored.
Former Member
Every year the various US intelligence agencies including CIA, NSA, the various military intel branches, etc. prepare a joint assessment of what is going on in the world, called the National Intelligence Estimate. And every year since 2003 they have concluded that Iran discontinued its nuclear weapons program in 2003. The "Iranian nukes" hoax is all the more audacious since it is an exact re-run of the "WMD" scam that was used to launch the Iraq war.
Here we have a revealing article by John Yoo, who is famous for being the Bush administration adviser who wrote the memos justifying the use of torture. He calls for the US to view itself as the new British Empire; he says the UN is no good, because it is required by its charter to respect national sovereignty and not wage wars of aggression. And of course, he wants to attack Iran.
Here we have a revealing article by John Yoo, who is famous for being the Bush administration adviser who wrote the memos justifying the use of torture. He calls for the US to view itself as the new British Empire; he says the UN is no good, because it is required by its charter to respect national sovereignty and not wage wars of aggression. And of course, he wants to attack Iran.
Former Member
israel and iran will enter a full scale war this year that is guaranteed .
COOL. I hpe CNN broadcast LIVE.
quote:Originally posted by kidmost:
israel and iran will enter a full scale war this year that is guaranteed .
Former Member
O rly? Irag, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Libya and all the drone attacks in Yemen and Africa didn't do squat for the economy.quote:Originally posted by Sledgehammer:
America need a regional war to boost deh economy.
Former Member
quote:Originally posted by Henry:O rly? Irag, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Libya and all the drone attacks in Yemen and Africa didn't do squat for the economy.quote:Originally posted by Sledgehammer:
America need a regional war to boost deh economy.
its about political leaders wielding the power entrusted them by voters trying to prove who has the bigger dick. Its like the various religions who tout their religion is real and their god has the biggest dick . It a lot of dickery going on . Do you think for one minuted these leaders give a rats ass about the cost of wars . Look at the US army casualties if war , most are from lower and poor income familes and in arab nations it is always people who aint got shyte that die in the name of religion and patriotism .
Former Member
The British are desperate to get a world war started. In the NATO countries, the financial parasite is killing the host organism. Meanwhile, the Asian nations are staying out of the casino, proceeding with ambitious science and infrastructure projects, and achieving steady growth. The Brits can't tolerate the idea that Asia will be the new center of the world economy, so they are manipulating useful idiots in the US (Obama and most of the Republicans) into a global conflict with Russia and China.
The Brits react with rage to every step that reduces the war danger. In Syria, the opposition groups issued a statement saying "no to violent regime change, no to foreign intervention, and no to sectarian violence"; the Brits are fit to be tied over this. In the US, the only presidential candidate who has performed military service is Ron Paul, and he is attacking the others for being eager to engage in senseless wars. The media are now colluding to avoid coverage of his campaign (not that he would be a good president -- he's horrible on economics.) Obama just signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act which gives him the authority to detain US citizens indefinitely without trial, and some people are now beginning to realize what a scary situation the US is in.
The Brits react with rage to every step that reduces the war danger. In Syria, the opposition groups issued a statement saying "no to violent regime change, no to foreign intervention, and no to sectarian violence"; the Brits are fit to be tied over this. In the US, the only presidential candidate who has performed military service is Ron Paul, and he is attacking the others for being eager to engage in senseless wars. The media are now colluding to avoid coverage of his campaign (not that he would be a good president -- he's horrible on economics.) Obama just signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act which gives him the authority to detain US citizens indefinitely without trial, and some people are now beginning to realize what a scary situation the US is in.
Add Reply
Sign In To Reply
246 online (1 member
/
245 guests)