Iran warns Bush not to talk unwisely over Britons' case

Originally posted by Odium

Originally posted by DYepes
What hes saying is, Europe would be at the mercy of Russia, and the Middle East, if not still fighting wars with them, if it were not for the full backing of the United States of America.

Diplomacy only works as long as one side has something to fear. Without America, The big players East of the Balkans would have little to fear, and thus, their influence would be excerted much more wholesome on the European nations. I mean thats just how I read into it anyways, but hey, am I wrong?

Yes, Britain doesn't have Nuclear Weapons these days.

No we don't. Thank the Lord for the Mighty America to protect us. Of course, it is doubtful we'd have needed the protection if it wasn't for America in the first place. The whole Cold War came about because of the actions of a few parties in WW2, including not warning the Russians about the dropping of Nuclear Weapons while they were at War with Japan. Etcetera.

Britain has 200 nuclear tipped Trident's bud.

Does anyone remember this thread and how it may figure into the present situation?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Bombshell from Zbigniew Brzezinski: Ex-national security adviser warns of pretext to attack Iran.


[edit on 2-4-2007 by interestedalways]

Originally posted by WestPoint23
The subject is not so simple as to be laughable, indeed the UK has physical nuclear weapons, but does it have a true independent nuclear option, in all aspects of the phrase? Consider before answering...

No more than the United States - wait - ground silo's - in the event we suffer a first strike against us those play no role.

Nuclear weapons in a sub are far more dangerous and a greater projection of military power.

That's not what I meant, I was leaning more towards the development, research, manufacturing and use aspect of the UK's nuclear weapons...

Originally posted by Odium

Just like Iraq was?

I remember when that was going to be a walk in the park. How they'd cheer us into Iraq, we'd invade and be home for dinner. Look how it is now...

Did I say I was for war? I do not make these decisions. What I gave was a very real warning. It would be nice if we could have a more peaceful and serene world, but lets not skew fantasy with reality. If the decision of war is made, there is nothing you nor I can do about it.

How many more thousands of Americans need to die to make you happy?

Where did I say I was happy to see Americans die? Do you always put words in peoples mouths? Was that statement suppose to bring a "rise" out of me?

[edit on 2-4-2007 by Grimbone]

Originally posted by WestPoint23
That's not what I meant, I was leaning more towards the development, research, manufacturing and use aspect of the UK's nuclear weapons...

Ah..

I follow you now bro.

Originally posted by SKUNK2
ROFL

Britain does indeed have nuclear weapons, Trident missiles inside nuclear submarines, France has nukes too.

I was being sarcastic.

Please these words in an order: Over, It, Head. You'll come up with an interesting answer.

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally posted by SKUNK2
Britain does indeed have nuclear weapons, Trident missiles inside nuclear submarines, France has nukes too.

The subject is not so simple as to be laughable, indeed the UK has physical nuclear weapons, but does it have a true independent nuclear option, in all aspects of the phrase? Consider before answering...

LOL you must be so simple to think the UK needs help to launch a nuke
Trident missile can be fired from any spot in the world to any where in the world, exactly the same as US/Russian/French missiles.

Bush didn't do anything wrong in this case.

Britain could be doing so much more than they are doing now, and the US could help them until they release the soldiers. This means blockades on imports from other countries, blocking transfers of crude to refineries out of the country, crippling their economy even further. Sponsoring ethnic separtists even more than they are doing now.

I don't want war, but there is so much more that can be done.

What if they stop exporting oil? They won't, at least not for long as their whole economy is based on oil. And, other countries will start doing more as the prices go up, which will be a justification for war.

I'm thinking Iran had better watch their step. They are about to step in it deep.

Originally posted by spencerjohnstone

The President made a mistake voicing his displeasure to Iran this weekend, the UK has the US's support and the UK was using it's channels, the EU and UN to back them up in the case of the 15 captives.

Makes it worse, with him using the word hostage, oh please oh please, where was someone to glue his mouth together when he said that....

Thanks alot Bush, knows u care an all but pls do not say another word regaring out servicemenwomen, this will only imflame the situation even more.

you know what? This is just a classic case where bush is damned if he does and damned if he doesnt say somthing.

What did you expect him to say when the media keeps hustling him on this issue? # the brits? Would you preferred that? How about "I dont care"?

Iran doesnt dictate what we can and cant say. Its our right to speak freely. # Iran. Let them piss and moan about it. They are completely powerless as to stop us from saying and doing whatever the # we want..

While I do feel that a diplomatic approach should be used(i.e. an public apology or maybe some sort of border agreement) to get the soilders back, I don't get the feeling that Iran would seriously be open to anything along those lines. As stated before, this situation is being used as propaganda to bolster support from the surrounding Islamic nations and apparently it's working. I do feel offended at the fact that Iran thinks it can tell our president(even though I can't stand him)what he can and can't say. I guess they love the fact that they hold 15 soilders lives in their hands and are using it as leverage in their cause.
Maybe it is time to give our special forces and covert ops guys a workout?

Originally posted by Infra_red

Maybe it is time to give our special forces and covert ops guys a workout?

I suspect that this is what will wind up happening. I do think that Iran will eventually be reckoned with as a whole, but I don't think the tiome is just yet.

Anybody who believes the SAS weren't being briefed about this the moment it happened are deluded.

They would have been briefed on the possibilities while Mi6 was figuring out exactly where the Navy personell had been taken.

after a couple of days the location of the personell would be known and the SAS flown in.

