board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Iran - the evitable conflict

Post Reply   Page 1 of 3  [ 55 posts ]
Jump to page 1 2 3 »
Author Message
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject: Iran - the evitable conflict
Posted: Wed 08 Mar , 2006 6:50 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Israel will have to act on Iran if UN can't
Quote:
BERLIN (Reuters) - If the U.N. Security Council is incapable of taking action to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, Israel will have no choice but to defend itself, Israel's defense minister said on Wednesday.

Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz was asked whether Israel was ready to use military action if the Security Council proved unable to act against what Israel and the West believe is a covert Iranian nuclear weapons program.

"My answer to this question is that the state of Israel has the right give all the security that is needed to the people in Israel. We have to defend ourselves," Mofaz told Reuters after a meeting with his German counterpart Franz Josef Jung.

Iran denies wanting nuclear weapons and says it is only interested in the peaceful generation of electricity. It has also threatened to retaliate if Israel or the United States were to bomb any of its nuclear facilities.

In 1981, Israel bombed Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor to prevent Saddam Hussein from getting nuclear weapons. Saddam's covert atom bomb program continued until U.N. inspectors dismantled it after the 1991 Gulf War, but the Israeli strike set progress back many years.

"The Israeli approach is that the U.S. and the European countries should lead the issue of the Iranian nuclear program to the table of the U.N. Security Council, asking for sanctions. And I hope the sanctions will be effective," Mofaz said.

Mofaz, who was born in Iran, added that Israel believed the 15-nation Security Council should grant the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the U.N.'s Vienna-based nuclear watchdog, sweeping inspection powers so that it can smoke out any secret nuclear arms-related activities in Iran.

"We need to have very deep and large inspections within all the nuclear locations in Iran because Iran has two nuclear programs -- one is a covered one and the second is uncovered," he said.

The Iranian delegation to an IAEA board of governors meeting in Vienna issued a statement earlier warning that the United States could feel "harm and pain" if the Security Council took up the issue of Tehran's nuclear fuel research and vowed never to abandon its atomic program.

At a news conference with Mofaz, Jung told reporters Germany was already discussing with the five permanent Security Council members -- Russia, China, the United States, Britain and France -- what the council could do to prevent Tehran getting the bomb.

"Everything must be done to ensure that Iran does not acquire nuclear weapons," Jung said.

A senior diplomat from one of the "EU3" said earlier that the Security Council would probably begin discussing Iran next week and hoped to issue a "presidential statement" urging Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment program and cooperate with the IAEA.
The last time I can recall so much causeless war was in the early 20th Century.

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 08 Mar , 2006 8:25 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
You know I have an Iran thread already right? :P

This is why I believe the US and Israel are the most dangerous nations on the planet - they don't need any sort of proof that they will be attacked, just the merest possibility is apparantly enough for them to lash out.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 08 Mar , 2006 9:20 pm
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
I know the Church of Scientology tells me I'm too nervous, but with all the different things converging in late March/early April, can you really blame a guy?


Top
Profile Quote
Impenitent
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 09 Mar , 2006 12:46 am
Try to stay perky
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2677
Joined: Wed 29 Dec , 2004 10:54 am
 
I have no faith that Iran is acting honestly; no faith at all.

I believe that Iran will do all it can to develop nuclear weapons. Yes, I believe this.

I believe that, should Iran succeed, the world is in a deal of trouble.

I believe, therefore, that the possibility of success should be circumvented - by ruthless but non-violent means would be my preference.

I do not believe that the US and Israel are the most dangerous nations on the planet and no amount of conspiracy theorising will convince me otherwise.

_________________

[ img ]

"Believe me, every heart has its secret sorrows, which the world knows not;
and oftentimes we call a man cold when he is only sad." ~Robert C. Savage


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 09 Mar , 2006 2:54 am
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
You do realise that the IAEA has found zero evidence that Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons? And that most analysts say it would take them 10 years anyway? And that even if they did eventually get them, they would be commiting suicide to dare using one? The second they launched one they would be wiped off the map by the US and Israel. So how could they possibly pose a danger to the world? (And they claim conspiracy theorists are paranoid)

What on earth would Iran stand to gain by using a nuke?

What is the only nation that has ever used nuclear weapons in the past?

What is the only nation that ignores the NPT in the Middle-east?

Iran has done nothing wrong. Iran has not threatened the US. You're falling for the Iraq WMD deception all over again.

How can you trust what the US government tells you after it bungled the Iraq WMD intel? What makes you so sure they're getting it right this time?

As Dumbya would say, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

If the majority believe the fear-mongering like you, we are headed toward WWIII. And when your grandkids get drafted, you'll wish you'd done something about the warmongering when you had the chance.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Impenitent
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 09 Mar , 2006 3:19 am
Try to stay perky
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2677
Joined: Wed 29 Dec , 2004 10:54 am
 
Quote:
You're falling for the Iraq WMD deception all over again.
Don't attempt mind-reading Iavas, and don't tell me what I think.

I realise much that I choose not to post here, mainly because I see no point in hitting my head against a brick wall. You stand where you stand; I stand on different ground. The chasm is unbridgable at this point in time.

However, my choice not to debate doesn't negate my right to simply state my opinion.

_________________

[ img ]

"Believe me, every heart has its secret sorrows, which the world knows not;
and oftentimes we call a man cold when he is only sad." ~Robert C. Savage


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 09 Mar , 2006 3:35 am
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
You have stated your opinion, and I have stated my opinion of that opinion.

