Irans capability and reasoning...

reply to post by CanadianDream420



I don’t care how many SCUDs or missiles or BIO Chemical weapons Iran has, No one compares to the Combine Military Might of US and G.B and our Allies. Will American Casualties be high, most certainly. But Iranian military and people will suffer more. In a war with Iran America wins, the war they fight against Iraq was a joke and ended in a tie after 8 years. we defeated Iraq twice, in four days and four weeks. ( Main Armies)

America's weakness is a guerilla war it is our Achilles Tendon, The VC did it and The Arabs in Iraq and Afghan have done it. Even though one can argue the war in Iraq has been won and The Afghan war is close to winding down....

Also Via HAMAS and HEZBOLLAH the Iranians can wage a terror war here in America and the west, so it will be interesting to see what goes down, I for one won’t fight as I have done my time In Iraq and Afghan and I am sick of war.

Good thread.

War is business, just as PT says. It is all about how to make more money (or, at least make more of it end up in certain peoples pockets).

I am surprised that our debt to China is actually as high as it is, considering that they benefited so heavily in the spoils of war.

But if another war is attempted, we will likely see a national uprising so fierce that our nation will be brought to its knees.

either that, or a false flag will ignite the powder keg in an increasingly restless and desparate society. This is a pwerful weapon when directed properly.

reply to post by CanadianDream420


I find your argument somewhat naive.

Why peace with the western world will never happen can be found in basic islamic law...

Sheikh Manna` K. Al-Qubtan, professor of Higher studies at the School of Islamic Law in Riyadh, indicates that:

Basically, the command of non-Muslims over Muslims in not admissible, because God Almighty said: 'Allah will not give access to the infidels (i.e. Christians) to have authority over believers (Muslims) [Qur'an 4:141]. For God - Glory be to Him - has elevated Muslims to the highest rank (over all men) and foreordained to them the might, by virtue of the Qurtanic text in which God the Almighty said: 'Might and strength be to Allah, the Prophet (Muhammad) and the believers (Muslims) [Qur'an 63:8].
Thus, the authority of non-Muslim over a Muslim is incompatible with these two verses, since the Muslim has to submit to and obey whoever is in charge over him. The Muslim, therefore becomes inferior to him, and this should not be the case with the Muslim.

Dr. Salih Al-Sadlan, professor of Shari`a at the School of Islamic Law, Riyadh, cites the same verses and asserts that it is not permissible for a infidel (in this case is a Christian) to be in charge over Muslims whether in the private or public sector. Such an act:

"entails the humiliaton of the Muslim and the exaltation of the infidel (Christian). This infidel may exploit his position to humiliate and insult the Muslims who work under his administration. It is advisable to the company owner to fear God Almighty and to authorize only a Muslim over the Muslims. Also, the injunctions issued by the ruler, provides that an infidel should not be in charge when there is a Muslim available to assume the command. Our advice to the company owner is to remove this infidel and to replace him with a Muslim."

Simply put. infidels cannot tell the Muslim people what to do, the very idea is offensive to them!
Rights of Non Muslims


Peace talks require compromise on both sides. America can and will compromise, but Iran, or rather its current leader cannot compromise, inasmuch as people hardly ever compromise their religion.

It could bear fruit, peace-talking to China, Russia or North Koria because they only want money and power. However if you see someone waving the Koran at you, he is giving you three options; 1. convert 2. die or kill him. I pittythe poor fool who waits to find a 4th option.

Sooner or later we will come to blows. Which fool wants to wait until they carry out their threat to hasten the return of the 12th Eamon, to gloat over our ashes. The Gipper warned us that we are never more than a generation away from loosing freedom. It is worse than that, we are no further away than one ULTIMATE WEAPON.
My definition of an ultimate weapon is a mad suicide bomber with nukes. mutually assured destruction won't be a deterrent.

Trust me when I say that will be one war party I do not want to be intived to

War can still be averted.

The Iranian people definately do not desire war, for they are intelligent to know what the stakes are. Bullets have no name in battles. Majority of them know that their election had been rigged, and an imposter sits on the throne.

The solution to peace lies with them. They must seek deep for that courage to rise up against the evil that will ruin their country. There is no glory in killing people as in terrorists acts, so called acts of vengence.

