Should the world form a colliation to attack Iran

How should the world deal with Iran

  • Diplomacy

    Votes: 50 47.2%

  • Collation for invasion

    Votes: 15 14.2%

  • Leave them be

    Votes: 34 32.1%

  • other

    Votes: 7 6.6%
  • Total voters
    106
CptStern said:
why not, they have nukes, the us could easily support them and bomb iran by proxy
Click to expand...
You know as well as I do that they would not use nukes, simply because using them would justify Irans position, and lastly why use nukes when conventional weapons would suffice.
 
CptStern said:
why not, they have nukes, the us could easily support them and bomb iran by proxy
Click to expand...
Because as far as I know it's not necessary to take the facilities out in a strike.

It's akin to killing a fly with a sledgehammer don't you think?
 
yes I agree but the US wants them inoperable, an airstrike would be the easiest way of going about it, plus it's the US' first tactic in any engagement: carpet bomb, soften targets, then send in ground forces to mop up


Grey Fox said:
You know as well as I do that they would not use nukes, simply because using them would justify Irans position, and lastly why use nukes when conventional weapons would suffice.
Click to expand...

nope:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060408/wl_mideast_afp/usirannuclearmilitary
 
CptStern said:
nope:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060408/wl_mideast_afp/usirannuclearmilitary
Click to expand...
Saw the story and it's probably one of dozens upon dozens of proposed plans to be honest. As with everything though- speculation.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060410/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iran_13

WASHINGTON - President Bush said Monday that force is not necessarily required to stop Iran from having a nuclear weapon, and he dismissed reports of plans for a military attack against Tehran as "wild speculation."
 
I think the US's first action is uber secret guyz lawl.
 
RakuraiTenjin said:
Saw the story and it's probably one of dozens upon dozens of proposed plans to be honest. As with everything though- speculation.
Click to expand...


I'd agree if there wasnt so much incidental evidence:

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/04/despite_denials.html

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/04/iran_send_in_th.html

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329458582-119093,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,1754307,00.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/14/AR2006041401907.html

http://today.reuters.com/news/artic...1_N15206081_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAN-USA-ARTICLE.xml

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1492642.cms


besides, bush isnt exactly very credible:

We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.

George Bush February 8, 2003
 
K e r b e r o s said:
Firey rhetoric thats meant to ignite another war in the middle east, and, words aside. He's stepping up his missle program. The Shahab-3 and Fajr-3 can carry WMD Warheads. The Fajr-3 specifically can carry multiple warheads, and can reach as far as Turkey.
Click to expand...

1. for 'fiery rhetoric' see bush prior to the iraq war
2. for 'igniting another ME war' see also bush (+ blair). iran has never attacked anyone
3. for 'stepping up missile program' see US expansion of so-called 'tactical' nuke capability, and recall that the US has 10,000 warheads already, many of which i would imagine can travel a lot further than turkey

These movements are'nt entirely warranting of diplomacy on his half. I want diplomacy as much as anyone. But this ... is a total step up to a war against Israel.
Click to expand...

1. are you forgetting that israel has already threatened to 'respond' to the iranian nuclear program (presumably the same way it 'responded' to the iraqi program in 1982)?
2. are you also forgetting that the warmongering most definitely began in washington not tehran?
3. why is it israel security matters more than anything in the ME? why should be secured at the expense of everyone else's security?
 
sorry for another tangential post but

They're more scared of us than we are of them.
Wait, that's bears...
Click to expand...
Nuke it from orbit.
Click to expand...
Tell Iran they smell like shit and need some god damn deoderant
Click to expand...
rupert said:
damn i'm glad i put the effort into that post.
Click to expand...

:laugh: :laugh: Funniest thing today... or the other day, whatever

Anyway, I don't know too much about the details of the situation, but I would say that in any administration, no matter how nuts, there are figures who are open to reason. Or if not that much, then there are those who appreciate that big explosions are rarely the most mutually beneficial outcome to a crisis. So yeah, don't count out diplomacy, and don't listen to those who prematurely say that diplomacy is done with.
 
Israel should be destroyed in one way or another since it does not belong to the Middle East. If you take a look round at the history of Middle East, you'll find that Israel is totally a joke. The land of Israel used to belong to Palestine. The first absurdity is the USA divided Palestine into two and erected a new regime called Israel. What will you feel if your country is subjected to the same treatment? Another absurdity is that the land given to Israel is Palestinian Holy Land. If ones' holy land had been unwillingly given to others, how can the people be calm? How can people there don't try to fight them back? I started to suspect the conflict in Middle East is an conspiracy of the USA.

Anyway, I am getting off the topic. Well, war is not that fun and easy. If we nuke Iran, they will surely nuke us back. The consequence is the radioactive fallout will mutate all of us and the nuclear winter will freeze us all. If we attack Iran, Iran will nuke us. We have no choice but nuke them back. The consequence is the same. Invasion is nothing but suicide.

