144 replies to this topic

[and then]

Coffey, on 06 February 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

Iran would not nuke Israel. It is just silly to even think that.

Then their leadership should stop hinting/alluding to it at every opportunity.  But I have explained the danger many times here and it is NOT an overt Iranian attack on Israel.  I don't desire to explain it yet again.

[Coffey]

and then, on 06 February 2013 - 06:39 PM, said:

Then their leadership should stop hinting/alluding to it at every opportunity.  But I have explained the danger many times here and it is NOT an overt Iranian attack on Israel.  I don't desire to explain it yet again.

I posted a video with their President saying how he doesn't want a nuke and wants peace. LOL

Can you find a video of Israels president saying they want peace?!

I have never once seen any evidence of these threats. Every time someone has shown em these threats they are clearly not threats, they are comments on how someone can't get away with doing horrible things, which is true. As a religious man he will mean it in a God won't put up with that without punishment. Which i agree, Israel should be held accountable for their crimes against humanity.

[and then]

Yamato, on 06 February 2013 - 06:36 PM, said:

And we bomb civilians that we suspect they are disagreeable.   We electrocute people, torture people, have over a million abortions a year, gamble, prostitute, start wars on countries that never attacked us, starve millions of people to death with sanctions, proliferate more arms than any other country in the world.   Who's going to rabble rouse about us out there and make you think their voices are legitimate?   That reflection in that mirror is nothing I'd wear.

If cutting off body parts is going to be raised as the reason to rabble rouse about Iran then our officials should get busy with their next shameless display of hypocrisy while they're subsidizing other countries who stone women blah blah blah.

Ahh again with the wannabe utopian stuff...   No matter how hard one tries it is impossible to EQUATE all countries such that no one can be separated and found to be more of a threat.  If you feel that the Iranian government is just an average group of  human beings, no different than the US House or Senate or the military leaders in the US then that is your prerogative Yam.  I'm all full up on crazy here - not buying yours.

[Yamato]

and then, on 06 February 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

Ahh again with the wannabe utopian stuff...   No matter how hard one tries it is impossible to EQUATE all countries such that no one can be separated and found to be more of a threat.  If you feel that the Iranian government is just an average group of  human beings, no different than the US House or Senate or the military leaders in the US then that is your prerogative Yam.  I'm all full up on crazy here - not buying yours.

There's nothing Utopian about any of that.   If foreigners have a legitimate right to intervene in our internal affairs over any conceivable crap that they don't agree with personally or politically, then that reflection in the mirror will be justified.

Every government is disagreeable to me.  It's just a fashion show, the special interests you care about.

[skookum]

Coffey, on 06 February 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

I posted a video with their President saying how he doesn't want a nuke and wants peace. LOL

Can you find a video of Israels president saying they want peace?!

I have never once seen any evidence of these threats. Every time someone has shown em these threats they are clearly not threats, they are comments on how someone can't get away with doing horrible things, which is true. As a religious man he will mean it in a God won't put up with that without punishment. Which i agree, Israel should be held accountable for their crimes against humanity.

Yet every other nation who makes a statement is branded as western propaganda and lies.

Obviously in the west we read it as 'Israel needs to be wiped off the map 'when what he really meant was 'Israeli's should all come and live in Iran'

Like the Stealth fighter.  Western propaganda read it as 'we have a fighter who can evade radar and strike before you know we are here'. Yet what they meant was ' our fly boys really liked the look of the F22 so we built one to keep them happy'

They reported their new stealthy anti ship subs.  Blimey propaganda led us to believe 'It is a stealth sub that cannot been seen so can attack carriers and destroyers in the area with anti ship missiles'  What they really wanted to say was 'We had a load of turquoise paint and thought they would look nice painted in them.

Same as the new monkey space program.  A huge amount of Iranians live in poverty, with lack of basic facilities so obviously the most sensible for a Government is to start spending billions on a space program.

[DarkHunter]

I have nothing against Iran having nuclear power, I am not against anyone having nuclear power.  I personally think that nuclear power would be a great intermediate step to wean the world off of oil and other fossil fuels till a better, cleaner source of energy can be found.  

