Like machette said = Britain came to U.S.A saying how they were worried, but the U.S did everything.

As an example the UK supported the US in Iraq, but before were pushing Bush not to invade like he did and make him go through the UN, this will probaly be the situation again here if Bush gets impatient.

And unlike you i dont support the leader of my country (even though blair has a partial brain unlike bush), i didnt vote for him, i voted liberal democrats.

Why are you leaving the UN out, they are also playing a role in this. Numerous big european countries have become involved

Uhh, who does need nuclear arms. eek:

yes but the UN didnt invade Iraq did it? sleeping:

It was a British company(The British Petroleum Company aka BP.) that controlled the oil in Iran. (The British government, at the impetus of Winston Churchill, First Lord of the Admiralty, partly nationalised the company in 1913 in order to secure British-controlled oil supplies for its ships.) When Iran refused an offer for larger revenues(aka oil profits) but instead wanted controlling interest in the company itsself.(this is after already signing a 60 year agreement on the oil) Iran then decided to renig on the deal and nationalize the entire oil industry in Iran. That then totally fucked Iran because no one wanted to buy their oil and their export markets were closed to them and the plant was closed.

US had no hand in this problem at all until the UK came home crying to big brother that the big bad bully took his candy. The US's major concern was Iran getting chummy with then rival USSR and decide to intervene.

I also voted democrat in the last election. Do I agree with all of Bush's actions? No I don't. However I do see that action needed to be taken and will support him none the less.

Sadaam Hussein Attempted to invade and control another country and was beaten back. He then was killing his own people who he determined "non superior"

Last guy that did that was named Hitler when he decided to invade and control several countries, bomb the living shit out of the UK, and exterminated millions of Jews(which I guess you believe is also a myth now, seeing your new found support for Iranian govt.)

None of the Pussy UN countries were crying then when we were bailing there ass out then.

At the point and time the UN is a complete joke.

wtf does that have to do with anything? We are talking about Iran, not Iraq.

going to bed, to be continued.

BTW wtf are you doing up stat its like fucking 5:30 in the morning in the UK, dont you have something better to do than argue diplomacy.

[quote:6d150]Sadaam Hussein Attempted to invade and control another country and was beaten back. He then was killing his own people who he determined "non superior"

Last guy that did that was named Hitler when he decided to invade and control several countries, bomb the living shit out of the UK, and exterminated millions of Jews(which I guess you believe is also a myth now, seeing your new found support for Iranian govt.)

None of the Pussy UN countries were crying then when we were bailing there ass out then.
[/quote:6d150]

Comparing Iraq to the second world war effort againt Nazi Germany shows just how fucking dumb you are.

And the particular point of contention in the over throw of the Iranian Government was the nationisation of the Oil Companies, and dont think the US had no hand in this and just did it as a favour as after they threw over the government the BP Oil company lost alot of its monopoly on the oil to guess who? 5 major US oil companies, that then operated in Iran so dont try to make it sound so fucking innocent the US had more to gain from over throwing them hence they are the ones that did it.

Im up at nearly 6am because suffer from insomnia and i cannot stop playing mario sunshine.

why do you fucking think Iraq was invaded? For WMDs that didnt exist remember? And the situation in Iran is for what? Irans WMDs in the form of nuclear weapons that dont exist.

Iraq invaded for other reasons as well, reasons that prominent libs acknowledged before the war started, so don't think go around yelling that George Bush is a liar, it's not valid as far as I am concerned.

I'm done arguing this issue, we'll see what happens soon and who gets involved, maybe if the French get involved then you will be satisfied, you'll have all the pussies finally trying to do something.

prominent libs are not good enough, Bush himself and other major people in government clearly laid out they were going there for WMDs, then when none were found oh well they went there to free the Iraqi people, spare me the bullshit and excuses.

And pussies because they actually try to resolve things legally through the UN rather than getting impatient and invading a country for the wrong reason then fucking it up? Please sleeping:

freeing the iraq people was on the list of reasons before we went in.

no, pussies because they try to be so idealistic like a disney movie that they refuse to acknowledge anything needs to be done.

If things are legal through the UN, why aren't you bitching about how the UN is going to get involved over Iran? I don't understand how you use the UN as a standard on Iraq but not on Iran now.

How is it "fucking dumb" to compare hitler to sadaam. They have the same beliefs and actions(experimintation/tourture/murder of humans, though Sadaams on a smaller level) The only difference is that Sadaam didn't do us a favor like Hitler and kill himself, we had to go back 10 years later and finish the job that should have been completed by Bush senior. Yes the WMD issue is rediculous, but we already had reason to finish what was started.