There will be no vengence needed if there are no wars. The gift of live is not meant to wage incessant wars and spilling of blood. The gift is to know the natural beauty of Earth, and revel in the love between family, relatives and friends. There is so much for humans in peace, but war will only destroy it all.

If I'm an Iranian, I would rather topple the leadership, than to fight for the nutheaded despots' desires. To go to war with the world, my chances of survival is zero. But to destroy those beasts that will ruin the country, I may have half a chance to survive, for the brainwashed obedient soldiers may kill hundred thousands of Iranians in an uprising, but they cannot kill ALL Iranians. Even if i were to die, others will live.

May diplomacy truimph so that no deaths be needed, or else, Charon will be making a killing ferrying the dead.



[edit on 23-4-2010 by SeekerofTruth101]

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


Stand up and fight against a corrupt government you say?

Do something about a rigged election you say?

Take a stance against terrorist acts you say?

Do you live in the U.S.?.......

This thing with Iran isn't going away. Soon all the role players will find an excuse to invade Iran and do what it did to Iraq and other countries before it.

reply to post by silent thunder


You know, I hadn't considered this. You make a very good point. A whole new generation of voters ignorant to the monumental balls up(s) of those just before them. Buying the story as told to them. It's a good thing we won in Vietnam because if we hadn't, MY generation would have never allowed war in the middle east. WE are smarter than that....

Not only do we not learn from our mistakes, we can't even learn from other's.

Originally posted by OZtracized
reply to post by silent thunder

 

You know, I hadn't considered this. You make a very good point. A whole new generation of voters ignorant to the monumental balls up(s) of those just before them. Buying the story as told to them. It's a good thing we won in Vietnam because if we hadn't, MY generation would have never allowed war in the middle east. WE are smarter than that....

Not only do we not learn from our mistakes, we can't even learn from other's.

We won in Vietnam??? Is that what Professor Beck is teaching these days?

Best,
Skunknuts

Originally posted by OZtracized
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

 

Stand up and fight against a corrupt government you say?

Do something about a rigged election you say?

Take a stance against terrorist acts you say?

Do you live in the U.S.?.......

What's your point? Are American citizens chanting 'death to jews, death to Iranians, death to non-americans?'

Do you have evidences that point to the current elected administration in a FREE and OPEN election of being corrupt, everyone of them?

Are american citizens going to overseas committing suicide bombings while screaming to them 'Allah Akbar!' ?

Is Iran attempting every diplomatic protoccol to stop supposed American aggression on it, instead of declaring outright defiance and stall to the international diplomatic community?

Do you live or work in Sadabad Palace, Iran?


2 can play the game but look, I bear you no malice, for you are just a nick in this annonymous world, just as I am. And I am sure you too have no wish for war and bloodshed to be inflicted on innocent men, women and children.

Let you and me find a common ground to stand on, as see if we can come up to solutions that can be relayed to our families, relatives and friends where real change can come.

If even you and I, ordinary joes, cannot even agree, then it is no wonder diplomacy failed and will continue to fail in the future.

The issue is Iran, and its alarming nuclear posture to its neighbours and world, not US, or Saudi Arabia or Israel.

[edit on 23-4-2010 by SeekerofTruth101]

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by CanadianDream420

 

I do not want to see any more deaths or killings, I've seen enough!
Iran, Most of the US forces he has mentioned have been tested.

I'll just say this.
PEACE!


[edit on 23-4-2010 by SLAYER69]

Peace!

I'm just amazed how very differently this war was reported on in the main stream media in different parts of the world. I have seen so many different styles and agendas on how this war was reported on to the public.

Here in this video we can hear the lady reporting in spanish in the end.

She says in Spanish:

"Remember that this is a city with a population of 5 millions residents - AND WE CAN ONLY IMAGINE THE HORROR AND FEAR which these people are living/going through, at this very moment!"

And here in this video we can see a listen to a more honest humanistic concern about the population of Baghdad, when reporting on these awful bombings - the female reporter is honestly very concerned about Baghdad's population and what they must feel in this terrible moment.

Whereas on FOX and other American news networks they were reporting completely different and sometimes also dehumanised the population of Iraq in their war propaganda efforts.

I watched both FOX and CNN International which I had from my cable provider during the war 2003 and it was sometimes very cold & clinical reporting as a part of the American war propaganda machine to not upset the American public with the real horrible picture of war.

