Is Iran trying to pick a fight withe U.S.and Israel???

I'm posting this thread in response to all the speculation and what seems to be confusing coverage of the nuclear issue involving Iran.Iran has been warned many times not proceed with it's nuclear programme and yet it continues without any intervention from any other superpower.They say it is for peaceful purposes and yet they developed missles capable of carrying nukes great distances.The U.S. administration has been playing down this threat,saying that it will proceed with diplomatic negotiations.Now,let's go back to 1981,when Iraq was trying to build a nuclear power plant "for peaceful purposes".It was wiped out before the cement was allowed to dry.What is different between now and then??? I would think that,even though nobody is coming out publicly to confirm this, that Iran has already purchased Nukes from the old soviet block countries.I can't find the link I wanted to use for this thread but there was an article I had seen on this website and others about a Ukrainian general who claims that 250 nuclear devices were sold to Iran when the soviet union collapsed.There are alot of other links that speculate about this theory,here's one I found quickly

www.counterpunch.org...

We know that the Iranian leader believes he will bring about the end of the world.Why?? and with what?? I don't believe this is just bravado in the face of the U.S. and Israel.I believe he is looking for an excuse to start a major nuclear exchange with Israel and the U.S. I also, believe that both of those countries believe Iran has nukes-Why else haven't they put a stop to this problem already????????

Long time no see ATS, nice to see you again...

This board cracks me up at times and posts like these make me wet myself. If this is actually a theory on the table it tells me two things. One, that U.S. propaganda is winning and two, U.S. propaganda is winning.

Yes those fiesky Iranians are at it again trying to get on our last nerve so we'll just go over there and demolish their out of date weaponry and crush their Islamic Republic. They're just aching for it those damn heathens!!!

Uhm.... Yeah.... or.... We want their oil. Let's see... the Iranians want us to fight them for.... what reasons.... and we want their oil for what reason.... reasons reasons reason....

Quick hint tehre.... try to Reason and stop theorizing.

not everything is about oil-not with this country.The U.S. can and is get oil from other sources in the mideast.Give me a reason why their nuclear programme hasn't been stopped yet that makes sense

Why hasnt it been stopped? Its not because we or Isreal lack the ability. Its solely because the Iraq War didnt gett much support from the fickle US Citizen, so the US is trying the diplomatic approach (which wont work). Eventually, we will have to intervene....

I think too much a big deal is made out of these Iranian comments like "wipe Israel off the map" he has clearly indicated in these speeches that he means a political overthrow comparing Israel to the Soviet Union, Facist Germany, or Aphartied Era South Africa(or South Afrikaa as the Afrikaaners saw it.

Maybe if Israel wasn't so fanatically Zionist in it's approach to their conflict with the Palestinians (imposing aphartied boundaries and racist oppresion instead of simply ending the illegal occupation of all the West Bank & East Jerusalem) than the Iranian president wouldn't be so fanatically anti-zionist.

Originally posted by jajabinks
I think too much a big deal is made out of these Iranian comments like "wipe Israel off the map" he has clearly indicated in these speeches that he means a political overthrow comparing Israel to the Soviet Union, Facist Germany, or Aphartied Era South Africa(or South Afrikaa as the Afrikaaners saw it.

:

um yeah...and if the US siad we were going to wipe a nation off the map everyone would be going nuts. Why does everyone make excuses for these fanatics? maybe they are just misunderstood...... yeah right!

load the tactical nukes!

unload the nukes on yourself because 1 day after you use them your face melts off in the counterstrike..i didn't say he was misunderstood, wipeing Israel off the map is not the same thing as wiping Cambodia or France off the map, Israel has serious legitamacy issues when you consider half the population in that country (historic Palestine) considers the state to be 'Palestine' and that 'Israel' is a illegitamate manifistation of oppresion. And then there are 4 million more Palestinians who were illegally deported and want to go back..they clearly have a claim that 'Israel' is a sham..really saying Israel should be wiped off the map is not really 'fanatical'..was nelson mandela fanatical when he insisted the S.Afrikaaner nation-which even had it's own language and national identity be wiped off the map so democracy could exist?

Originally posted by ARNOMANNN
not everything is about oil-not with this country.The U.S. can and is get oil from other sources in the mideast.Give me a reason why their nuclear programme hasn't been stopped yet that makes sense

You want a reson why hasn't it been stopped? Perhaps you could offer a reson as to why it should be stopped?

