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.

 

What should the US do about Iran?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 12:25 PM
link   
With August 22 (the next "end of the world" prediction) quickly approaching, I was curious with what everyone thought about this subject. I believe there's an active thread discussing the "staged" Israel/Hezbollah war and how it's being used as a precursor to attack Iran. Of course most of you talk about how horrible the Bush administration is and how poorly it's handled almost everything. So, what's your answer to this question? Ahmadinejad has openly stated that Israel should be wiped off the map, and he believes he is in power to bring about the end of the world (in so many words). We've tried bribery, I mean diplomacy, and I don't believe that will ultimately work with this guy. So, what next?




posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 01:05 PM
link   
It seems like the only answer you're really interested in hearing is:
"Bomb em!"

So...

Bomb 'em?



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 02:14 PM
link   
No, that's not the answer I'm looking for. I honestly want some real answer, because I don't see one.

I honestly get tired of reading how the US is behind all of this evil simply to advance whatever it is we're supposed to be advancing. With Iran, you have someone openly threatening the world. I want to know if there's anything that can be done.



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by undecided2
No, that's not the answer I'm looking for. I honestly want some real answer, because I don't see one.

....

With Iran, you have someone openly threatening the world. I want to know if there's anything that can be done.


I think the problem is that Iran isn't "openly threatening the world" and there's no reason to do anything about them at all. Could they be a threat to Israel with a nuclear weapon and an accurate long range missile? Only if they want 200 or more Israeli nuclear missiles in return. Could they be a threat to the US with 12000 nuclear warheads and the most advanced weaponry on the planet? No.

So what's the big deal about Iran?



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 02:51 PM
link   
I don't think there is any pressing need to "do anything" about Iran.
Iran is in no position to seriously threaten the US, nukes or not.

The theocracy there is awful to be sure, but it's their country, not ours.
It was the US/UK backed overthrow of the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh that eventually led to the Islamic revolution in Iran.

In Iran, like so many places in the world, the hostility we face is due to our own actions.



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 02:58 PM
link   
We could bomb 'em back to the stone age, but that would require like, what, 1 or 2 bombs as they have hardly emerged from the stone age.

The reality is that we do nothing. Iran is doing enough to incriminate themselves and call for a more concerted effort on behalf of the gobal community to take a tougher stance against them. They are already finding advanced Iranian and Syrian weaponry in the wake of the Hizbollah/Israel conflict.

I am truly interested in seeing what the (Weak Kneed) UN will do when Iran has not stopped enriching uranium by the August 31 deadline.



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Leave them to it. Believe me, there's nothing I'd like more than to see the reign of the "Mad Mullahs" come to an end, but if the only option is to turn it into a bloody mess like Iraq and Afghanistan then it's probably better to let things move at their own pace.


Originally posted by xmotex
IThe theocracy there is awful to be sure, but it's their country, not ours.
It was the US/UK backed overthrow of the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh that eventually led to the Islamic revolution in Iran.


Even the Shah was prefferential to what we've got now, at least women weren't treated like second class citizens (girls schools built, etc) and the Savak weren't nice but no worse than secret police forces operating with a carte blache from the US in South America and Africa.



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Lets turn our head and count to 10 years and turn back to see how peaceful they keep theiir nuclear program

[edit on 15-8-2006 by IspyU]



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Leave all iran alone. When they have a nuclear accident, dont send any help.
They dont want it anyways.



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by IspyU
Lets turn our head and count to 10 years and turn back to see how peaceful they keep theiir nuclear program

[edit on 15-8-2006 by IspyU]



I think that's an excellent suggestion. Monitor their nuclear program and keep them on probation for 10 years or so. If they show they can be responsible, they can join the nuclear club like other nations.



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by R3KR
Leave all iran alone. When they have a nuclear accident, dont send any help.
They dont want it anyways.


Wow, nice humanitarian sympathies there! Hopefully other nations around the globe will be a little more magnanimous should a tradgedy occur (i.e. a Chernobyl like incident).



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 03:36 PM
link   


nice humanitarian sympathies there


your are serious ?
They have thousands of operatives around the world ready to carry out terrorist attacks on your country and mine. If we do anything to them they will attack. How is that for humanitarians.

Like I said leave them alone.

[edit on 15-8-2006 by R3KR]



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 03:53 PM
link   
I also want to be counted in the 'don't-need-to-do-anything' camp. The best thing we can do to counter Iran and similarly hostile countries is for us to maintain a stable and healthy economy. They'll implode under the weight of their own unemployed, dissenfranchised population soon enough. Every time we meddle in another country's affairs the USA takes a huge economic and social hit while a very small group of elite make windfalls. Not to mention this meddling never pays off. Vietnam, E. Europe, Iraq, Afghanastan it's all the same. And other meddling countries have learned the same lesson. Sure, the oil companies are making record profits as are the people connected to them but everything else is rapidly going into the toilet. In the 70's we had an oil crisis and THAT should have demonstrated to this country the need to mitigate our reliance on foreign oil. We had 30yrs to address this serious strategic weakness. But our elected officials decided to use that time to squander billions on unnecessary defense spending and other crap to keep us "more secure". If we had spent that same money to cut our dependence on foreign oil we wouldn't give a rodent's touchis about the middle east and would now be far more secure than we obviously are.