Whereas in Europe and elsewhere the reporting were more focused on the human sufferering of the Iraq war, and showed us all the bombed out women and children and their horrible injuries on TV with no censorship - and none of this was reported on, or anything you could directly see/watch on FOX when I was watching.

And I think this was why the European public rapidly became more against the war - because here, they actually showed us all the effects of all those bombs - and we saw and heard the crying women and children on TV and saw the horrible photos of injured children in our newspapers.

It's very easy for the public to support a war in a distant foreign land if you never see the horrible consequences of the war.

But I guess the Pentagon rapidly learned their lesson from on how the TV-news were reporting from the Vietnam war, which swayed the American public to become anti-war after the effects and horror of the war came directly into the living-room of the American public.

Just my two €urocents and crappy analysis!


[edit on 23-4-2010 by Chevalerous]

Originally posted by toreishi
this just in

The Iranian television report said naval, air and ground units from the Guard were participating in the three-day games codenamed "The Great Prophet." It said the war games will witness the commissioning of what it described as an "ultra-speed" vessel called "Ya Mahdi" and a total of 313 speedboats with the capability of firing rockets and missiles also would participate.

Link

Interesting and telling how a country under the thumb of a muslim (religion of peace) theocracy chooses to name their war games "the Great Prophet" - a reference to the founder of the muslim religion Mohammed.

For comparison, has ANY western country named any of their military exercises "Jesus"?

Again, a telling example of what iran's real plans are ...

Originally posted by centurion1211

Again, a telling example of what iran's real plans are ...

So what are their plans?? Do you really think they are going to attack the US or Israel???

You are a sad victim of propaganda, my friend. Very sad.

Originally posted by OZtracized
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

 

Stand up and fight against a corrupt government you say?

Do something about a rigged election you say?

Take a stance against terrorist acts you say?

Do you live in the U.S.?.......

This is the best quote of the thread LOL

Originally posted by VendettaBeretta

Originally posted by centurion1211

Again, a telling example of what iran's real plans are ...

So what are their plans?? Do you really think they are going to attack the US or Israel???

You are a sad victim of propaganda, my friend. Very sad.

If I am "a sad victim of propaganda", it would be the propaganda spewing from iran.

For the true "victim", maybe you should check your mirror ...

Attack the U.S.? Quite possibly by proxy through terrorist organizations.

Attack Israel? Quite possibly - either by proxy (hezbollah), or directly as they have been saying should be done for quite some time.

Pull your head out of the sand before someone you could/should have seen coming kicks you in the a$$.

And your views on the "religion of peace" government of iran naming wargames after the founder of their religion? I'm sure it means nothing, right?

[edit on 4/23/2010 by centurion1211]

God this whole political/war/business is SO pathetic and human!
The Iranian people are just like us for the most part, they certainly do not deserve war, they have to tolerate a government that they do not even approve of or want. It's all just sad to me.

PEACE!

Originally posted by cindymars
God this whole political/war/business is SO pathetic and human!
The Iranian people are just like us for the most part, they certainly do not deserve war, they have to tolerate a government that they do not even approve of or want. It's all just sad to me.

PEACE!

Well, it's just too bad the iranian people don't have their fingers on the launch buttons and the government they don't approve of does.. Until they fix that, then things will be the way they are.

Now if you're also talking about the U.S. government. I thought all the peace-niks HAD in obama the government they wanted. But they all still love him ...

Even if the threat is minimal. Iran still gets a ton of military aid from Russia. And even the outdated Russian equipment can still devastate a large portion of the planet, should Iran get hold of weapons grade uranium and the capacity to launch A/Many warheads. US needs to stop threatening and either compromise or blow them off the planet.

reply to post by CanadianDream420


Some of us have known the obliviously ubiquitous necessity of getting involved with Iran, and putting a stop to their nuclear program was inevitable since at least the 1980's.

Back when Iraq and Iran were semi-friendly and definitely hostile towards the United States, our Government, and through the Central Intelligence Agency, figured out that Iran would and could do just about anything towards gaining nuclear capabilities.

The biggest difference between the 1980's and now is Oliver North is retired after falling on the sword for his Commander in Chief, Ronald Reagan, due to the Iran-Contra Affair and the Russian bear, the conglomerate of Communism has fallen.