Can you do that? Can you offer a reson why the Iranians should cease any nuclear activity, which they are entitled to do under the NPT. I have a nasty feeling that I am just going to hear the same, tired old reasons that get pumped out of the White House, week in, week out.



[edit on 15/4/06 by stumason]

I would like to add that the title of this thread is a tad misleading.

It should read:

Is U.S.and Israel trying to pick a fight with Iran ???

As that seems to what is going on.... At least from the non-US media fed perspective....

Originally posted by jajabinks
I think too much a big deal is made out of these Iranian comments like "wipe Israel off the map" he has clearly indicated in these speeches that he means a political overthrow comparing Israel to the Soviet Union, Facist Germany, or Aphartied Era South Africa(or South Afrikaa as the Afrikaaners saw it.

jajabinks,

If you were around in the late 1930's, you would have been trying to rationalize Germanys' reoccupationin of the Rhineland, the Anschluss with Austria, and need to protect fellow Germans in the Sudetenland. I mean those who spoke up against those actions were probably making too big of deal of those actions as well, weren't they?

Politicians choose their words carefully, especially in speeches and especially the leader of the nation. When a politician says the same thing multiple times, it is not an off the cuff remark or mistake. It is in fact their policy that they plan to carry out. A bully never stops trying to bully till someone stands up and gives them a bloody nose.

Originally posted by pavil

jajabinks,

If you were around in the late 1930's, you would have been trying to rationalize Germanys' reoccupationin of the Rhineland, the Anschluss with Austria, and need to protect fellow Germans in the Sudetenland. I mean those who spoke up against those actions were probably making too big of deal of those actions as well, weren't they?

Politicians choose their words carefully, especially in speeches and especially the leader of the nation. When a politician says the same thing multiple times, it is not an off the cuff remark or mistake. It is in fact their policy that they plan to carry out. A bully never stops trying to bully till someone stands up and gives them a bloody nose.

Oh come on! People go spare at others drawing parralells between the current US Admin and Nazi germany (of which there are several similarities in modus operandi), claiming they are two different beasts, but it's ok to compare the Iranians with the Nazi's now?

To be honest, everyone in Europe during the 30's actually did think Germany was harshly punished at the end of WW1. Many will agree with you today, as well. It was a direct cause of WW2.

The re-occupation of the Rhineland, Anschluss, the Sudentantland and Poland all had legitimate reasons, as it was all German territory prior to WW1, although the way they went about it was probably not the most constructive....

Also, you have to remember, that the time of "appeasement", no one knew what horrors would happen towards the end of the War... It can be argued that the Holocaust happened as a direct result of Germany facing defeat. Had they got to do what the originally planned to do, Israel would exist today as a product of Nazi Germany...

But that's another story.....

I used that analogy to represent that when leaders of countries continually say and do things, that they really intend to carry them out if given the chance. Only until someone tells them STOP and backs it up with military and economic pressure will that leader reconsider their course of action.

Iran's rhetoric and ACTIONS are setting into motion a chain of events that will not bode well for the region and especially Iran and Israel. That is why the UN must act quicker and more decisively than they usually do or things will get worse.

Originally posted by pavil
I used that analogy to represent that when leaders of countries continually say and do things, that they really intend to carry them out if given the chance. Only until someone tells them STOP and backs it up with military and economic pressure will that leader reconsider their course of action.

Iran's rhetoric and ACTIONS are setting into motion a chain of events that will not bode well for the region and especially Iran and Israel. That is why the UN must act quicker and more decisively than they usually do or things will get worse.

What exactly is Iran doing wrong though?

Originally posted by stumason

What exactly is Iran doing wrong though?

Well for starters even though this is rehasing, rehashed topics:


Calling for the wiping off the map of another country, saying that Israel is "heading toward annihilation," and that Israel is a "permanent threat" to the Middle East that will soon be "liberated".

I know, I know they are just words. Words have never meant anything.
In fact, the President of Iran didn't even use the word Israel, he said "Zionist regime" that means something totally different.
I'm sure Iran would never act on their words if given the chance.

Originally posted by pavil
In fact, the President of Iran didn't even use the word Israel, he said "Zionist regime" that means something totally different.
I'm sure Iran would never act on their words if given the chance.

Aha, now we get to the crux of the issue...