I'm sure that if Hitler had survived we would have let him just go back to ruling Germany.

Iran already makes more than enough energy to sustain its country as it is. there is no need for nuclear energy.

I do believe the UN is the right way to go if they believe they have a problem, but there isnt, it is the Countries like US, UK, Russia, Germany whining to the UN where whatever happens will happen, but I dont believe they should as Sanctions will do nothing but harm the Iran population and make Oil prices go up, when Iran hasnt done anything wrong in the first place. And if the UN was used properly before Bush side stepped it maybe they might of found out there were no fucking WMDs in the first place, meaning no war, meaning no lies, meaning no loss of life.



stfu you have no proof of this, and like many other countries Iran has a right to go after energy that doesnt involve fossil fuels.

And the whole hitler-saddam thing i wont even argue about as it is just so astronomically stupid that i cannot take you serious.

eek: ed: stupid:

Saying something is a bit different then doing something, you know like saying you are invading Iraq for WMDs then, oh no actually saying you invaded for regime change sleeping:

Hitler is the pioneer of modern electioneering techniques.

Gotta love a guy who did it legally...hell the constitution in the end was the loophole that led to his dictatorship.

Though I don't see how Saddam should be thorally compared to Hitler as I get shit everytime I compare people to Hitler.

Yeah, ok. Whe a country says, "I'm gonna bomb the hell out of you until your existance is over."...doesn't that ring off a bell that something may not be right. And they HAVE done numerous things...such as disregarding the UN in the first place.

Gotta love when people put some much faith in the UN yet don't care when people ignore it. ie: Iraq, Iran, etc.


And once again, WMDs was not the only reason we wanted to invade Iraq, other reasons were given BEFORE we invaded!

Iran bans CNN, I love it. happy:

[quote=c312]Gotta love when people put some much faith in the UN yet don't care when people ignore it. ie: Iraq, Iran, etc.


And once again, WMDs was not the only reason we wanted to invade Iraq, other reasons were given BEFORE we invaded![/quote:23a75]

Iran ignoring it as they have will be dealt with, but ignoring the UN and illegally invading Iraq like the Coalition forces did is not the way unlike your feable mind believes.

And these WMDs that didnt exist were the major conflict issue as to Iraqs invasion, maybe Oil aswell but heck i dont see America invading North Korea, Zimbabwe, China etc for regime change to free their oppressed populations, spare me the bullshit.

yep, invading China seems like a totally winnable operation without sending the world a ticket for a nuclear fireworks show.

same situation different country, but a country that actually has nuclear weapons and also a much larger militarized arm, but oh they lack the same oil production as your middle eastern friends so Iran seems like the easiest next target sleeping:

fuck Iran. I'd rather go for England

whatever happened to all the Insurgents from Syria, that a case for a whole invasion right there! Heck they might even have WMDs

well, im not gonna read 5 pages worth of bickering just to make my post, so if i mention some things that have already been discussed, forgive me.

On one hand, I understand what people like elstatec are trying to say. Who put the US in charge? Why is the US throwing a hissy fit over Iran getting some nuclear weapons, when they themselves have enough to blow up the world 10 times over.

On the other hand, we have to be realistic. True the US has used weapons in a time of war. And lets face it. Weapons are made for two reasons. To be use to intimidate, and to be used, period. If you build weapons, eventually they will be used. And lets not kid ourselves. Iran/the president of Iran has clearly stated numerous times that he wants the destruction of Israel. Is a man who claims to want the destruction of an entire country, and even worse, an entire race, religion, is a man like that one who you would allow to possess nuclear weaponry?

Fact is, sooner or later, there will be a war. Not between a world power and a 3rd world country, but between world powers. Im willing to bet that when that time comes, the entire world will once again become a battleground. And Iran possessing nukes is just one extra thing that, if I was a leader of a world power, I would not want to deal with. Its an extra hassle to deal with. And that hassle can quickly turn into a deathtrap. This is something we can not be equal about. This is something we must be objective about.

Any country is a possible enemy in the future, and if they have nuclear arms that makes them even more dangerous. Not to mention that a country like Iran simply cannot be trusted. Iran is full of religious people. Very religious. And religious people believe when they die they will go to heaven. If they are killed, they become martyrs, heroes. Death is nothing to them. And those people are also the people calling for Israel to be eradicated. You think itll be just Israel? Today Israel, tommorrow America, no country is safe from nuclear weapons.

For the safety of our countries, and other countries around the world, we must not allow any more countries to possess such technologies.

Yeah, cause the UN always deals with people who ignore it, right, sort of like in Iraq right? Ha!

