The all encompassing Iran thread - Part 3

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

http://www.edefenseonline.com/default.asp?func=article&aref=03_08_2006_OM_01

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

Watch this clip IRI vs. FOX news , look what happens when the two extremes meet
http://rapidshare.de/files/15039917/foxnewsatom.avi.html

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

Join the army.

 

Iran has Stealth!!

http://www.mehrnews.com/en/NewsDetail.aspx?NewsID=300342

Well crap we are screwed now. We will never be able to detect their high tech all powerful planes....

Ok so does anyone actually believe this? Is this site a joke site or is it legit?

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

No, we should feed them the old fasioned way - by taking from the civilian economy. One of the worst things the Vietnam War did was give regular Americans the expectation that you can have a war without it hurting anyone except the actual soldiers (and maybe make a nice profit for arms manufacturers).

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

And in the ostensibly truthful "The Terror Nework," the CIA believed its own propaganda that the USSR was behind all world terrorism. Thanks, Casey.

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

That is not the worst things in the Vietnam War. The worst thing is that Vietnam is too close to a big country like China. The condition was no American GI can set his foot across 18 degree line. So Americans tested their bombers, Russians tested their anti-air missiles, Chinese tested their anti-air operational skills, and Vietnams watched everyone wasted their land.

One thing you have to respect Vietnames for their fighting spirits. In the ancient time, north part of Vietnam was a part of China, but Vietnames decided to go for independance. It only took them about 1500 years to get that. If Americans didn't stop the war at 70s, you may be still fighting today.

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

Man oh man am I tired of Rice's jibbeh jabbah....harm and pain my ass...it is not as bad as the press is making it out to be.

Sanctions this, sanctions that.....use of force this military strike that....

I am pretty sure the SC will be sensible enough to reprimand Iran before anything else. Gosh, doesn't anyone believe in good ol' diplomacy anymore? Ever since this administration went bezerk it's always a war of words with war in the air.....

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

You have two sticking points here:

1) Currently, both China (#1 in US target list) and Russia (former #1, but current #2) have strategic and economc interests and influences in Iran, but USA has nothing. By force or by diplomacy, US has to stick a foot into there.

2) Iran's nuclear program can go away, if a direct two way talk between US and Iran resulting a security gurantee for US will not use military forces attacking Iran. In this stage, State Department would not make such consession. By sign this agreement, US may lose a valuable option to handle Iran in the future.

Only by making the consession, this standoff will not resolve anytime soon. Check the North Korea issue for reference.

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

It's naiive to think Iran, a country subjected to US hostility for more than half a century, would submit its future security to ANY country, let alone US!!!!

Direct negotiations is definitely the ONLY final answer, but its directives will have to be around USA accepting Iran as a major power in the region, not the other way around or asking for "security gurantee".

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

The point is how the US is handling this...and that is not very well, despite some mutual agreements with some European countries, they are using arguements that really have no grounds in accordance with the IAEA's investigation over the last couple of months. They are making preemptive threats more or less which will only have one impact on how Iran sees or plans on handling this issue in regards to the US. Why do you think Iran isn't backing down or considering negotiations with the United States but is doing so with some European countries?

Plus, this isn't all about the US...there is a sincere intentions in the program to enrich uranium for civilian nuclear energy and the US proposal or way of negotiating the situation puts that very VITAL economic opportunity at risk for Iran. Everything is hinting at the US not really even considering Iran's side...that is flat out shameful diplomacy.

Your arguement about countering Russian and Chinese influences ring very true but is that the US's arguement for sanctions? "Central bank for terrorism" isn't going to get them anywhere. I want this resolved as much as anyone else.

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

now we have two votes for this option....

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

don't know why....but this thread made me think of the only Iranian joke I know....

Two university professors in Tehran...been working on trying to find the "missing link" between apes and humans for 25 years...no success....as a last resort they put an ad in the student newspaper wanting "volunteers" for a scientific experiment....3 lads apply...an American, an Englishman and an Iranian (Iranian Monitor ?)...the profs have "borrowed" a female gorilla from the zoology dept and want one of the young, fit lads to shag the gorilla hoping the resulting offspring will be the sought after "missing link"....

they first talk to the American, explain what they are doing and say "we need you to shag this gorilla for $500.00"... the American declines immediately...

they then ask the Englishman the same thing...."we want you to shag this gorilla for $500.00" and after thinking about it for a minute (he is English after all) he also politely declines....

the profs are getting more despondent by the minute....but one of them, trying to stay optimistic says, "look we still have one student left, lets not despair"...

the Iranian kid comes in and the situation is explained to him....he thinks for a second or two then says..."I'll do it, but with three conditions"...

the profs think they are fcuked... but ask "what are they"

the Iranian says, "first you have to tie the gorilla down"

....second, "no one can know about this"...

....and third....


























...."you have to give me a week to come up with the $500.00"

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

In the spirit of a good laugh, here's my problem with this joke, if the kid thinks he's the one paying, then obviously the situation isn't explained to him well. In that case, the American and the Englishman might have left because they thought they too have to cough up $500 each.

Americans are used to getting it for free so it's no surprise he declines. But I hope the Englishman hasn't declined because $500 is more than he's willing to spend on a female gorilla.

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

The Iranian gets the same explanation as do the Englishman and the American (this really isn't that complicated )....the question asked is "We want you to fcuk this gorilla for 500 hundred dollars".....the Englishman and the American know full well that they are the ones getting paid.....the Iranian is sure he has to pay....or are you just taking the piss...??? it's a JOKE for fcuks sake....and no, I'm not Danish.....