How is Iran wanting to, essentially, do a "regime change" and bad mouthing the "Zionist Regime" any different to "another" nation doing the same and even worse, acting on it?

Now, I know you could argue that said "regime's" needed changing, but that is a point of view rather than a statement of fact.

It could be argued that, for example, Iraqi's were far better off under Saddam than the chaos their country is in now. Ten's of thousands of innocent civilians would still be alive today, for example.

I hear of the much vaunted "mass graves" and "hundreds of thousands killed", but there is little evidence to support such a huge number, so those thousands that have died in the invasion and occupation would have a good chance of living now, had it not taken place.

Now, back to Iran.. Israel, whilst it doesn't threaten it's neighbours openly, is pretty active behind the scenes. On top of that, they are running an apartheid regime within Israel and the Occupied Territories that, under scruntiny, is far worse than the other Apartheid regime in South Africa.

Now, given that most, if not all Western Nations boycotted SA and pressured them to do a "self" regime change, what is so bad for the Iranian's calling the same on Israel?

Yes, the language is harsh at times, but he is playing to the crowds back home where he does face an electorate.

Just to add, I try not to "take sides" in this issue and remain objective where others get hot under the collar and call for the Nuking of Tehran. If this is the only complaint that you have against Iran, then there is not much of a complaint at all, least yet a Cassus Belli.

If, on the other hand, you want a war based on their continuing Nuclear activities instead, there is also little to no ground for any action there. Iran is obeying the NPT to the letter and has yet to do anything that comes anywhere near to making a bomb. Remember, they are still under the scrutiny of the IAEA.

Yes Iran bad and Dictators from Equatorial Guinea like President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo are good friends of the USA as Condoleeza Rice describes him.

No News media, torture,his son owns the only radio station in the whole country. He's Parade Magazines Top 10 list of worst dictators 4 years now
List taken from US Dept of State website

• abridgement of citizens' right to change their government
• security force torture, beating, and other physical abuse of prisoners and detainees
• harsh and life-threatening prison conditions
• impunity
• arbitrary arrest, detention, and incommunicado detention
• harassment, detention, and deportation of foreign residents
• judicial corruption and lack of due process
• restrictions on the right of privacy
• severe restrictions on freedom of speech and of the press
• restrictions on the rights of assembly, association, and movement
• government corruption
• restrictions on human rights nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)
• violence and discrimination against women
• trafficking in persons
• discrimination against ethnic minorities and HIV/AID victims
• restrictions on labor rights
• forced labor
• child labor

www.state.gov...

AND We give them Aid on top of it!

Remarks With Equatorial Guinean President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo Before Their Meeting

Secretary Condoleezza Rice
Washington, DC
April 12, 2006

(10:00 a.m. EST)

SECRETARY RICE: Good morning. Welcome. I'm very pleased to welcome the President of Equatorial Guinea, President Obiang. We will have a full set of discussions about our bilateral relationship, about some innovative social programs that USAID is involved with and about the range of regional issues that we both confront. So thank you very much for your presence here. You are a good friend and we welcome you.


PRESIDENT OBIANG: (Via interpreter) I thank you so much. We have extremely good relations with the United States. Our country has had good relations with the United States for a very long time and my visit here is simply in order to consolidate and also to establish further ties of cooperation with your country. Yesterday, in fact, we signed a very important agreement with USAID, an agreement for the development of Equatorial Guinea which will be helped with financing from the United States for social programs in our country so that our people may enjoy greater prosperity and are able to combat poverty.


Therefore, we are extremely pleased and hopeful that this relationship will continue to grow in friendship and cooperation, and I thank you very much.
www.state.gov...

So funny how people can just believe whatever they are being fed.




[edit on 15-4-2006 by ThePieMaN]

Originally posted by stumason
Now, back to Iran.. Israel, whilst it doesn't threaten it's neighbours openly, is pretty active behind the scenes.

Stu,
Has Israel called for any of it's neighbors in the region to be wiped off the map?
Iran is pretty active behind the scenes in Lebanon and Iraq, and HAS openly threatened it's neighbors in the region.

If, on the other hand, you want a war based on their continuing Nuclear activities instead, there is also little to no ground for any action there. Iran is obeying the NPT to the letter and has yet to do anything that comes anywhere near to making a bomb. Remember, they are still under the scrutiny of the IAEA.

NPT Treaty

Article II
Each non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to receive the transfer from any transferor whatsoever of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or of control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; not to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices; and not to seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.