Iran will not take the initiative in using nuke. The nuke is Iran's bargain power, they won't really use them even if they have nuclear warhead or nuclear warheads. They are just for bargain. Iran is trying to earn a more significant position in the politics stage, not nuking anyone or any country. Nothing to fear of unless some other country attacks first. The best way for the US to duel with it is by diplomacy. Nothing more.

p.s. Having nuclear is nothing wrong. If we invade Iran because it has nuke, all countries should gather together and invade the USA first since it has the most number of nuke and the USA is a terrible country.
 
No, however, all the terrorist organizations in the world should form a coalition to detonate nuclear bombs in all the major cities in the world triggering a nuclear winter followed by a nuclear summer that'll kill off like 99.9% of mankind!
 
Gargantou said:
No, however, all the terrorist organizations in the world should form a coalition to detonate nuclear bombs in all the major cities in the world triggering a nuclear winter followed by a nuclear summer that'll kill off like 99.9% of mankind!
Click to expand...

100% as such. And there is no nuclear summer.

Anyway, terrorists are not going to make human extinct. That's not their target.
 
bbson_john said:
100% as such. And there is no nuclear summer.

Anyway, terrorists are not going to make human extinct. That's not there target.
Click to expand...
1st, refeering to your statement about nuclear summer. You should STFU about what you don't know, sorry to be come off as a jerk but I'm sick of people like that, its not your fault you're not as into nuclear warfare and it's effect on the world as me. A nuclear summer is just as real as nuclear winter, I quote.

"A Nuclear summer is a hypothetical scenario resulting from nuclear warfare that would follow a nuclear winter. In this scenario, the amount of water in the stratosphere would increase, causing greenhouse warming of the surface. The nuclear detonations would also produce oxides of nitrogen that would then deplete the ozone layer around the Earth. This layer screens out UV-B radiation from the Sun, which causes genetic damage to life forms on the surface. Possibilities of any existing species to survive in this extreme condition will be less. The absorption of ozone also results in a heating of the stratosphere, which results in a further contribution to greenhouse heating."

Also, I doubt all of mankind would die, I think atleast a few people would survive, but with horrible mutations, but if they survived they'd probably become the new dominant race.:)

2nd, yes I am fully aware of that and I was just having some fun.:laugh:
 
Gargantou said:
"A Nuclear summer is a hypothetical scenario resulting from nuclear warfare that would follow a nuclear winter. In this scenario, the amount of water in the stratosphere would increase, causing greenhouse warming of the surface. The nuclear detonations would also produce oxides of nitrogen that would then deplete the ozone layer around the Earth. This layer screens out UV-B radiation from the Sun, which causes genetic damage to life forms on the surface. Possibilities of any existing species to survive in this extreme condition will be less. The absorption of ozone also results in a heating of the stratosphere, which results in a further contribution to greenhouse heating."
Click to expand...
It was the first time I heard of that. Thanks for your information.
 
bbson_john said:
Israel should be destroyed in one way or another since it does not belong to the Middle East. If you take a look round at the history of Middle East, you'll find that Israel is totally a joke. The land of Israel used to belong to Palestine. The first absurdity is the USA divided Palestine into two and erected a new regime called Israel. What will you feel if your country is subjected to the same treatment? Another absurdity is that the land given to Israel is Palestinian Holy Land. If ones' holy land had been unwillingly given to others, how can the people be calm? How can people there don't try to fight them back? I started to suspect the conflict in Middle East is an conspiracy of the USA.
Click to expand...
First off, the US didn't split Palestine, the UN did. Secondly, while I agree that it was wrong to create back in '48, that doesn't justify the destruction of the sate now, almost 60 years later. Israel is there and you might as well accept it. The best would, of course, be if the Palestinians and the Israelis could learn to live together in peace and share the land as brothers and sisters, but that's not possible, at least not in the nearest future.
 
I don't know if I'm just super naive or whatever, but...if they say they're just developing nuclear power, why can't we just believe them?
 
because that's just a smokescreen ...just like WMD was with Iraq ..the neo-cons have wanted in for awhile now:

from Rebuilding America's Defenses, 2000:

Project for New American Century said:
while the unresolved conflict in Iraq provides the immediate justification [for US military presence], the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein" and "Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.-Iranian relations improve, retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region
Click to expand...

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
 
bbson_john said:
It was the first time I heard of that. Thanks for your information.
Click to expand...
Yeah, sorry to come off as aggressive, I've had a rough day.
 
I wouldnt feel bad if those facilities suddenly "blew up", since Iran + Nuclear technology gets me nervous..
But, i'm against any form of an invasion as it would further alienate and polarise the western -> middle-east world, and it would also kill alot of innocent Iranian people.
If military action would be the only way, and "actual proof comes :P" they're planning to build Nukes i'd say via a coalition would be best, and just get those facilities down and leave the rest of the country.
 
