Russian Leader Calls For Urgent Delivery Of Anti-aircraft Missile Systems To Iran

Originally posted by Pellevoisin

Originally posted by Vanguard223
reply to post by Pellevoisin

 

Yeah, but the attack on Pearl Harbor, the rape of Nanking and the Bataan death march are all A-OK with you, right? The big, bad America is the problem, right?

Absolutely not. Pearl Harbor goes as much into FDR's box as in Imperial Japan's box. As for Nanking and Bataan, those are to the shame of Imperial Japan.

As with most assertions claiming the numbers of casualties from a land invasion justifying the use of nuclear bombs, they are baseless and beneath contempt. Civilian populations are never to be declared enemy combatants and killed or simply chalked up as collateral damage. The USA only recognises this as truth when its own civilians are killed.

Wrong....destroying population centers was how war was waged in WWII and all wars before that. Was it brutal? Yes. Was it effective? Yes. Striking at population centers destroys enemy moral and their manufacturing base. It's not and wouldn't be acceptable today (except by radical muslims) so we don't do it now. It was standard operating procedure in WWII for all countries envolved. Are you saying that Germany or Japan wouldn't have dropped an A-bomb on New York if they had the chance in WWII?

[edit on 7-9-2007 by Vanguard223]

[edit on 7-9-2007 by Vanguard223]

Originally posted by Vanguard223 Are you saying that Germany or Japan wouldn't have dropped an A-bomb on New York if they had the chance in WWII?

It is so strange to watch US Americans become the very thing they hate.

Ends never justify means.

Originally posted by deltaboy
O you that brave enough to kill couple of young ten year old boys and girls head on? Bravo for you.

Of course, I never said any such thing.

Since the US American government doesn't care about 10 year old boys and girls being killed in Iraq, Afghanistan or in its own minority population at home, I suspect killing them indiscriminately in Iran with bombs from above will pass their peculiar moral calculus -- borrowed as it is from the old Soviet Union and the Third Reich.

The ghost of Mossadegh continues to haunt all of this as the Russians race in to help the Iranians before the USA et. al. rush in.

Originally posted by TruthWithin
The financial markets obviously have a GREAT stake in what the US posture is towards Iran. They are watching this situation closely because the result will have a dynamic impact on the price, currency and trade of oil. Also, if a conflict comes to fruition the tech and industrial stocks will be wildly affected, as they normally do in a new war time. It is possible that, at this point, only a war could pull the markets out of the mortgage slump.

The problem right now is the credit bubble, most economies float on loans, so the bubble is going to explode, it could take another decade but probably not even a year..
The banks have little trust in one another whether or not they will get their loans back in a specific timelime. Do you really think another billion dollar war[with lent money] would do any good to the budgetdeficit, the liquidity of the banks? also the mortgage banks, and foreign banks.
Maybe some tech/industrial stocks get a boost, but please: a blockade in the gulf, skyrocketing oil/gas prices not to mention the dumping of dollars and treasuries..[maybe even taking place right now]..
Injecting money into the markets only postpones the situation, loaning more money for a war doesnt solve anything, war doesnt solve anything, Us and Irian diplomats should get their asses to some nice lodge in Scandinavia[like the Iraqi's doing right now] and talk it out, just like the Irish did, [and look what a government they have right now.]
Since they're not planning to invade and topple the regime, this war wouldnt produce any money[at least in Iraq they could influence some market issues such as the petro/euro/dollar and the oil contracts].

FOr the poeple how dont believe Iran already has the s-300 systems

eldib.wordpress.com...


www.janes.com...

The source added Iran has also disclosed plans to acquire at least 50 Pantsyr-S1E systems and is currently now exploring potential options to realise this. He additionally confirmed that Iran has now acquired at least two longer-range S-300PMU-1/2 Favorit (SA-10c/d 'Grumble') air-defence systems.

[edit on 7-9-2007 by Foppezao]

Just to clear up a few things about the use of atomic weapons in WWII, for those who seem to think they know alot and denigrate those who disagree. Basically what it came down to was pure mathematics, would using thse weapons bring the war to a sooner end therefore saving lives on both sides, the answer is obviously yes.
Any land invasion would have resulted in immense loss of life on both sides, far more than the deaths the 2 atomic bombs wrought. In the scheme of things the 200 000 people who died were but a small percentage of the total loss of life ( only about 2/3's of the Chinese killed in one city called Nanking over a 3 week period)in the Asian theater in WWII.

Were the Japanese willing to negotiate surrender, the argument can be made for that. They made aproaches to the Soviets to try and contact the Americans, the SOviets turned them down. Hardly the the refusal of America. What should also be noted is that teh Japanese military didn't ant to surender even after the 2nd bomb. There was possible talk of a coup against the Emporer when he agrred to surrender.

Bottom line is, after th Americans were victorious, they built a better and far more prosperous country out of the ruins of Japan. A ruin the Japanese brought upon themselves mind you.