Iran has missiles to carry nuclear warheads


Instead of the single cone normally attached to this type of missile, the new Shahab has three cones, or a triconic, warhead. A triconic warhead allows the missile to accommodate a nuclear device and this type of warhead is normally found only in nuclear weapons.

According to the new research, the Iranian warhead is designed to carry a spherical nuclear weapon that would be detonated 2,000 feet above the ground, similar to the Hiroshima bomb.

Don't you wonder why Iran is modifying an existing missile's warhead to carry a nuclear payload? Iran also got centrifuge blueprints from A.Q. Khan, father of the Pakistani A-bomb. What gives you reason for hope that Iran didn't ask for and receive more than the blueprints when talking with Mr. Khan?

Iran will not leave the NPT treaty till it has all the components in place and ready to assemble, if their intention is to be a nuclear armed power. Why would you annouce to the world your intention to have a nuclear weapon until it is a fait accompli? Just doesn't make sense does it?

Originally posted by pavil
Originally posted by stumason
Now, back to Iran.. Israel, whilst it doesn't threaten it's neighbours openly, is pretty active behind the scenes.

Stu,
Has Israel called for any of it's neighbors in the region to be wiped off the map?
Don't you wonder why Iran is modifying an existing missile's warhead to carry a nuclear payload? Iran also got centrifuge blueprints from A.Q. Khan, father of the Pakistani A-bomb.

Well I'm glad Stu sees it. Just because they don't openly come out and say it in public doesn't mean diddly. They don't have to say it, they have Americans, America, and Israelis to say it for them. Is "Nuke Iran" or "We are going to Bombard Your Nuclear Facilities" code word for "I Love You" or something perhaps?
I guess dropping missiles on Palestinian civilians is a show of love in that country.
Mossad has their noses in everyones business and they make it obvious. They do it here in the USA as well as other places. I can't see how anyone tolerates this but they do.
As for Iran's build-up of weaponry. If there were no other threats in the region they would not be building up as they are now. Its kind of obvious as to why they are trying to play keep up with an unknown cache of WOMD that no one has any clear cut idea about aside from the Israeli government. We did it during the Cold-War, India did it with Pakistan and now Iran is doing it with Israel.
No one did anything to them when they were smuggling nuclear parts and devices into their country back in the 60's and 70's, so why should they have something to say about Iran from the mid 1990's up until now.

IMO none of them should have any nuclear capability but I know that israel would never give up their program of WOMD so its only fair that other nations have the very same right wether its for Defense or Energy use.

Originally posted by ARNOMANNN

We know that the Iranian leader believes he will bring about the end of the world.Why?? and with what?? I don't believe this is just bravado in the face of the U.S. and Israel.I believe he is looking for an excuse to start a major nuclear exchange with Israel and the U.S. I also, believe that both of those countries believe Iran has nukes-Why else haven't they put a stop to this problem already????????

You know he wants to cause global destruction how? Because you saw it on US TV, or because you read it here posted by liers who still believe Bush likes hes a saint speaking not a lier. Iran is defending itself from the US not looking for trouble.

As for the oil your right, America doesnt need to invade for oil, it invades countries who threaten to trade in euroes. (Iraq,Iran next) Without US taxing every oil trader by making them trade in dollers the US would be broke in months, your country would come to a stand still. This is why bush wanted to ivade Iran, this is why Iran delayed setting up the oil bourse, and why the US has held off the attack so far.

Originally posted by pavil

Originally posted by stumason

What exactly is Iran doing wrong though?

Well for starters even though this is rehasing, rehashed topics:


Calling for the wiping off the map of another country, saying that Israel is "heading toward annihilation," and that Israel is a "permanent threat" to the Middle East that will soon be "liberated".

I know, I know they are just words. Words have never meant anything.
In fact, the President of Iran didn't even use the word Israel, he said "Zionist regime" that means something totally different.
I'm sure Iran would never act on their words if given the chance.

Make up your mind, either he is calling for the "zionist ragimes" destruction or Iraels? You seem to change your mind on that fact to suit your other "facts". Israel has started many conflicts in the ME Iran has been around for thousands of years, I dont think they would of lasted so long if they are as eager for death as you claim. To be honest i think your terrified and looking for a boogey man to punish after 9/11. arent the thousands dead in Afghanistan and Iraq enough to satisfy your lust for blood?