It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iran invasion & how Russia/China could be affected?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:
cjf

posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ghostsoldier
... However I do think Iran has the right to protect themselves and form a resistance against US Imperialism...


As one example, the Nation of Israel has the very same collective right, if not greater by your argument, in acts concerning protection of her people against official Iranian threats of something far, far worse than imperialistic gains…total annihilation.

Another Iranian public statment, notice the date.



"If one day, this Islamic world is also equipped with weapons like those that Israel possesses now, then the imperialists' strategy will reach a standstill because the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything"

On December 14, 2001, at Tehran University by Iran's Expediency Council chairman and former President ‘Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani



Originally posted by ghostsoldier
If the people needed liberating they can liberate themselves... How about teaching them how to resist if its such a big deal...If the US is so concerned about the democracy in the region, why not set a good example yourself...


As to Iran, the US nor any of its' allies have in recent events proported the use of overt military force to 'liberate Iranians' or install a democratic styled governmental body. Any statement to the contrary is pure, un-factuated speculation such as the incorrect allurement in your response which assumes too much or greater in probably it is this just another sophomoric jab at the US.

The US and Israel (to name a few nations) have discussed the use of force as a future option to diminish and eradicate the nuclear threat and unchecked, unmonitored Iranian nuclear development, support, research and enrichment facilities. These very same facilities can be used and have been overtly touted officially by Iran in bringing to fruition years of threats against sovereign nations, such as the one case of Israel, and upon millions and millions of noncombatants. The collaborative converation of possible options is called 'planning' and by no means shown to be the 'preferred option'.


Originally posted by ghostsoldier
You think bombing a town to smitherenes with laser-guided weapons is defending humanity! You are sadly mistaken if you beleive violence on that level is right and just... Perhaps you should remember how the American public reacted after 9/11...


To your point, the repetitive threats to use nuclear weapons by a theocratic, fanatical and radical government entity and followed by any actual use, if only once, would invoke a response (and not necessarily by the US) which would dwarf your incorrect example of 'retaliation'.

Now, since you have told me what I should think through your opinions, incorrect assumptions and poorly drawn conclusions, I will rightfully tell you my opinion: All of your pathetic, ethnocentric propagandized eye rolling, foot stomping and hand waving about the US, not just in this thread's content, does not provide, nor has it promoted, suggested, outlined, defined or even optioned any steps to solutions to the many problems you feel are important. Rather, your conclusions have historically amounted to no more than a personal agenda based upon your biased, opinioned, dual standard superficial "buffet styled"excruciating finger pointing at every turn primarily against the US and its' supporters. You sir/madam are doomed to failure no matter what cause you uphold, right or wrong without indifference, until you apply your same standards to yourself which you expect from your 'audience'.




posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 01:43 PM
link   
The US won't be able to invade Iran, because the Iraqi shiites are now the ruling class in Iraq, and they have very strong religious ties (and often personal) to their Iranian counterparts.

A US invasion of Iran would certainly trigger and all-out guerilla war in Iraq. Right now the insurgents are just a bunch of radicals, but in that case most able men would do it. That unfortunately would make the US position untenable, and without Iraq occupied one can't effectively operate in Iran.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 02:55 PM
link   
The thread was originally about how Russia and China would be affected. Here's my thoughts:

Russia
If Iran finishes this plant and builds a nuclear device they will certainly use it against Israel. If that happens, Russia's government should be tried for war crimes. Russia secretly building a nuclear reactor for Iran is completely irresponsible. Russia should be punished for this action regardless of whether or not the plant gets finished.

China
China will be against anything the US does. Personally I think China would not want a nuclear armed Iran, but they will never admit to it publicly because the US is against it.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by PeanutButterJellyTime

Russia
If Iran finishes this plant and builds a nuclear device they will certainly use it against Israel.


Rubbish, there is NO evidence Iran is trying to build any nuclear device, apart from power plants.



If that happens, Russia's government should be tried for war crimes. Russia secretly building a nuclear reactor for Iran is completely irresponsible. Russia should be punished for this action regardless of whether or not the plant gets finished.



Again utter rubbish. War crimes? Russia is at war with who? They are not "secretly" building a reactor. They are quite open about it, as are we "evil" europeans. How is producing nuclear ENERGY "irresponsible"?!

