Welcome to PatsFans.com

Does anyone still doubt Iran is a threat?

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Turd Furguson, Feb 16, 2006.

  1. Turd Furguson

    Turd Furguson Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

  2. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Nope, dont doubt it at all. Be scared. Be very, very scared.
  3. Terry Glenn is a cowgirl

    Terry Glenn is a cowgirl Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    7,883
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Actually, Russia is holding Iran's hand...but then again. Whatever I say is just a wacko alert.
  4. Turd Furguson

    Turd Furguson Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Oh I dont doubt that. Putin is definately in bed with Iran. That could foul things up with the UN Security Council. Then again SOMETHING always fouls things up in the UN Security Council.
  5. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,650
    Likes Received:
    113
    Ratings:
    +142 / 1 / -4

    Iran became a threat as a result of the Iraq war. It had a fairly moderate government but the people, afraid of the United States, voted in an extremist government. If you scare people enough, they will elect fools as leaders, as we did. Further, Iran is a more serious threat because we took out their biggest regional enemy, Iraq, and are helping to unify the Shiite population of the region.

    It's interesting that Bush hasn't even imposed unilateral sanctions on Iran yet. Maybe Rove is waiting until a more strategic time to stoke up the fear machine and rally the paranoid right.

    That said, eventually something will have to be done, perhaps a targeted attack on Iran's nuclear facilities to slow down their program, but for now I agree with Rice's $75 million propaganda campaign, though I can't believe that amount of money is enough.
  6. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,650
    Likes Received:
    113
    Ratings:
    +142 / 1 / -4

    Some people do react badly to your posts; but others find them curious and even interesting. Unlike the rest of us, you don't have a mainstream point of view, but that's what makes your posts refreshing.
  7. Turd Furguson

    Turd Furguson Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I think thats unfair Patters. Iran did not just suddenly wake up the morning after the Iraq war began and said "Death to Israel, Death to America"

    They've been a threat for some time now and their latest quest to jump start their nuclear program only now brings them to the forefront.

    I believe that their populace (especially the youth) are more moderate but that the government has been run by the extremists.

    I also believe that while Iran is a giant threat, look at the countries that surround them; Iraq, Afghanistan and Turkey, All countries that are now somewhat hostile towards them and/or have a U.S military presence.


    I think Bush believes that the UN CANNOT ignore Iran's threat as it is much much clearer than Iraq's was. And their nuclear facilities are I believe, spaced out and even underground as they learned Iraq's lesson after Israel bombed their capabilities to hell.
  8. sdaniels7114

    sdaniels7114 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    5,742
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Pretend that there's a sensible government in Iran for just a moment. In a little more than 10 years they have watched the USA's magnificent military slap their greatest enemy around like a red-headed step-child not once but twice. The enemy that they fought a 10 year war with that ended in a stalemate. Isn't a 10 year stalemate pretty conclusive evidence that the two combatants were evenly matched? And would it therefore be safe to say that since our military rolled over Iraq's like it wasn't even there mean that the same could happen to Iran at any time? Now ask yourself if it really seems so weird, so provocative that they want to acquire the one weapon that we can't defend against.
  9. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,098
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Errr...no. Iran would actually put up a defense, and a pretty tough one at that by all reasonable estimates. The Iraq we rolled through was a shell of its previous military as a reult of the Iran-Iraq war, not to mention the Gulf War and post-war inspections, sanctions and routine bombings of their air defenses.

    Iran has had no such softening. BUt I think I get your point, and I agree. They fear the worst, have seen the worst next door, and are preparing for it.
  10. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,650
    Likes Received:
    113
    Ratings:
    +142 / 1 / -4

    I agree with you, but Iran was making inroads towards moderation. Their last government was reasonably moderate, though hardliners still held control of the military and maybe the courts, so the moderates didn't really have that much power. The real solution to all this is an international treaty that denies any country the right to have nuclear weapons, but I don't think the big powers will give up their advantage. The key now is to take whatever diplomatic and nonmilitary steps we can to try to avoid a confrontation. So far we're doing that, and the fact that we're launching a propaganda campaign suggests to me that no military action is imminent.
  11. gomezcat

    gomezcat It's SIR Moderator to you Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    3,551
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    http://www.globalfirepower.com/iran_detail.asp

    Turd, I don't think anyone thought that Iran isn't a potential threat. What puzzled people is how Bush and Blair read the evidence available to them and came to the conclusion that we should effectively strengthen Iran by taking out Saddam. As Patters said, it also reinforced the message to moderate Iranians that they should prepare to defend themselves. Does that mean that we should attack them at the moment? I'd say no.
    Others on the board with real knowledge have suggested that Iran's facilities would be well-buried and bomb proof, at least to conventional weapons. After all, they saw what the Israelis did to Osirak.
    I think we can put enough frighteners on the current Iranian government to make sure that they don't use nukes, though. There is only one outcome of a nuclear attack by Iran or one of the groups that they support.They know that the US would obliterate them.
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2006
  12. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,098
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I'll bet Cheney has already mulled the nuclear option- and I wouldn't put it past these criminals to do just that.
  13. PatsFanInEaglesLand

    PatsFanInEaglesLand Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,785
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +77 / 5 / -7

    #37 Jersey

    No I believe that was your boy, Jacque Chirac, who put the nuclear option out there. But hey a little more liberal BS can't hurt this forum it is already drowned with it.
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2006
  14. Turd Furguson

    Turd Furguson Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I dont want imminent military action as long as the International community can lay the law down to Iran and make Iran believe that should they continue they WILL get butchslapped.

    The question at hand is will the U.N have the balls to say what they mean and mean what they say?

    History tells us one answer....
  15. Turd Furguson

    Turd Furguson Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I'm guessing each administration mulls the nuclear option on a number of countries for the simple purpose of feasibility, preparedness, outcome etc.......


    Much like each administration has to draw up war plans for a number of nations for that "just in case" scenario of preparedness.
  16. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,098
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Good point. Will we shut down Gitmo? Or is the UN only relevant when we say it is?

    But more to the point, here's one good reason why we need to be careful about Iran. We were lied to before, all bets are off now.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-niger17feb17,0,6889656.story
  17. Turd Furguson

    Turd Furguson Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    If we did in fact, shut down Gitmo, where would we put all those Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters who were captured on the battlefield?

    We wouldnt want to pull a Bill Clinton laying the pressure of the Oslo Accords down on Israel insisting that they release ALL their prisoners, not just the political ones and then having one prisoner in particular (Mohammed Atta) pay us back by flying a jetliner into Tower 1 of the WTC would you?
  18. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,098
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    If there's too much "liberal BS" in the world around you, maybe its you that is in the fringe minority? http://poll.gallup.com/content/default.aspx?ci=21472

    PFEIL, if you can't engage in the discussion in a civil manner, why don't you go get your shinebox?
  19. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,098
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    True. But not all countries were publicly identified as the axis of evil.
  20. Turd Furguson

    Turd Furguson Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I'm pretty sure those three were identified for a reason.


    We are talking about a country who openly supports and sponsors terrorist groups like Hezbollah after all.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>