But where I do have a problem is with the type of reactor Iran is using, there is simply no reason to produce the type of reactor they have unless you are planning of making nuclear weapons at some point.  If Iran truly had peaceful intentions then why didn't they produce a Thorium-based nuclear reactor.  It is safer and cleaner then Uranium-based reactors, and produces less nuclear waste then other reactor types.  The only problem is that it is near if not impossible to make a weapon out of a Thorium-based reactor, unlike the type of reactor Iran has.  

Honestly why would Iran choose its current type of nuclear reactor that really has no advantages over a Thorium-based reactor and has crippling sanctions involved with it, unless it is to produce a nuclear weapon which a Thorium-reactor simply can't do.

Because I have noticed this being brought up recently that Iran hasn't declared war on anybody for over 200 years is a bit misleading.  While Iran may have not declared war officially on anyone for over 200 years they are far fro peaceful, most of that 200 year period of peace has been marked with a civil war every 20 or 30 years it seems from a quick look at Iranian history with its only periods of prolonged peace being when it was under foreign occupation and with recent history Iran has been funding/supporting multiple terrorist organizations in multiple middle eastern countries.

I know this quote is form Stalin but it seems to fit rather well regarding Iran, "If any foreign minister begins to defend to the death a 'peace conference,' you can be sure his government has already placed its order for new battleships and airplanes."

[Coffey]

skookum, on 06 February 2013 - 08:28 PM, said:

Yet every other nation who makes a statement is branded as western propaganda and lies.

Obviously in the west we read it as 'Israel needs to be wiped off the map 'when what he really meant was 'Israeli's should all come and live in Iran'

Like the Stealth fighter.  Western propaganda read it as 'we have a fighter who can evade radar and strike before you know we are here'. Yet what they meant was ' our fly boys really liked the look of the F22 so we built one to keep them happy'

They reported their new stealthy anti ship subs.  Blimey propaganda led us to believe 'It is a stealth sub that cannot been seen so can attack carriers and destroyers in the area with anti ship missiles'  What they really wanted to say was 'We had a load of turquoise paint and thought they would look nice painted in them.

Same as the new monkey space program.  A huge amount of Iranians live in poverty, with lack of basic facilities so obviously the most sensible for a Government is to start spending billions on a space program.

Lets look at the stealth fighter shall we... Firstly it's a fighter not a bomber. Which means it's main role is for air support, this can be defensive. yes it evades radar, radar is used not just as a defense, it's an offensive weapon for attacking enemy airspace as well. They are unveiling this stuff as a deterrent. Not a threat. That is pretty obvious when using common sense.

Same with a stealth sub, it sits and waits to be attacked, like a trap door spider. Why can't you see that? It's  a very common strategy, been used for thousands of years, they have mostly done it with tanks and anti tank guns in ww2. It's common sense, whats the point of having a non stealth sub just sitting there waiting for ti to be taken out.

Just because we use all our stealth capabilities to evade other countries and blow all their citizens away, doesn't mean other countries want to. We're allowed nukes though... LMFAO

DarkHunter, on 06 February 2013 - 08:37 PM, said:

I have nothing against Iran having nuclear power, I am not against anyone having nuclear power.  I personally think that nuclear power would be a great intermediate step to wean the world off of oil and other fossil fuels till a better, cleaner source of energy can be found.  

But where I do have a problem is with the type of reactor Iran is using, there is simply no reason to produce the type of reactor they have unless you are planning of making nuclear weapons at some point.  If Iran truly had peaceful intentions then why didn't they produce a Thorium-based nuclear reactor.  It is safer and cleaner then Uranium-based reactors, and produces less nuclear waste then other reactor types.  The only problem is that it is near if not impossible to make a weapon out of a Thorium-based reactor, unlike the type of reactor Iran has.  

Honestly why would Iran choose its current type of nuclear reactor that really has no advantages over a Thorium-based reactor and has crippling sanctions involved with it, unless it is to produce a nuclear weapon which a Thorium-reactor simply can't do.

Because I have noticed this being brought up recently that Iran hasn't declared war on anybody for over 200 years is a bit misleading.  While Iran may have not declared war officially on anyone for over 200 years they are far fro peaceful, most of that 200 year period of peace has been marked with a civil war every 20 or 30 years it seems from a quick look at Iranian history with its only periods of prolonged peace being when it was under foreign occupation and with recent history Iran has been funding/supporting multiple terrorist organizations in multiple middle eastern countries.