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 06:06 PM
link   
i'm telling you. my view: it's the late 1930s all over again. we can fight now or we can fight later. that's the choice before us. both are unpopular with the international appeasers like france, the EU, anan et al, but later will be a lot messier than now.

similarities between now and say 1938: a country full of jews is threatend by a totalitarian neighbor who has publically stated that they are to be exterminated. in 1938 it was poland - home to most of europe's jews. 2006 it is israel. germany led by adolf - iran led by mahmoud. both made their views concerning the jews well known. both had regional ambitions. the only difference is the size of hitler's army viz the state of mahmouds, but, a nuclear capability will change all that.

and don't think for a second that the iranian mullahs will be deterred by the MAD doctrine like the rational and secular soviets were. they have an apocalyptic world view. remember, nothing happens unless Allah wills it so.

and don't think for a second that mahmoud won't pass any nuke tech to his proxies, the biggest of which is of course - hezbollah. now imagine that, hezbollah with a nuclear weapon (or weapons) - the same hezbollah the international community (esp. the UN, anan, france, EU etc) have saved from annihilation. we may not be talking about 100 megaton bombs here, but you'd be surprised what kind of damage a small tactical should-fired nuke could do to a residential area in haifa!

in sum, we ought not to ignore iran - i believe they pose the biggest danger since hitler. much more of a danger than al quaida, though in my op, they're all very much connected.



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by R3KR


nice humanitarian sympathies there


your are serious ?
They have thousands of operatives around the world ready to carry out terrorist attacks on your country and mine. If we do anything to them they will attack. How is that for humanitarians.

Like I said leave them alone.

[edit on 15-8-2006 by R3KR]


And if the USA were to attack them then they have every right to fight back by whatever means possible. If left alone they have no reason to carry out any aggression towards the USA. Why is Iran such a hot topic for the USA? Simple answer is it isn't but the Israeli lobbyists and their paid for congress critters will vote for any aggression required by Israel.
It's just not in the interests of Americans, which kinda makes you wonder why those in power don't spend the money at home on the people who pay the taxes and their wages.



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackvance88
in sum, we ought not to ignore iran - i believe they pose the biggest danger since hitler. much more of a danger than al quaida, though in my op, they're all very much connected.


yet the biggest threat to the world is the united states and israel
the bigest danger since hitler is bush and his crusade (unlike some iran hasnt killed countless thousends by invading soveron countries)

also hazbullah dont count as the US has supported far worse



edit:

what the US should do about Iran nothing
there intel is full of crap and iraq is proof of that

[edit on 15-8-2006 by bodrul]



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Do we have radio and TV channels over there ?
Showing the masses the good things we do could undo the fundamentalists



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by bodrul

Originally posted by jackvance88
in sum, we ought not to ignore iran - i believe they pose the biggest danger since hitler. much more of a danger than al quaida, though in my op, they're all very much connected.


yet the biggest threat to the world is the united states and israel
the bigest danger since hitler is bush and his crusade (unlike some iran hasnt killed countless thousends by invading soveron countries)

also hazbullah dont count as the US has supported far worse



***NUTJOB ALERT***



edit:

what the US should do about Iran nothing
there intel is full of crap and iraq is proof of that

[edit on 15-8-2006 by bodrul]



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 08:56 PM
link   
"INVADING SOVEREIGN NATIONS"

like you can only invade nations that are not sovereign?



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 03:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by jackvance88
i'm telling you. my view: it's the late 1930s all over again. we can fight now or we can fight later. that's the choice before us. both are unpopular with the international appeasers like france, the EU, anan et al, but later will be a lot messier than now.


And if we take a good hard look at the circumstances that led to Nazi party power, etc, we'll see that it was mainly due to the disasterous state of the German economy....which was a direct result of the crippling reparations that the allies imposed post WWI.

So it seems that we never learn anything from history and are doomed to repeat the mistakes. So, hey, if we're so determined to turn Iran an international pariah with an even greater prediliction for bitterness, "zionist" conspiracy theories and secrecy then we're probably going the right way about it.

I'm sure imposing sanctions and treating them like backwards idiots (albeit dangerous ones) incapable of rational thought is the way to improve relations and make the world a safer place....right? No chance of it possibly making the situation worse?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join