PS. Forgot, Pellevoisin you should really learn about more about what you are trying to argue.

Originally posted by Pellevoisin
Of course, I never said any such thing.

Since the US American government doesn't care about 10 year old boys and girls being killed in Iraq, Afghanistan or in its own minority population at home, I suspect killing them indiscriminately in Iran with bombs from above will pass their peculiar moral calculus -- borrowed as it is from the old Soviet Union and the Third Reich.

Wow you forgot to mention Japan's indiscriminate bombing. But I guess you just interested in any action by the U.S.

Originally posted by deltaboy
Well that pretty much makes sense. Land on the shores of Japan kids have the right to get their hands on weapons and start kiling Yankees that land on the beach. Nuke them and its unjustified.

I'll just take my chance on bombing from the air than face kids willing to kill me.

I doubt anyone will be surprised by that statement.

Does this mean Russia is supporting "terrorism"?

Originally posted by NuclearPaul
Does this mean Russia is supporting "terrorism"?

How do you mean ? Are you saying that the IRGC will hvae control over the missiles, a designated terrorist group by teh US government.

Originally posted by The_Coo


Would these anti-aircraft missile systems make much of a diffrence to a US attack on IRAN? Seems as if RUSSIA wouldnt just sit back and watch IRAN being hammered into the gground.

www.nasdaq.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Russia and Iran have a mutual defense treaty, it is only correct that they should honour it.

I wonder what insanity is causing the US to provoke Iran and thereby Russia, it seems as if US policy makers WANT the US on the brink of war with these countries and I don't see that the US military is in any way strong enough for the task or that their alliances are strong enough to withstand it.

[edit on 8-9-2007 by JimmyBlonde]

More like Russian leader wants fast sale to Iran while they are still a viable client state, and is still dumb enough to believe the russian air defense systems will save them.

Russian tech= fluff.

Originally posted by Pellevoisin

Originally posted by deltaboy
O you that brave enough to kill couple of young ten year old boys and girls head on? Bravo for you.

Of course, I never said any such thing.

Since the US American government doesn't care about 10 year old boys and girls being killed in Iraq, Afghanistan or in its own minority population at home, I suspect killing them indiscriminately in Iran with bombs from above will pass their peculiar moral calculus -- borrowed as it is from the old Soviet Union and the Third Reich.

The ghost of Mossadegh continues to haunt all of this as the Russians race in to help the Iranians before the USA et. al. rush in.

You are such a tool. If the USA didn't care about civilian deaths the iraq war would be over and the insurgency would have been crushed.

Name a country that doesn't have blood on its hands, most have far more the the USA.

You got to love those noble russians, rushing to "aid" iran...lmao

[edit on 8-9-2007 by dmxny]

Originally posted by dmxny
Name a country that doesn't have blood on its hands, most have far more the the USA.

Switzerland
New Zealand
Canada
Ice Land
Finland
I could come up with a lot more examples of countries with relatively blood free hands.

Truth is, the US has had an unusually violent history in the modern era, being involved in more wars than any other nation on Earth since WWII.

Isn't it obvious what Russia is doing, showing America and their supporters that it is not going to sit and watch how the world goes under American control.
I think every clever country would have done the same, those things called "democracy" by US and its supporters is just hogwash.
If i was a president of USSR and knew that this was to happen, i would have bombed US long ago..
treat others the way you want to be treated yourself

BitRaiser
Finland doesn't have blood on their hands ?
starting with vikings up to Soviet Union times it was fighting

[edit on 8-9-2007 by silencee]

Originally posted by dmxny
More like Russian leader wants fast sale to Iran while they are still a viable client state, and is still dumb enough to believe the russian air defense systems will save them.

Russian tech= fluff.

Funny, that "fluff" kept the world living in fear of instant annihilation for 50 years and is responsible for the magnitude and modernity of today's US military...

Don't forget that the next generation of Russian technology is coming out of the factories now and it won't be long before the capabilities of this new Russian military are better known.

I did a long page on it yesterday On ALL the dirty stuff going on...

Like the delivery of the SS-N-26 Yakhont to Iran by Russians as reported in the Jerusalem Post on Aug 28th, 2007....
www.jpost.com...

MY hairy scary article is here
www.anomalicresearch.com...

reply to post by BitRaiser


Canadians have been in Afghanistan supporting N.A.T.O for some time now. Killing tali ban scum just as much as anyone and I'm glad for that.
Just because a country is to small to provide any force projection doesn't mean they are not in the game.

The Kremlin never does anything in a rush.

Big Z is the court jester... he entertained the West for years
with his outrageous outbursts... while Putin slowly and silently
took all power.

not many people can even fathom the absolute might of the US military, everything thinks its stretched out in iraq, and yes there would be a draft if there was major escalation in the middle east, its not just about energy it about our way of life.