Ome_Vince said:
I wouldnt feel bad if those facilities suddenly "blew up", since Iran + Nuclear technology gets me nervous..
But, i'm against any form of an invasion as it would further alienate and polarise the western -> middle-east world, and it would also kill alot of innocent Iranian people.
If military action would be the only way, and "actual proof comes :P" they're planning to build Nukes i'd say via a coalition would be best, and just get those facilities down and leave the rest of the country.
Click to expand...


you dont get it, most of you dont get it ..the US wants to use nuclear weapons because they say all offensive nuke programmes are miles underground. The only way they say they'll take it out is if they use nuclear bunker busters ..can no one see the irony here?
 
yeah, that is ****ed up :S
"We dont want them to get nukes, so lets use nukes" :P

Now its only a matter of time before "proof" pops up :)
 
:O omg
although i doubt the US would actually use nuclear warheads.. although on the other hand... Bush ... + .... Nukes...
*flees to find shelter
 
and? why would they change their use of nuclear weapons protocols if they're not at least exploring the idea of nuclear strikes?

Washington Post said:
The Pentagon has drafted a revised doctrine for the use of nuclear weapons that envisions commanders requesting presidential approval to use them to preempt an attack by a nation or a terrorist group using weapons of mass destruction. The draft also includes the option of using nuclear arms to destroy known enemy stockpiles of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.
Click to expand...
 
KoreBolteR- said:
diplomacy then if not. invade.
Click to expand...


what gives them the right? pre-emptive strikes are illegal ..any invading army would be guilty of war crimes ..you'd think the world would have learned it's lesson after Iraq ..it's the exact same situation again ...although this time it wont be contained in just iran:

U.S. intelligence and terrorism experts say this might be Iran's response:

"As tensions increase between the United States and Iran, U.S. intelligence and terrorism experts say they believe Iran would respond to U.S. military strikes on its nuclear sites by deploying its intelligence operatives and Hezbollah teams to carry out terrorist attacks worldwide.

Iran would mount attacks against U.S. targets inside Iraq, where Iranian intelligence agents are already plentiful, predicted these experts. There is also a growing consensus that Iran's agents would target civilians in the United States, Europe and elsewhere, they said."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/01/AR2006040100981.html


so more innocent people will die for the greed of a few:


from 2000:

"while the unresolved conflict in Iraq provides the immediate justification [for US military presence], the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein" and "Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.-Iranian relations improve, retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region


it's all just a smokescreen for a land grab
 
So you don't even think for a second that Iran could be building nuclear warheads?
 
they're 10 years away of making even a single nuke ..the US has 3000 x that amount at the ready ..it's idiotic to think they'd use their one nuke as a suicide machine ..any response would get them instantly incinerated without much opposition from the rest of the world

..why dont you seem to care that israel has been secretly (not much of a secret) making it's own nuclear program for years?
 
yes they did ...that's the thing, they still havent been accounted for ....you have to ask yourself why they havent


the US estimates israel has over 200 nukes
 
Honestly, Iran is being kind of a bitch
They better hope the US doesn;t get drunk or anything
 
For the first time, i'm actually "scared" of the future :(...

@the nuke issue. Nukes funny enough arent build to be used. Israel wont use its nukes, as will Iran (if it ever gets em). Its all to get a "stale-mate" (<--that how you spell it?) position thats all.
Israel got nukes so now it can be sure the Arab nations wont attempt to anihilate them. Iran wants nukes to be sure its safe from invasion ( like north korea).
Funny thing is: nukes means you're safe from invasion...
 
DeusExMachina said:
Well Israel better get on the ball and let the IEA in there.
Click to expand...




they wont

...they vetoed an attempt back in 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1987, etc etc etc


icarusintel: glad you can be so flippant about it ..when the time comes it will people like you dying in a foreign land not the ones who make the decision to invade
 
CptStern said:
icarusintel: glad you can be so flippant about it ..when the time comes it will people like you dying in a foreign land not the ones who make the decision to invade
Click to expand...
Man, you need to lighten up some, and listen to a little Dane Cook. What I said is an obvious reference to one of his skits.

Seriously though, I'm not really worried about Iran. I think the whole thing will sort itself out if we leave it alone. Besides, they're still a little ways off from producing a nuke. And last I checked they're way behind on catching up to any country, including North Korea. I say we leave it alone, but if they start threatening to use nukes then they will need to be taught a lesson. Of course, I'd say we put Israel on the lead for it.

And if it comes down to us fighting over there, well, if I think we're over there for the right reasons I won;t mind fighting.
 
Icarusintel said:
And if it comes down to us fighting over there, well, if I think we're over there for the right reasons I won;t mind fighting.
Click to expand...

you have no say in the matter, you will fight regardless
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Shyam
Abbas Submits Palestinian Request For Statehood To The UN.
Replies
37
Views
5K
15357
15357
CptStern
Like Iraq, US Intel on Iran Faulty
Replies
35
Views
2K
PortalStormzzzz
PortalStormzzzz
Adrik_Senturu
Welcome to Judge Rotenberg Center where we torture the mentally handicapped!
Replies
31
Views
2K
Raziaar
Raziaar
Warped
Whew!
Replies
1
Views
712
Shem
Shem
N
Iran caught red-handed shipping weapons to the Taliban
3 4 5
Replies
163
Views
10K
kathaksung
K
Back
Top