board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

War with Iran - links to Plamegate?

Post Reply   Page 5 of 6  [ 106 posts ]
Jump to page « 1 2 3 4 5 6 »
War with Iran..
Looks likely to happen, and is important in winning the war on terror
  
3% [ 1 ]
Looks likely to happen, and will be a horrendous mistake
  
26% [ 9 ]
Probably won't happen, the government won't rush into another war so soon
  
17% [ 6 ]
Probably won't happen, due to public outcry
  
23% [ 8 ]
I have no idea at this stage
  
20% [ 7 ]
Other
  
11% [ 4 ]
Total votes: 35
Author Message
Ara-anna
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 30 Jan , 2006 6:01 pm
Daydream Believer
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5780
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Pac Northwest
 
Well sadly it won't stop GWB, he doesn't seem to care what anyone else thinks but his small clan of yes people. He won't care if there are no WMD.

The thing I don't comprehend is....we need to find a way for the world to ween itself off of oil, yet no countries can build nuclear power plants because they can then use the urainum for weapons. Sort of a catch 22 that America is running on the rest of the world. No you cant have a nuclear power plant, yes you must use oil, but only after we have had our fill of oil.

_________________

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone


Top
Profile Quote
halplm
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 30 Jan , 2006 6:06 pm
b77 whipping boy
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 9079
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 4:40 pm
 
we can't even build nuclear plants HERE because the environmentalist lobby is so strong...

_________________

I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 30 Jan , 2006 6:10 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
At this point there is absolutely zero evidence that Iran wants to do anything other than build a nuclear power station. And even if they wanted a weapon, all reasonable estimates say they are about 10 years away from that. Then, even if they did build one, why would they commit suicide by using it on Israel or the US?

And 57% of Americans are worried about a highly improbable event 10 years away?? Even after the non-existant threat from Iraq? Wow, that's some impressive fear-mongering.

Last edited by Iavas_Saar on Mon 30 Jan , 2006 6:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Ara-anna
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 30 Jan , 2006 6:11 pm
Daydream Believer
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5780
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Pac Northwest
 
baaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

_________________

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 30 Jan , 2006 7:20 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
The ironic thing is ...

Outside the US, the environmentalists welcome nuclear power because it actually is safe and it pollute far less than any other source.

I cannot find a reference, but I once read that the American environmental groups initially supported nuclear power, but were persuaded otherwise when the oil and coal industry published many works critical of the environmental impact of nuclear power.


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 04 Feb , 2006 3:49 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Iran reported to Security Council

What a shocker.

This is all strangely familiar somehow...

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 04 Feb , 2006 9:34 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Time to Scrap the NPT
Quote:
There’s only one country that has ever used nuclear weapons.

There’s only one country that has used nuclear weapons on civilian population centers.

There’s only one country that has ever threatened to use nuclear weapons on non-nuclear countries.

There’s only one country that has over 10,000 nuclear weapons many of which are on hair-trigger alert for enemies real or imagined.

There’s only one country that has developed a regime of low-yield, bunker-busting, "usable" nuclear weapons; stating that they could be legitimately used, not to deter aggression or to stave off an imminent threat, but simply to eliminate the "suspicion" of weapons programs.

There’s only one country that justifies unprovoked aggression (preemption) in its National Security doctrine; allowing it to attack any potential rival to its global dominance.

There’s only one country that currently occupies a Muslim nation of 25 million inhabitants without any proof of an imminent threat, weapons-systems, or territorial aggression.

The purpose of the NPT (Nonproliferation Treaty) is to reduce or eliminate the development of nuclear weapons. If it is to have any relevance at all it must be directed at nations that not only have weapons, but demonstrate a flagrant disregard for the international laws condemning their use. The IAEA should focus its attention on those states that have a clear record of territorial aggression, military intervention, or who consistently violate United Nations resolutions.