If it had not been for us setting Iraq and Iran against each other, like Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum, those two countries would have solidified as a worthy adversary to replace their once master, Russia, and we might have never had the lame excuse for the Cold War, the rather crappy misnomer, to replace that sad excuse with the "War on Terror", to fund, fuel, and feed the Military Industrial Complex.

Personally, I say pull our troops out, quit sticking our collective assets into the Middle East, and let them all sort out the ruling of the wasteland, because if it were not for oil, the supplying of it, and the supplying of military weaponry, and as well rebuilding Iraq after kicking Saddam Hussein's butt, we have zero reason to be involved in the Middle Eastern politics of this area.

Oh wait, I almost forgot, yes, the Pentagon wants us there, in order to use Iraq and Iran as a staging ground, in order to leap upon Asia next, which is where the former Blackwater, now Xe comes into play, with getting thrown out of Iraq.

The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-first Century

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ce162ff8ff28.jpg[/atsimg]

Amazon Review :

This bold and important book strives to be a practical "strategy for a Second American Century."

In this brilliantly argued work, Thomas Barnett calls globalization "this country’s gift to history" and explains why its wide dissemination is critical to the security of not only America but the entire world.

As a senior military analyst for the U.S. Naval War College, Barnett is intimately familiar with the culture of the Pentagon and the State Department (both of which he believes are due for significant overhauls).

He explains how the Pentagon, still in shock at the rapid dissolution of the once evil empire, spent the 1990s grasping for a long-term strategy to replace containment.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Barnett argues, revealed the gap between an outdated Cold War-era military and a radically different one needed to deal with emerging threats.

He believes that America is the prime mover in developing a "future worth creating" not because of its unrivaled capacity to wage war, but due to its ability to ensure security around the world.

Further, he believes that the U.S. has a moral responsibility to create a better world and the way he proposes to do that is by bringing all nations into the fold of globalization, or what he calls connectedness.

Eradicating disconnectedness, therefore, is "the defining security task of our age."

His stunning predictions of a U.S. annexation of much of Latin America and Canada within 50 years as well as an end to war in the foreseeable future guarantee that the book will be controversial.

And that's good.

The Pentagon's New Map deserves to be widely discussed. Ultimately, however, the most impressive aspects of the book is not its revolutionary ideas but its overwhelming optimism.

Barnett wants the U.S. to pursue the dream of global peace with the same zeal that was applied to preventing global nuclear war with the former Soviet Union.

High-level civilian policy makers and top military leaders are already familiar with his vision of the future—this book is a briefing for the rest of us and it cannot be ignored.

--Shawn Carkonen

The Pentagon's New Map

(video is 1 hour 22 minutes, there's a 13 part version on YouTube)

And this is when and where the Council on Foreign Relations and as well policy think-tank's in Washington D.C., like the Project for the New American Century, among many others, comes into play.

Quote from : Wikipedia : Project for the New American Century

The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was an American think tank based in Washington, D.C. that lasted from early 1997 to 2006.

It was co-founded as a non-profit educational organization by neoconservatives William Kristol and Robert Kagan.

The PNAC's stated goal was "to promote American global leadership."

Fundamental to the PNAC were the view that "American leadership is both good for America and good for the world" and support for "a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity."

The PNAC exerted influence on high-level U.S. government officials in the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush and affected the Bush Administration's development of military and foreign policies, especially involving national security and the Iraq War.

This is nothing more than finding a reason to release funding from the Treasury through shaking the money-tree, which is Congress, to keep funding meaningless war.

Think about it for a moment, if you will, if the United States, and as well the United Nations, did not get ourselves directly and or indirectly involved in the politics of the Middle East, does anyone honestly believe we would need a reason to defend against terrorism and or extremists to begin with?

If not for the necessity and or blind ignorance and arrogance of impeding upon their sand, for oil, we would quite literally not still be at a state of war, in a rather stupid, ignorant, and arrogant carrying on of the Middle Ages modern day version of the Crusades, where religions causes religions to infringe upon religion.

[edit on 23-4-2010 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

reply to post by skunknuts


I must confess I was being sarcastic! The last line is the clue.

reply to post by CanadianDream420




In my first post I forgot to odd

S & F