I know this quote is form Stalin but it seems to fit rather well regarding Iran, "If any foreign minister begins to defend to the death a 'peace conference,' you can be sure his government has already placed its order for new battleships and airplanes."

I don't know enough about Nuclear power to comment on that, I do know it is Russia helping/advising them with it. Is it plausible that the technology is not as easy to build or is the cost very high?

As for civil wars, that is different if the country is having disputes with itself, Israel is having a civil war AND attacking others... (even though Israel doesn't call it a civil war and denies it's a civil war... )

The US funds terrorist organizations as well. lol

The US funded Iraq to attack Iran... then we had to fight the exact army the US armed in Iraq.
The US funded, trained and made Al Qaeda.... Then again we had to fight them.
The US funded Al Qaeda/rebels in Libya.
The US is supposed to be funding Al Qaeda/Rebels in Syria.


How is that not aiding terrorists?! lol

Edited by Coffey, 06 February 2013 - 09:10 PM.

[acidhead]

DarkHunter, on 06 February 2013 - 08:37 PM, said:

I have nothing against Iran having nuclear power, I am not against anyone having nuclear power.  I personally think that nuclear power would be a great intermediate step to wean the world off of oil and other fossil fuels till a better, cleaner source of energy can be found.  

But where I do have a problem is with the type of reactor Iran is using, there is simply no reason to produce the type of reactor they have unless you are planning of making nuclear weapons at some point.  If Iran truly had peaceful intentions then why didn't they produce a Thorium-based nuclear reactor.  It is safer and cleaner then Uranium-based reactors, and produces less nuclear waste then other reactor types.  The only problem is that it is near if not impossible to make a weapon out of a Thorium-based reactor, unlike the type of reactor Iran has.  

Honestly why would Iran choose its current type of nuclear reactor that really has no advantages over a Thorium-based reactor and has crippling sanctions involved with it, unless it is to produce a nuclear weapon which a Thorium-reactor simply can't do.

Because I have noticed this being brought up recently that Iran hasn't declared war on anybody for over 200 years is a bit misleading.  While Iran may have not declared war officially on anyone for over 200 years they are far fro peaceful, most of that 200 year period of peace has been marked with a civil war every 20 or 30 years it seems from a quick look at Iranian history with its only periods of prolonged peace being when it was under foreign occupation and with recent history Iran has been funding/supporting multiple terrorist organizations in multiple middle eastern countries.

I know this quote is form Stalin but it seems to fit rather well regarding Iran, "If any foreign minister begins to defend to the death a 'peace conference,' you can be sure his government has already placed its order for new battleships and airplanes."

Regardless, Iran is still no threat to the West.  They are an isolated Nation.  Sure they have economic relations with Russia but what does that prove?  Russia is an Allie with the West.  China is in a no-win situation as well.  Their economy relies heavily on the economy of the USA and the EU.  

Patriotism or Nationalism is the highest form of Collectivism.

I look at the Iranian GOV as more of a player in this global game of corporate dominance over personal liberty than I do them the enemy.

We've been lied to too much.

[Frank Merton]

Yamato, on 06 February 2013 - 06:31 PM, said:

What should somebody else in the world "allow" your country with your government?   Sovereignty is a wonderful thing, when you're taking your own for granted and defiling someone else's.

Sovereignty is what the Chinese talk about when they march into Tibet -- Tibet is "part of China" so others should not complain when China exercises sovereignty.  They make the same claim about Mongolia, large chunks of India, and a whole bunch of islands all over the place.

Then there is internal sovereignty.  We have to recognize this nineteenth century Metternich political invention as taking priority over basic human compassion?

[Yamato]

Frank Merton, on 07 February 2013 - 06:20 AM, said:

Sovereignty is what the Chinese talk about when they march into Tibet -- Tibet is "part of China" so others should not complain when China exercises sovereignty.  They make the same claim about Mongolia, large chunks of India, and a whole bunch of islands all over the place.

Then there is internal sovereignty.  We have to recognize this nineteenth century Metternich political invention as taking priority over basic human compassion?

I find the best standards regardless of what China or any other government says, and I wouldn't take any foreigner seriously who came and talked to me about "allowing" me to do something.