In its present form the IAEA and the NPT are utterly meaningless. Rather than leading the world towards nuclear disarmament, the agency and the treaty have simply ignored the misbehavior of the more powerful nations and humiliated the non-nuclear states with spurious accusations and threatening rhetoric.

The NPT was never intended to be a bludgeon for battering the weaker nations; nor was it set up as a de-facto apartheid system whereby the superpower and its allies can lord above the non nuclear states coercing them to act according to their diktats. It was designed to curb the development of the world’s most lethal weapons; eventually consigning them to the ash-heap.

The political maneuvering surrounding Iran’s "alleged" nuclear weapons-programs demonstrates the irrelevance and hypocrisy of the current system. As yet, there is no concrete evidence that Iran is in non-compliance with the terms of the treaty. That hasn’t deterred the Bush administration from intimidating its allies and adversaries alike to assist them in dragging Iran before the Security Council. At the same time, the United States is occupying the country next door to Iran and, after having killed an estimated 100,000 Iraqis and destroyed vast swaths of the countryside, has still never provided any coherent justification for the initial invasion. The international community has simply looked away in fear.

This alone should illustrate the ineffectiveness of the institutions that are designed to keep the peace.

If the ruling body at the IAEA is to have any relevance, it must direct its attention to the real threats of nuclear proliferation posed by those nations that consider nuclear weapons a privilege that should be limited to a certain group of elite states. If the IAEA cannot perform its duties in a neutral manner that respects the rights of all nations equally, it should disband and abolish the NPT without delay.

If the IAEA is uncertain about the real threats to regional peace, they should take note of the many recent polls which invariably list the same belligerent nations as the leading offenders. It is these countries that should be scrutinized most carefully.

It is not the purview of the IAEA to keep the weaker nations out of the nuclear club. That simply enables the stronger states to bully their enemies with threats of using their WMD. In fact, it’s plain to see that the current disparity in military power has created a perilous imbalance between nations which is rapidly spreading war throughout the world.

One only has to look at Haiti, Afghanistan, Iraq or Kosovo to see the glaring failures of the unipolar model; where the military prowess of one country is so great it is emboldened to resolve its differences through conflagration. The NPT was not created to facilitate the imperial ambitions of the superpower, but to protect the innocent from the increasing likelihood of nuclear holocaust.

If the NPT cannot decrease the threat of nuclear war from conspicuously hostile nations, it should be abandoned altogether.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 06 Feb , 2006 4:29 am
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2951
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
The Scotsman is reporting that the US and UK are laying plans for a permanent military presense in Iraq. I and others have argued before that setting up permanent bases was part of the reason for going in in the first place, so this comes as no surprise.

http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/po ... =183752006
Quote:
The MoD confirmed that the government still hopes to begin a significant withdrawal this year, although the 4,000 leaving by May quoted in some reports is seen as far too optimistic as the insurgency continues to disrupt everyday life in the British zone. Military planners foresee a phased "return to barracks" as a preliminary to a gradual reduction of forces during the year.

But even after significant numbers of troops have finally left Iraq, Britain will retain a presence. One senior defence source confirmed that negotiations with the Americans are ongoing, and that the MoD is actively considering the option of withdrawing to a "non-urban location", which could be termed as a base or a "training facility" with space for hundreds of troops.


Top
Profile Quote
Lord_Morningstar
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 06 Feb , 2006 4:33 am
Offline
 
Posts: 2420
Joined: Thu 03 Mar , 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia
 
Wasn’t part of the point of the Iraq War getting all ‘infidel’ troops out of the Middle East to not promote extremism?

_________________

[Space for Rent]


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 06 Feb , 2006 4:46 am
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2951
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
I don't think so. Someone may have said something along those lines at some point, but I think setting up a Middle-East police station has been part of the US Executive Branch's plan all along.

It's not necessarily an unreasonable thing to do, but they haven't been forthright about their plans and intentions.