China
China will be against anything the US does. Personally I think China would not want a nuclear armed Iran, but they will never admit to it publicly because the US is against it.

Er, China is not against the US. Why would they be, when so many people are willing to pay pay big bucks for their electrical products.

*Sigh*



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kriz_4
Rubbish, there is NO evidence Iran is trying to build any nuclear device, apart from power plants.


Excuse me? They THEMSELVES have stated MANY times that they would like to aquire nuclear weapons.




Again utter rubbish. War crimes? Russia is at war with who? They are not "secretly" building a reactor. They are quite open about it, as are we "evil" europeans. How is producing nuclear ENERGY "irresponsible"?!


It is not responsable to suply a country WITH A STATED GOAL OF DESTROYING ANOTHER COUNTRY (Isreal) nuclear power which could then be used to build a nuke. Does it mean they will definatly do it? No. But just because you give a killer bullets, it doesn't mean he will then go kill someone. It is still not responsable.




Er, China is not against the US. Why would they be, when so many people are willing to pay pay big bucks for their electrical products.


You must be kidding. China is against the US just as the US is against China. The US is in the position China would like to be. They will do what they can to hurt us and improve their position. The US sees China as the threat to dominance it is.

Get your head out of the sand buddy. It's going to be Cold War II soon, though much less direct.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Excuse me? They THEMSELVES have stated MANY times that they would like to aquire nuclear weapons.


There is a difference between "likeing" than "getting"...



It is not responsable to suply a country WITH A STATED GOAL OF DESTROYING ANOTHER COUNTRY (Isreal) nuclear power which could then be used to build a nuke. Does it mean they will definatly do it? No. But just because you give a killer bullets, it doesn't mean he will then go kill someone. It is still not responsable.

So wait, its ok to give the isreali's weapons but not ok for the russians to give a country something that might be turned into weapons....can you explain that logic?




You must be kidding. China is against the US just as the US is against China. The US is in the position China would like to be. They will do what they can to hurt us and improve their position. The US sees China as the threat to dominance it is.

So thats the excuse?
Because they are a possible threat you should label them?


Get your head out of the sand buddy. It's going to be Cold War II soon, though much less direct.

Yeah its also going to take several decades for them to be able to hit you effectively.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 07:07 PM
link   
The Iranian/Russian nuclear plant was only publicly acknowledged recently. The project to build a reactor has gone on for several years though.

Israel most likely has nukes but they do not state they are going to wipe other countries off the face of the earth. Iran recently paraded nuclear-capable Shihab-3 missiles with "Israel must be wiped out" and "We will crush America under our feet" written on them.

Iran is required under the UN's Non Proliferation Treaty that it signed to declare that it intends to build a nuclear reactor before it begins. The construction was well underway, as well as the construction of numerous other facilities to process heavy water and enrich uranium, before Iran publicly admitted it was doing this. And Russia was supplying the plans, materials and know-how to build them. This puts Russia at fault as well.

If I was walking down the street with Kriz_4, he got mad at somebody and threatened to kill them, I pulled out a gun and gave it to him, and he shot the person, I would be just as guilty as he was for the murder. If Iran develops nuclear weapons as a result of this reactor supplied by Russia and nukes Israel, how is Russia's position different from mine in this situation?



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 07:12 PM
link   
How is this any diffrennt fomr giveing any country weapons?
Only the number and way that people die is diffrent.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 09:54 PM
link   
It's different because most countries don't publicly announce they want to destroy other countries. Most countires don't openly fund and support terrorist organizations.

If a country has publicly stated time and time again they want to wipe another country off the map, the US wouldn't sell them weapons or give them the means to make nuclear weapons. No sane government would sell weapons to a country that openly admits they wanted to destroy other countries.


cjf

posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by PeanutButterJellyTime
It's different because most countries don't publicly announce they want to destroy other countries. Most countires don't openly fund and support terrorist organizations.

As applicable to the topic yes, yes, yes... to the latter yes, yes, yes.

If a country has publicly stated time and time again they want to wipe another country off the map, the US wouldn't sell them weapons or give them the means to make nuclear weapons. No sane government would sell weapons to a country that openly admits they wanted to destroy other countries.


"no sane gov't", a definition to national sanity could be an issue; however, to put a gun in a murder's hand and see what happens? Will 'ethics' prevail...not historically.

Good comments.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join