So basically it's bad when the US ignores the UN but it's ok when smaller, muslim countries do it?

sleeping: get it through your skull that while Iran has ignored the UN to resume nuclear research/power (which they should have the right todo) the US ignored the UN to invade a country based on a lie, so which one is the worse, the latter. sleeping:

And you can never say what might of happened in Iraq if the UN had its ways, but dear mr bush got too impatient for his oil and the capitalist machine wanted profits so highho off to Iraq they went.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Iran

Electricity:

* production: 129 TWh (2002)
* consumption: 119.9 TWh (2002)

Iran's population size increased dramatically during the latter half of the 20th century to reach 70 million in 2006, although in recent years Iran appears to have taken control of its high population growth rate and many studies show that Iran's population growth rate will continue to decline

So there population is actually declining, not increasing and there are several different alternatives to nuclear energy. Go check out Hydro, or solar, lets not kid around why they are so adamant about Nuclear. enough that they would totally ignore the UN to persue it.

fuck Syria. All of my family is over here safe and sound the_finger:

Countries grow, there need for power grows and the persuit of a steady modern power source which doesnt use fossil fuels grows, there is never enough energy. Hydro and solar energy cannot make anywhere near the same energy as a nuclear power station. If other countries in the world can freely use nuclear energy, Iran shouldnt be halted in doing so. Try again.

ya know what..nevermind let them have their nuke technology, design the bomb and when you're out prancing around in the flower field fields with the unicorns and rainbows in your "World" don't come crying to us when the shit hits the fan

I am AMAZED that some one from a western superpower believes that fucking Iran wants nuclear technology for "energy purposes"

for a mistake made by an interpreter from an independant company that works for SEVERAL news agencies and has no affiliation with cnn.

an unstable country does NOT need nuclear weapons, if they want one Id be happy to "give" them one

thats a bit ignorant to say nyck, i dont see any proof at all that they are aiming for nuclear weapons and this is the same ignorance that will probaly lead to a similar incident as Iraq had, and even if they did eventually want Nuclear Weapons then they would have as equal right to have them as Israel, US, UK and Russia.


and i love how you say
'I am AMAZED that some one from a western superpower believes that fucking Iran wants nuclear technology for "energy purposes'
you sound so so soo idiotic and well just makes me love to keep arguing because its just hilarious how dumb you sound.

you believe what you want.

Ill err on the side of caution and believe what I want.

there is nothing at all idiotic about what I'm saying. Iran wants nuclear technology okay, prove to me that they deserve it. Hell lets hook up afghanastan with a few and leave a few in Iraq and North Korea to boot.

NUKES FOR EVERYONE.

I mean honestly okay would you feel better if the United States of America and the UK ceased all nuclear weapons and disarmed them or gave them all to Iran and North Korea and everyother 3rd world country

Yes i would want those countries to just disarm and have no nuclear weapons but that would never happen.

But the point i am saying is there is no reason why Iran cannot have nuclear technology which is totally separate from Nuclear Weapons, and I believe they whole bullshit on this whole situation is that so many people are ignorant to the fact that they are the same thing.

If America, Russia, Israel, UK etc can have these weapons to imtimidate, and when Iran cannot, plus the state of Iraq now well, no ones the innocent.




But please show me any evidence at all that Iran has a nuclear weapon program, nuclear weapons at all which you are stating is why they use this technology, which this whole matter is about and which sounds so similar to a previous situation in Iraq.

statec must have been born in Tehran.

why have oil prices increased since the war if that was the sole reason? I mean, yeah, it's easy to jump on the bandwagon and shout "no blood for oil", it's quite convenient, true? not so much, but definately easy.

if anyone here sounds idiotic its you statec.

On a side note let's be realistic, I want to show you guys something that has value to the debate about nuclear weapons. The IAEA is trying everything it can to get non-proliferation around the world. A question was posed to Mohamed ElBaradei at the Carnegie international nuclear conference..this is the question. "Shouldn't we start off by absolving the weapons from the U.S"
ElBaradeis response: "We should start off with the countries trying to get the weapons, then build our way to bigger problems like the U.S"
Unfortunately for the IAEA it has a budget of 200$ million a year which is very low considering the importance of the cause, the boston red sox team uses the same amount in a year, which ElBaradei noted laughing.

It is unfortunate that we can not absolve nuclear weapons, but I am inclined to believe that maybe Iran is just building a nuclear weapon to flaunt its neighbours not to start a new nuclear war. These are my assumptions of course.

I really don't view that as being hilarious. It is kinda scary if you ask me.