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 07 Feb , 2006 5:34 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Buildup to World War III
Quote:
Objective: Seize oil fields and destroy military in Arabic countries

Step #1: Raise oil prices to unprecedented levels so the economic impact of any withdrawal of oil from the world market by Middle-Eastern countries will be blunted by existing high oil prices.

Step #2: Warn the public, in this instance in a State of the Union Address, that the nation must become less oil dependent.

Step #3: Raise funds for the war in Congress before war is announced. The President requested the military budget be raised by $70 billion (Feb. 5, 2006).

Step #4: Provoke the people in target countries to respond with anger by humiliating them. Cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in Danish newspapers have provoked outrage and demonstrations throughout Middle-Eastern countries. An Associated Press report says "images of abuse by American soldiers at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and reports of deplorable conditions at the Guantanamo Bay prison also have reinforced suspicions that Arabs in general have become targets of the anti-terror war."

A Knight-Ridder news report said: "Muslims also took to the streets in Afghanistan, the West Bank, Iraq and New Zealand on Sunday. The most violent protests occurred in Asian and Middle Eastern capitals. In London, some protesters carried placards warning that those who defame Islam would pay with their blood."

Fawzi al-Jasem, Kuwait's ambassador to Austria, said: "At first it was just Denmark, but it keeps spreading," al-Jasem said. "We don't know what we can do to stop this."

Somehow a vast cache of Danish flags have appeared in Muslim countries, to be publicly burned, while green and black Islamic flags were waved by demonstrators worldwide. The outrage is being well orchestrated.

Step #5: Find a fall guy. Jamal Ahmed Badawi, the so-called mastermind of the USS Cole attack in 2000, is reported on Feb. 5, 2006, to have escaped from prison in Yemen with other al Qaeda terrorists. He is now free to attack the West.

The problem with this story is that Associated Press released a similar story that Badawi escaped from prison on April 11, 2003. Certainly the news media is aware of this, which means they are complicit in the propaganda buildup to the next war.

Step #6: Contrive or provoke a threat. In this instance, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, seeing US military bases being built in countries neighboring Iran and elsewhere, may feel the only negotiation card Iran has left is nuclear weapons.

Step #7: Ignite the world against the Middle-Eastern countries in order to recruit the vast number of military troops required for WW III. US forces are short on man power. Whatever country doesn’t go along with the agenda won’t have oil supplies restored.

Step #8: Now all that is needed in this powder keg environment is an alarming event, which is scheduled for…………

References:

For Badawi escape report in New York Times on Feb. 5, 2006
For Badawi escape report of April 11, 2003, see if you can locate it here before it is withdrawn from the internet
Addendum: In response to those who have claimed al Badawi was recaptured, the Associated Press distributed this report in March of 2004 saying suspects had been re-captured, but not al Badawi.

8 of 10 escaped Cole bombing suspects recaptured
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
March 16, 2004, 2:03 PM EST

SAN'A, Yemen – A year after they broke out of jail, eight of 10 suspects in the 2000 bombing of the U.S. destroyer Cole have been recaptured, the government said Tuesday.

Interior Minister Rashad al-Eleimi did not say how or when the eight men were captured, but said authorities were closing in on the two still at large.

The suspects in the October, 2000 bombing broke out of jail in the southern port city of Aden last year, a major embarrassment to the Yemeni government. The bombing in Aden killed 17 American soldiers and has been blamed on Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida network.

Yemen has allied itself with the U.S. war on terrorism, allowing American forces to train its military. The country, which long has tolerated Muslim extremists, is the ancestral homeland of bin Laden.

According to previous official statements, at least four of the men were caught in a recent crackdown on militants in a southern mountain region that led to the arrest of 28 other suspects.

Al-Eleimi did not disclose the identities of those in custody. Officials in southern Abyan region, speaking to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity, said the country's most-wanted man, Jamal al-Badawi, is still at large. He was charged in the United States last year with helping carry out the bombing.

Al-Eleimi made the comments to the weekly Interior Ministry publication Al-Hares. He said the recapture of the eight suspects was the result of increased cooperation with Saudi Arabia.