They would be in the vicinity of the captaves gathering information and planning a rescue attempt.

If there was a sign that the captaves were in danger the SAS would then attempt a rescue. This would be seen by Iran as an official act of war so that is why is will only be done if the captaves are in imminent danger.

The British army do things differently! Unlike some other nations Britain will try to diffuse the situation diplomatically first.

you know what? This is just a classic case where bush is damned if he does and damned if he doesnt say somthing.

What did you expect him to say when the media keeps hustling him on this issue? # the brits? Would you preferred that? How about "I dont care"?

He could have chosen his words moe carefully, fgs..... he already knew that Blair wanted the US to stay quiet over the crisis not to inflame situation........

Using the word 'Hostages' inflames the situation...

Iran doesnt dictate what we can and cant say. Its our right to speak freely. # Iran. Let them piss and moan about it. They are completely powerless as to stop us from saying and doing whatever the # we want..

When did I say Iran did dictate anything the US say? Do not put words in my mouth which I have neither said nor either posted...

Western countries cowering over what some piss-ant wanna be big power mid-east backwards dump might think if they say something bad?

The sun sinks daily in the west, and the west sinks further.

Originally posted by RetinoidReceptor
.
I don't want war, but there is so much more that can be done.

What if they stop exporting oil? They won't, at least not for long as their whole economy is based on oil. And, other countries will start doing more as the prices go up, which will be a justification for war.

I don't know, these statements seem a little contradictory Retinoid, but it's possible that I'm just misunderstanding...wouldn't be the first time. In any event, do we really want to trump-up another justification for war here?

Stop Iranian oil exports and we'll have China, Japan, and Germany to deal with...their economies need oil too...Iranian oil. Bear in mind that Japan & China are Americas largest creditors. Having recently kicked sand in China's face, via trade sanctions (serious economic situation), I doubt we really want to go there. Also, the US economy, like the Iranian economy, is currently ill-equipped to absorb the inflationary consequences of oil shock.

I side with your perspective on the use of economic pressure. After all, in the final analysis...decisions governing the resolution of geopolitical events usually take shape on the economic chessboard...but it's a complex game...with each country applying their respective leverage. I think an oil blockade would, and should, be a measure of last resort.

I wish GWB could have kept the US on the sidelines awhile longer, but after rethinking the issue, I doubt he would have come forward publicly without first conferring with, or at least preparing the UK...but then again...Yee Haw!...he's the urban cowboy.

I'm sure all military contingencies are being reviewed, and Special Ops, (already thought to be operating in Iran), are prepared to do what they do best.

Peace &
Good Fortune
OBE1

While President Bush inflamed the situation(or not, is negotable at best), he simply called a duck a duck so to speak, ofcourse the Iranians are going to dislike it and try to 'spin' it to there advantage how ever skewed it may be/seem. Mr Bush spoke upon a world matter that has political ramifications, that is what Presidents and world leaders do. Anything he said or did not say would have been twisted in to an inflamitory act so I applaud him for "saying it like it is".

Iran is overstepping their bounds, pure and simple. And now they have put human lives at risk for the worlds stage to see outside the realm of military opp's or "justifiable force'. Daring anyone, expecially the USA, to "do something about it". This is not acceptable to me and should not be to anyone with a concern for a future. The more one 'survives' with this "Im untouchable" attitude, the more intollarable and devious one will become, and he has to be removed.

I'm as much against war as anyone and hope and prey a peaceful solution can/is reached but if the proper channels are not enough to keep Iran in check, and Iran continues this path of total disreguard, I will, for one, totally support the removal of Iran from the worlds stage via any means necessary.

There is too many problems with the world we ALL need to work together with/for. There is very little patience left for a hitler type dictator with visions of grandure and spite for western civilization. I think its time we all "call a duck a duck", set our selfish fears aside and progress with the taming of Iran. Not for ourselvs but for our childrens children..

Just my 2.

[edit on 2-4-2007 by HomeBrew]

[edit on 2-4-2007 by HomeBrew]

Okay, I like war about as much as Odium does, however, he's wrong in this case.

War is a painful thing, there is no doubt about that. However, like other painful activities, War can, and is, needed.

Comparably, War is like pulling an arrow out of your gut. It hurts like heck, but it has to be done or else you'll get infected and die.

Iran has chosen to be the arrow. Heck, the West would live with them peaceably if it could. However, since Iran has chosen to be the arrow, they have to be removed as a threat, or the entire world will fall.

Now, I'm not calling for the extermination of Iran as a country, unless it absolutely has to be done. All they need is an attitude adjustment. They need to stop choosing to be the arrow in the worlds gut before they get pulled out.

Originally posted by esdad71
Iran has commited an act of war. They have attacked the British consulate.

But the british navy was (allegedly) trespassing in Iranian borders and was taken into custody... The UK caused "first blood" in a sense...

I agree with you with giving them a dead-line (and actually doing something, if Iran chooses to ignore it). Iran got too much warnings, now they should learn to listen to warnings. Sanctions won't stop them from doing what they do... they'll eventually become self-sufficient during the time of isolation (like North Korea).

Originally posted by Odium
How many more thousands of Americans need to die to make you happy?

All I can say to shis type of question is... sacrifices are sometimes needed...

Kill one to save hundreds or even thousands, kill thousands to save millions.

And as for Iraq being a walk in the park... guerilla warfare is really hard to beat... and to some degree, impossible.