[Zaphod222]

acidhead, on 07 February 2013 - 06:05 AM, said:

I look at the Iranian GOV as more of a player in this global game of corporate dominance over personal liberty than I do them the enemy.

We've been lied to too much.

Wrong paradigm. The Iranian mullah government is first and foremost guided by radical islamic doctrine, and by the Shiite "12er" teaching in particular. That is the foundation for their jihad against Israel, against the "Great Satan" USA, and for their Middle Eastern policy of dominating the Sunni countries in the region.
If you are unaware of that, you have not done your homework.
Start by reading history, of the region, and that of Khomeinis revolution in particular.

Edited by Zaphod222, 07 February 2013 - 07:07 AM.

[Frank Merton]

Yamato, on 07 February 2013 - 06:45 AM, said:

I find the best standards regardless of what China or any other government says, and I wouldn't take any foreigner seriously who came and talked to me about "allowing" me to do something.

It's a tough call; I find the wide-open gun regime in the US (and the ensuing excess deaths) and the execution rates in states like Texas to be violations of human rights.  Americans find the imprisonment of native tribes people who want to stand in the way of Vietnam's exercise of eminent domain in order to preserve their culture to be a violation of human rights.  Sometimes the regimes are so outrageous that the whole world takes notice, such as the execution of young boys suspected of being homosexuals in Iran and the routine executions of women accused of being witches in much of Africa and the systematic denial of women's rights in the Middle East.

[Stellar]

acidhead, on 07 February 2013 - 06:05 AM, said:

Regardless, Iran is still no threat to the West.  They are an isolated Nation.  

You realise Canada kicked out Iranian diplomats a few months back because they were using the embassy to smuggle in potential saboteurs to the country?

[Yamato]

Frank Merton, on 07 February 2013 - 07:18 AM, said:

It's a tough call; I find the wide-open gun regime in the US (and the ensuing excess deaths) and the execution rates in states like Texas to be violations of human rights.  Americans find the imprisonment of native tribes people who want to stand in the way of Vietnam's exercise of eminent domain in order to preserve their culture to be a violation of human rights.  Sometimes the regimes are so outrageous that the whole world takes notice, such as the execution of young boys suspected of being homosexuals in Iran and the routine executions of women accused of being witches in much of Africa and the systematic denial of women's rights in the Middle East.

So then don't look to regimes.   Look to groups of free individuals.  Regimes want power; corporations want profit.   It's not surprising we get the best results from the passionate individuals from civil society volunteering for a cause greater than themselves.

The individual is sovereign.   Independence, not centralization.  If we listen to what governments say to find out what we really think, we'll never get it right.

[skookum]

Well look at it this way.  Both Japan and Russia have suffered reactor meltdowns despite having over 50 years experience with nuclear power.  They both managed to contaminate large areas despite their efforts and experience trying to stop this.

Here comes Iran, a new kid on the block with a nuclear toy 50 years behind the rest of the world.  Can you imagine what will happen if this goes wrong?

Given the state of the country and the poverty I imagine their safety precautions and quality will be top notch

Not quoting but back to the Stealth fighter being used as a defensive weapon.  It has been used in combat for 30 years.  Can someone enlighten me to its defensive role?  I believe it has only been used in an offensive role in the former Yugoslavia and Iraq.  I take it Iran have found a new use of stealth and think it is best suited as an interceptor.  As for weapons storage a modern bomb can easily fit on a fighter and take up no more room than a few air to air missles.  Hence why air forces around the world have been decommissioning their heavy bombers.

Britain used Tornado Bombers quite effectively over Libya and they flew from the UK, so I see no logic in the size of an aircraft an payload.  I know Iran is quite behind but I doubt their first nuke will be the size of the Hiroshima bomb.

Stealth doesn't mean you are totally invisible to radar always.  It means under certain conditions you give out a very low radar signature.  Start thrashing engines and using after burners it gives up your game.  Interceptor or defensive aircraft need to be fast to catch up to target.  Stealth is currently not at state it will work in an interceptor role.

The US Navy have long been known to avoid stealth as a necessity as their most important role is an air supremacy role and interception.

Maybe Iran should concentrate on it's UFO' s for the defensive role.

Edited by skookum, 08 February 2013 - 06:53 PM.