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

poorly explained joke. couldn't find the humor unless the gorilla was an English man!

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

You have a problem to understand other people's sentence. Iran never subjected their security to ANY country. The requirement is a direct two party talk that results an agreement -- US will not use military action against Iran. Without this agreement, Iran will not give up its nuclear program.

This is what North Korean asked and US refused. US wants to have 6 party talk, so the solution is that during the 6 party talk, there is a small meeting for US and North Korea to sit there to talk with saving faces for both.

The reason North Korea dares to openly declare that they have nukes because US cannot launch a military action against them. Any US ground troops deploy into North Korea, is considering a declaration of war against China. Even though an air strike may not tick off Chinese, but South Koreans may react voilently and may just kick US forces out of South Korea.

In contrast, Iran doesn't enjoy such kind of support out of the neighborhood. So they have to disguise their real intention about their nuclear program.

About US accepting Iran as a major power in the region, people will accept you as a major power when you finally have an ability to show that.

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

The problem is on your part in lack of understanding the basics of the Iranian doctrine. If Iran thought Nukes is the way to its security, not suggesting that it is, then she would NOT give up that right by any means, let alone trying buy off a country from not attacking it. What if Country B decided to bully her around for another bogus reason, what should Iran give up then!!!

as I said earlier, I agree with direct talks but not on the notion of Iran giving up her rights.

You are twisting here. Iran has enough that she doesn't have to prove anything for "acceptance", unlike China in her desperate need for economic aid. Iran wants certain group within the US government to cometo terms with the reality, that's all.

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

IAEA chief, Mohammad El Baradaie, has been floating the idea that 'security guarantees' from the US would help in the process of resolving the nuclear impasse on Iran. However, Iran has repeatedly rejected the notion that such 'security guarantees' would make it give up it fuel cycle program. And there is a reason for that.

The problems between Iran and the US are not going to be resolved by legal niceties. Indeed, under the Algiers Accord which settled the "hostage crisis', the US undertook certain obligations including not interfering in Iranian affairs, that go beyond some half hearted security guarantees. Yet, I don't see those words changing the basic dynamics in the relationship between the two countries.

Iran's nuclear program is multi-faceted and should be viewed in that light.

First, the program is indeed meant to provide Iran with 'surge capacity', i.e the capability to build nuclear weapons on short notice. In this regard, security guarantees by the US are relevant only in the sense of taking away the primary reason for Iran to actually build nuclear weapons. They will not be sufficient for Iran to give the option of building those weapons if that becomes necessary, either through a change of heart by the US or based on other threats.

Second, Iran's nuclear program is part of an ambitious energy program that is absolutely necessary for Iran's long term growth and prosperity. Iran's oil exports are going to shrink considerably in the coming years, and indeed Iran can become a net oil importer in a decade, unless Iran pursues alternative energy sources. While those alternatives could and will include partial reliance on Iran's abundant natural gas reserves, energy sources that can be depleted are not going to be the only source which Iran will rely upon in its long term plans.

Third, a strong nuclear program has other benefits as well. Those applications include medicine, agriculture, as well as non-nuclear weapons related military applications such as building nuclear fueled submarines and aircraft carriers. They also include many other facets in scientific research and development.

Finally, and in some ways most importantly, Iran's nuclear program is a matter of national pride in Iran.(1) For Iran to compromise on this issue based on extra legal threats and bogus charges would totally undermine any pretense by the regime that it is able to stand up to the forces of 'global arrogance' and it would similarly make Iranians suffer a major loss in pride in their own country's ability to run its policies independently of unjust foreign dictates.
-----

(1)

While "Valenjak" might be dismissive of Iran's program, even assuming Iran does not have a covert program outside IAEA inspections, the declared parts of Iran's nuclear program combed through by the IAEA in thousands of inspections reveal its ambitious and developed nature. The arguments about the time it would take Iran to make "nuclear weapons" are all basically "political", not scientific or technical. On the latter point, both Iran and the IAEA admit that if Iran were freed from various constraints on its program arising from its compliance with its NPT obligations as well as its "voluntary confidence building measures", Iran would be able to make nukes in rather short order. Iran is only months away from the technical capability if it were freed from various external and self-imposed constraints. The rest of the time it would take Iran to build the bomb is merely a matter of how many centrifuges it assembles and how long it would take such cascades to produced enough highly enriched uranium.​

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

Right, if anyone read that leaked February IAEA report...despite some "inconsistencies" there really are no grounds for sanctions or anything in that extreme. There is just no conclusive evidence.

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

IM,

Agree that if US and Iran comes to an agreement or treaty (verified by EU, Russia and China due to multiple party discussions), Iran may accept the Russian proposal. In that case, Iran still enjoy the civic using of nuclear technology but meanwhile don't have to worry an attack from US.

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

Hmmm. So you're thinking the best way to calm everything down and reduce the risk of "harm and pain" to the US is for the US to actively block vital energy supplies from reaching that archetypal small-time player China and that other insignificant little blip on the diplomatic radar, India?

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

and not to add the fact that Iran has already proven (during Iran-Iraq war) that it can survive without oil trades... I want to see China surviving more than 3 weeks without Iran oil (or Japan for that matter)..

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

But is the gorilla at least pretty?

 

Re: Iran Threatens U.S. With 'Harm and Pain'

I am not proposing a way to calm anything, and I think harm and pain of some form are inevitable. I'm just saying that if America wants to stay the sole world power for a while longer it has to stand up to people that challenge it. And this is absolutely a challenge.