If you think this situation is any different to the Iraq build-up, where the Bushies promised us a "mushroom cloud" if we didn't do anything, then I'd like to hear why.

Do you also realise that China, unlike Iran, has actually threatened to use nukes on the US - but does that ever get reported? No, because China is not the warmongers' next target.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Impenitent
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 09 Mar , 2006 3:45 am
Try to stay perky
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2677
Joined: Wed 29 Dec , 2004 10:54 am
 
:) Your passion for the subject has to be admired.

_________________

[ img ]

"Believe me, every heart has its secret sorrows, which the world knows not;
and oftentimes we call a man cold when he is only sad." ~Robert C. Savage


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 09 Mar , 2006 3:49 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Actually, what Bush said was:

"Fool me once, shame on you, fool ... fool me ... you can't fool me again."

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 09 Mar , 2006 3:54 am
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Yup, what I really meant was: "As Bush would try to say.."

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 09 Mar , 2006 5:36 am
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
"Dangerousness" is a product of both intention and power. There's no question that Iran's intentions would make it much more dangerous than the US if it had comparable military and economic power, but it doesn't. PNAC is a loose cannon and with total control over the US executive branch and significant power in the World Bank and UN, it has the ability to do a heck of a lot of damage should it choose to. It comes down to a question of whether they really mean what they say or if they're just playing chicken. Even if it's the latter, they're playing with fire and the situation could easily spiral out of control.

Edit: Some people might remember (now former) UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter from the Iraq build-up. He opposed military action, claiming that Iraq didn't have and couldn't have WMD's based on what he'd seen during his inspections. It should go without saying that he was correct. Ritter was on Charles Osgood's radio show last Thursday saying the evidence against Iran is being trumped up in the same way:

http://www.theosgoodfile.com/osgood/thu1.htm


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 15 Mar , 2006 9:40 pm
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
In case anyone cares, the upcoming opening of the Iranian oil-for-Euros bourse I've mentioned a few times has been postponed indefinitely due to unspecified difficulties.


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 15 Mar , 2006 9:54 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Interesting...

will wait for the details to become un-unspecified.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Mar , 2006 3:00 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
What would not surprise me is if the Oil for Euro's occured 10 seconds after Bush leaves office.

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Mar , 2006 5:36 am
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
Bush reaffirms doctrine of preemtive war
Quote:
In his revised version, Bush offers no second thoughts about the preemption policy, saying it "remains the same" and defending it as necessary for a country in the "early years of a long struggle" akin to the Cold War.
Bolton compares Iran threat to 9/11
Quote:
Just like Sept. 11, only with nuclear weapons this time, that’s the threat.
Isn't that the exact same thing they said last time? You know, when they turned out to be completely wrong?

So let the next round of threats and posturing begin. Remember how adamant Bush was about getting Bolton into the UN? This is exactly why.

Edit: A number of people have pointed out the irony of these announcements being made on the Ides of March.


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Mar , 2006 12:52 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
So not only are they going to continue pimping 9/11, they're now going to make allusions to the Cold War too. Aimed at a country that has no nuclear weapons, has made no threats against the US, and has shown no imperialistic ambitions. Oh but they don't like Israel and they do have a lot of oil..

I want to ask Bolton why Iran would want to strike the US with a nuke (or anything else) when that would lead to their total destruction..

ps. If Bolton isn't on the list of the 50 most loathsome people in America he should be.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
The OG Borry
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Mar , 2006 5:40 pm
The best things in life are not things
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2136
Joined: Tue 26 Jul , 2005 10:44 pm
Location: here....<_< yeah here thats Ceres, CA for you stalkers
 
A whole country doesnt launch a missle Iavas. It only takes one. The general public may see it as what it is, idiotic and a waste of human ingenuity but if one person sees it another way thats all it takes for people to die.
Borry


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Mar , 2006 5:48 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Quote:
A whole country doesnt launch a missle Iavas. It only takes one. The general public may see it as what it is, idiotic and a waste of human ingenuity but if one person sees it another way thats all it takes for people to die.
If that is the criteria, then the US has a long list of countries it needs to incapacitate. What if Kim Jong-Il suddenly dies and gets replaced by a madman? How can we continue taking this risk? I expect you to start petitioning congress for a war against North Korea immediately. After all, they actually have nukes RIGHT NOW. How can you sleep at night??

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Lord_Morningstar
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Mar , 2006 9:11 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 2420
Joined: Thu 03 Mar , 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia
 
Do we know that North Korea has nukes? I always believed that we assumed Kim Jong-Il was bluffing.

_________________

[Space for Rent]


Top
Profile Quote
aulini
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Mar , 2006 9:21 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat 09 Jul , 2005 11:49 am
Location: Göteborg, Sweden
 
Dave_LF wrote:
In case anyone cares, the upcoming opening of the Iranian oil-for-Euros bourse I've mentioned a few times has been postponed indefinitely due to unspecified difficulties.
Dave_LF, where do you find reliable info on the Iranian oil bourse anyway? There seems to be a lot of hearsay and uncertainty around. I'm really on the fence when it comes to how great importance it actually has, if it's factual at all, and very curious about how much hard facts there really are behind the speculation.

_________________

Common sense isn't


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 1 of 3  [ 55 posts ]
Return to “The Symposium” | Jump to page 1 2 3 »
Jump to: