Iran? - Page 2

tomxtr · 02-10-2005, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyro

Well we strill choose to bomb countries who don't even have the slightest chance of ever getting away with even a minimul attack on USA soil.

It is kinda like being interrogated and them keep thinking you're lying, but you're telling the truth....and then after they finally believe you...they put a bullet in your head.

Thats like the Iraq war.

stupid:

Whatada · 02-10-2005, 11:53 AM

The U.S needs to stop rocket-whoring.

oOo:

Trunks · 02-10-2005, 12:38 PM

Take a look at this article. This doesnt look good. http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=34&t ... d&cat=Iran

tomxtr · 02-10-2005, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trunks

Take a look at this article. This doesnt look good. http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=34&t ... d&cat=Iran

This kind of posturing has been going on for some time.

Pyro · 02-10-2005, 04:45 PM

oh yeah...Iran obviouslly would be a harder task...think of like Germany trying to take over Russia...but probably easier than that.

Ferich · 02-22-2005, 08:50 PM

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtm ... ID=7704116

Bush Says Talk of Attacking Iran 'Ridiculous'

ninty · 02-22-2005, 08:58 PM

[quote:d496e]"This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous," Bush told a news conference after talks with European Union leaders.

"Having said that, all options are on the table," he added, drawing laughter at a clear reference to military action. [/quote:d496e]

oOo: dance:

Ferich · 02-22-2005, 09:01 PM

Watch out for Bush, he's very mischievous.

Madmartagen · 02-22-2005, 11:32 PM

well we have clear problem here. the US doesnt think Iran should have nuclear bombs (i agree). we can negotiate and sanction, but what if Iran doesnt give in? basically, what should be done in the event that a compromise isnt reached? overthrowing the Iranian govt would be pointless, i think the majority of people there favor a theocratic govt. what else is there?

sanctions/starvation
sabotage
bomb the plants
capture the plant and dismantle them
lure the army out and destroy it, leaving a free hand to dismantle

suggestions?

Tripper · 02-22-2005, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferich

Watch out for Bush, he's very mischievous.

lol.

ninty · 02-22-2005, 11:58 PM

The Iranian Government which is currently basically the Clerics, made the Koran law, and outlawed all birth control products about 25 years ago i believe. Thus, in this time span the population of Iran doubled. The government realized its mistake and has now allowed birth control products.

What does this ahve to do with anything? Essentially half the population is under 20. There are many students that would favour government reform. Women have no rights. There are different doors for women to enter and exit buildings, and women have to sit on the back of the bus. Iran has many human rights issues.

The Koran is taught in school and must be obeyed.

All of this makes Iran a scary place, and a scary country to have to deal with. Not to mention 60 million people and 3 times the land mass of Iraq.

What can be done? I'm not sure. The UN better step up to the plate and start making themselves a legitimate world body, because that should be their role in the world.

I truly don't see an invasion working. Not by the US, not by NATO, or by anyone. It would be impossible in my opinion. What I see happening is colition bombing runs on specific targets inside of Iran. That is if the Isralies don't try it first.

ninty · 02-23-2005, 10:21 AM

[quote:0bad0]On Iran, Ritter said that President George W. Bush has received and signed off on orders for an aerial attack on Iran planned for June 2005. Its purported goal is the destruction of Iran’s alleged program to develop nuclear weapons, but Ritter said neoconservatives in the administration also expected that the attack would set in motion a chain of events leading to regime change in the oil-rich nation of 70 million -- a possibility Ritter regards with the greatest skepticism.

The former Marine also said that the Jan. 30 elections, which George W. Bush has called "a turning point in the history of Iraq, a milestone in the advance of freedom," were not so free after all. Ritter said that U.S. authorities in Iraq had manipulated the results in order to reduce the percentage of the vote received by the United Iraqi Alliance from 56% to 48%.[/quote:0bad0]

http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.p ... 0222742305
http://electroniciraq.net/news/1881.shtml

bukdez · 02-27-2005, 03:41 PM

this looks a little oOo:...

[url:e42ff]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050227.wnucle0227/BNStory/International/[/url:e42ff]...

ninty · 02-27-2005, 04:19 PM

I find it funny how when Bush is in Russia they say they are comitted to democracy and that the two countries will work together blah blah blah, and then next day Russia does this. It's all political rhetoric, although this would help the cause for strikes against facilities in Iran if that is infact the new policy.

Ferich · 02-27-2005, 04:30 PM

[quote="bukdez's article":586a0]Russia, which helped build the plant, has agreed to provide the fuel needed to run it — but only if Iran returns the spent fuel to prevent any possibility Tehran would extract plutonium from it to make atomic bombs.[/quote:586a0]