Meanwhile, authorities beefed up security around foreign embassies and government buildings in the capital San'a Tuesday, cordoning off some areas and sending extra security patrols.

A Yemeni security official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the stepped up security was "pre-emptive." He did not elaborate.

Copyright © 2004, Newsday, Inc


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 07 Feb , 2006 6:07 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Pffft.. that's just a nutty conspiracy theory!

The US government is doing everything it can to avoid WWIII. But it's an undeniable fact that out of the possibility, however small, that Iran will manage to make a nuke then commit suicide by actually using it, and WWIII, WWIII would be the lesser evil. No amount of world strife is too much to avoid that tiny, 10-year distant risk of an Iranian WMD.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 07 Feb , 2006 6:30 pm
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2951
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
Cenedril_Gildinaur wrote:
Step #3: Raise funds for the war in Congress before war is announced. The President requested the military budget be raised by $70 billion (Feb. 5, 2006).
The budget proposal is so obviously unacceptable that I'm baffled. The possibilities are:

1) No more elections; he just doesn't give a rat's ass what people think about him anymore.
2) When Democrats vote against it due to cuts in social services, the GOP can run ads saying they don't support the troops.
3) They believe the country has no future and they're trying to loot as much as possible before it all falls apart.

I'm usually (mostly) just being cynical when I say things like (3), but I'm starting to wonder...


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 07 Feb , 2006 6:33 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
I heard that nearly 50% of the budget is going to the military? How does that compare to the past?

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 07 Feb , 2006 6:37 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Iavas_Saar wrote:
Pffft.. that's just a nutty conspiracy theory!
From you I'll take that as a major compliment.


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 07 Feb , 2006 11:53 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Onizuka Eikichi
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 08 Feb , 2006 3:54 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed 19 Oct , 2005 9:56 pm
Location: Outside of Causality
Contact: ICQ
 
Iavas_Saar wrote:
Israel - 'Iran is world's most serious threat since WWII'
*Technically* the greatest threat to the world since WWII is the United States, seeing as how it has the most firepower. Even worse, the people who control that firepower are some of the least intelligent people on the planet, according to the PISA.

In the last assessment (2003) the United States placed in the low 20's and high 30's (out of 41 countries total) for almost all levels of all subjects.

Another assessment is planned to take place this year (2006). I wonder how it will turn out this time. ;)

_________________

冬ながら
空より花の
散り来るは
雲のあなたに
春にやあるらん


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 08 Feb , 2006 4:43 am
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Yep..

It's also quite absurd for a nuclear country to accuse a non-nuclear country of being the biggest threat out there. And it's equally absurd to compare the ambitions of the current regime in Iran to the Nazis. There's only one nation trying to spread its power base across the world..

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
sauronsfinger
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 08 Feb , 2006 4:08 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 4336
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 9:28 pm
Location: The real world
 
Quote:
There's only one nation trying to spread its power base across the world..

Denmark???? :scratch:

_________________

There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers


Top
Profile Quote
Onizuka Eikichi
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 09 Feb , 2006 12:30 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed 19 Oct , 2005 9:56 pm
Location: Outside of Causality
Contact: ICQ
 
sauronsfinger wrote:
Quote:
There's only one nation trying to spread its power base across the world..

Denmark???? :scratch:
Nope. It's not even a nation, technically. It's Easter Island. Those bastards have been planning our demise since the glory days of the Egyptian Kingdom\Empire.

But really, I don't think there isn't a nation, state or any type of government anywhere that *wouldn't* like to be worldwide. I mean common - we're talking the entire planet. With that much under the control of a single system - it's a politician's dream come true. Even I, with my indestructible morals and will, might fall victim to that kind of power.

_________________

冬ながら
空より花の
散り来るは
雲のあなたに
春にやあるらん


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 5 of 6  [ 106 posts ]
Return to “The Symposium” | Jump to page « 1 2 3 4 5 6 »
Jump to: