Ya Iran start shaking war is coming :)

scatlett

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
645
If just 1 nuclear weapon exploded in anger (no matter where) the world would be completely different. Economically, we would be thrown into global turmoil. A nuclear war may not start though.

Life in South Africa would become very unpleasant as desperate people would become more desperate.

I do not understand why people are so keen to go to war.
 

Xarog

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
19,041
I do not understand why people are so keen to go to war.
Consider yourself fortunate. If you don't understand it you'll never get to the state of being bloodthirsty.

Sadly this is not the case with certain other people on the forum.
 

AntiThesis

Executive Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
5,420
Well this is the issue I have... a nuclear war (even on a small scale) would screw things up royally... think the Great Depression and the Cold War. Now imagine if someone decides to be really stupid and go large scale... life as we know it could actually be ended/changed forever. And we're keen for that?

Sheesh.
 

morebroadband

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2004
Messages
428
There is more likelihood of Iran starting a nuke war than USA. If they truly don't have nukes why keep bragging about there advancement of the nuke process, claiming to be able to enrich plutonium for weapons, and have multiple centrifuges, while on the other hand say it is for peaceful & energy purposes only!

The amount of rhetoric coming out the Iranian leader mouth leads me to believe there is not a full box of chocolates there. The timing of all of these events smacks of collusion to get the oil prices as high as possible, whilst USA has its hands full in Iraq. Imagine if a truly radical right winger, like Iranian leader, got into the White House and there was a true standoff, with buttons on the nukes. This is precisely why Iran should not have access to Nuke power, because the first thing they would do is nuke Israel, and then where would we be!
 

arf9999

MyBroadband Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
6,791
tibby.dude said:
I guess a mysterious plane crash will kill Aminanejad and some of his cronies and new elections will be held and somebody much more reasonable in the eyes of the West will be elected and he will say the right things and everybody will breath a sigh of relief and the Americans will turn to Iraq and try and extract themselves from that mess.
hmmm...judging by the CIA's recent form, it's more likely that they'll cause the wrong plane to crash, it'll crash into the nuclear facility and contaminate Asia and Europe :)
 

AntiThesis

Executive Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
5,420
And it's much better for the US to have a huge nuclear arsenal and claim it's for "defensive purposes"?

Balls.
 

ignacio

Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
593
So nobody is worried about Iran's declared dismissal of Israel's right to exist and avowal to destroy it? And this prospect only gets scarier and realistically practical with a nuclear-armed Iran.
 

morebroadband

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2004
Messages
428
It is not about whether US has an arsenal. This is fact and they will not get rid of it. The argument is rather should Iran have nukes because they feel it is their right, and because they have declared that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth. Why would any one entertain the thought of a person that declares this, to have his finger on a nuke??

My argument is not pro USA, but rather just looking for a common sense, reasonable approach. It is bad enough that N. Korea has nukes and threatens Japan, and South Korea, but the fanatical Muslim thought that surrounds Al Queda, Taliban and the Mullahs in Iran is what is worrying. More reason and peace is needed.

I found an interesting article the other day:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/11/i...33200&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&pagewanted=print

March 11, 2006
The Saturday Profile
For Muslim Who Says Violence Destroys Islam, Violent Threats
By JOHN M. BRODER

LOS ANGELES, March 10 — Three weeks ago, Dr. Wafa Sultan was a largely unknown Syrian-American psychiatrist living outside Los Angeles, nursing a deep anger and despair about her fellow Muslims.

Today, thanks to an unusually blunt and provocative interview on Al Jazeera television on Feb. 21, she is an international sensation, hailed as a fresh voice of reason by some, and by others as a heretic and infidel who deserves to die.

In the interview, which has been viewed on the Internet more than a million times and has reached the e-mail of hundreds of thousands around the world, Dr. Sultan bitterly criticized the Muslim clerics, holy warriors and political leaders who she believes have distorted the teachings of Muhammad and the Koran for 14 centuries.

She said the world's Muslims, whom she compares unfavorably with the Jews, have descended into a vortex of self-pity and violence.

Dr. Sultan said the world was not witnessing a clash of religions or cultures, but a battle between modernity and barbarism, a battle that the forces of violent, reactionary Islam are destined to lose.

In response, clerics throughout the Muslim world have condemned her, and her telephone answering machine has filled with dark threats. But Islamic reformers have praised her for saying out loud, in Arabic and on the most widely seen television network in the Arab world, what few Muslims dare to say even in private.

"I believe our people are hostages to our own beliefs and teachings," she said in an interview this week in her home in a Los Angeles suburb.

Dr. Sultan, who is 47, wears a prim sweater and skirt, with fleece-lined slippers and heavy stockings. Her eyes and hair are jet black and her modest manner belies her intense words: "Knowledge has released me from this backward thinking. Somebody has to help free the Muslim people from these wrong beliefs."

Perhaps her most provocative words on Al Jazeera were those comparing how the Jews and Muslims have reacted to adversity. Speaking of the Holocaust, she said, "The Jews have come from the tragedy and forced the world to respect them, with their knowledge, not with their terror; with their work, not with their crying and yelling."

She went on, "We have not seen a single Jew blow himself up in a German restaurant. We have not seen a single Jew destroy a church. We have not seen a single Jew protest by killing people."

She concluded, "Only the Muslims defend their beliefs by burning down churches, killing people and destroying embassies. This path will not yield any results. The Muslims must ask themselves what they can do for humankind, before they demand that humankind respect them."

Her views caught the ear of the American Jewish Congress, which has invited her to speak in May at a conference in Israel. "We have been discussing with her the importance of her message and trying to devise the right venue for her to address Jewish leaders," said Neil B. Goldstein, executive director of the organization.

She is probably more welcome in Tel Aviv than she would be in Damascus. Shortly after the broadcast, clerics in Syria denounced her as an infidel. One said she had done Islam more damage than the Danish cartoons mocking the Prophet Muhammad, a wire service reported.


DR. SULTAN is "working on a book that — if it is published — it's going to turn the Islamic world upside down."

"I have reached the point that doesn't allow any U-turn. I have no choice. I am questioning every single teaching of our holy book."

The working title is, "The Escaped Prisoner: When God Is a Monster."

Dr. Sultan grew up in a large traditional Muslim family in Banias, Syria, a small city on the Mediterranean about a two-hour drive north of Beirut. Her father was a grain trader and a devout Muslim, and she followed the faith's strictures into adulthood.

But, she said, her life changed in 1979 when she was a medical student at the University of Aleppo, in northern Syria. At that time, the radical Muslim Brotherhood was using terrorism to try to undermine the government of President Hafez al-Assad. Gunmen of the Muslim Brotherhood burst into a classroom at the university and killed her professor as she watched, she said.

"They shot hundreds of bullets into him, shouting, 'God is great!' " she said. "At that point, I lost my trust in their god and began to question all our teachings. It was the turning point of my life, and it has led me to this present point. I had to leave. I had to look for another god."

She and her husband, who now goes by the Americanized name of David, laid plans to leave for the United States. Their visas finally came in 1989, and the Sultans and their two children (they have since had a third) settled in with friends in Cerritos, Calif., a prosperous bedroom community on the edge of Los Angeles County.

After a succession of jobs and struggles with language, Dr. Sultan has completed her American medical licensing, with the exception of a hospital residency program, which she hopes to do within a year. David operates an automotive-smog-check station. They bought a home in the Los Angeles area and put their children through local public schools. All are now American citizens.


BUT even as she settled into a comfortable middle-class American life, Dr. Sultan's anger burned within. She took to writing, first for herself, then for an Islamic reform Web site called Annaqed (The Critic), run by a Syrian expatriate in Phoenix.

An angry essay on that site by Dr. Sultan about the Muslim Brotherhood caught the attention of Al Jazeera, which invited her to debate an Algerian cleric on the air last July.

In the debate, she questioned the religious teachings that prompt young people to commit suicide in the name of God. "Why does a young Muslim man, in the prime of life, with a full life ahead, go and blow himself up?" she asked. "In our countries, religion is the sole source of education and is the only spring from which that terrorist drank until his thirst was quenched."

Her remarks set off debates around the globe and her name began appearing in Arabic newspapers and Web sites. But her fame grew exponentially when she appeared on Al Jazeera again on Feb. 21, an appearance that was translated and widely distributed by the Middle East Media Research Institute, known as Memri.

Memri said the clip of her February appearance had been viewed more than a million times.

"The clash we are witnessing around the world is not a clash of religions or a clash of civilizations," Dr. Sultan said. "It is a clash between two opposites, between two eras. It is a clash between a mentality that belongs to the Middle Ages and another mentality that belongs to the 21st century. It is a clash between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality."

She said she no longer practiced Islam. "I am a secular human being," she said.

The other guest on the program, identified as an Egyptian professor of religious studies, Dr. Ibrahim al-Khouli, asked, "Are you a heretic?" He then said there was no point in rebuking or debating her, because she had blasphemed against Islam, the Prophet Muhammad and the Koran.

Dr. Sultan said she took those words as a formal fatwa, a religious condemnation. Since then, she said, she has received numerous death threats on her answering machine and by e-mail.

One message said: "Oh, you are still alive? Wait and see." She received an e-mail message the other day, in Arabic, that said, "If someone were to kill you, it would be me."

Dr. Sultan said her mother, who still lives in Syria, is afraid to contact her directly, speaking only through a sister who lives in Qatar. She said she worried more about the safety of family members here and in Syria than she did for her own.

"I have no fear," she said. "I believe in my message. It is like a million-mile journey, and I believe I have walked the first and hardest 10 miles."
 

3G4me

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Messages
509
I have found it very interesting to watch the Iranian president. He comes out with these very blatant and inciting statements, yet he never did before the Iraq war. The statements sound as if he is saying "Here I am America, come and get me". It almost seems calculated...

I wonder if his intentions are to get USA to attack, based on these nuclear weapons (once again) only to find they don't exist (once again). Surely this action would turn the muslim countries/individuals who are sitting on the fence, so to speak, against the USA once and for all. Finally they would have their JIHAD with the majority of muslims fighting alongside them. At this stage, they (the fighters) are in the minority.

If this is the case, then I have long overestimated the intelligence of the muslim community - I always believed they were amongst the higher intelligence people (most kids who graduate college under 16 are muslim kids).

If I can see clearly these intentions, I'm sure the USA and UK & UN can see them too... They need to get all their people behind them to create WW3, until then, they are just terrorists getting in they way!

I think they belong in the middle ages, if this is the case. They will never win or even manage to start a real war until they look at modern society and find a way to target the modern thinkers. Lets pray they never do...
 

tibby.dude

Executive Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2004
Messages
6,019
3G4me said:
IIt almost seems calculated...
Ever played poker ???.
So how do you know the other guy is just bluffing our holding a full house in his hands ???.
 

3G4me

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Messages
509
It's called intelligence services,vs propaganda. I would go with intelligence,if we could believe it.
Personally, I have been told the Isreali service is the best... But you never know. After all, they (al Quaeda) did succeed with 911. Yet I have been told by local Muslims (not militant), that they think the USA allowed that attack to happen in order to justify Iraq & Afghanistan (Bin Laden is far to clever for them to ignore, & has far too much money, support & knowledge of their systems). Maybe true, maybe some muslims sitting on the fence???
 

morebroadband

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2004
Messages
428
The USA would never use nukes on Iran unless the are attacked first. There is a lot of posturing, bantering and war talk. Yes Iran is taking full advantage of the USA being pre-occupied with Iraq, Afganistan & its own internal politics leading up to presidential elections BUT there is one factor that might just piss the yanks off enough and that is their continued sponsoring of terrorists.

The USA is going to try an internal type of revolution (using CIA and spies), but they have being trying this long enough without success. It looks like another long drawn out verbal battle, whilst the Oil price continues to climb.

Bring on Fuel Cells and alternative energy sources and this little spat will disappear.
 

kilo39

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
5,425
3G4me said:
It's called intelligence services,vs propaganda. I would go with intelligence,if we could believe it.
Personally, I have been told the Isreali service is the best... But you never know. After all, they (al Quaeda) did succeed with 911. Yet I have been told by local Muslims (not militant), that they think the USA allowed that attack to happen in order to justify Iraq & Afghanistan (Bin Laden is far to clever for them to ignore, & has far too much money, support & knowledge of their systems). Maybe true, maybe some muslims sitting on the fence???
You new here 3G4me (welcome to the forums!) He not be around so I'll introduce you to LoneGunman - you'll probably enjoy his read:
A Coincidence Theorists Guide to 911
 

nocilah

Banned
Joined
Sep 2, 2004
Messages
7,624
it's an american war for an american economy for an american world.

fsck america!
 

Xarog

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
19,041
The USA would never use nukes on Iran unless the are attacked first.
Not true - they've been hard at work trying to get the international community to accept their so-called "bunkerbuster" bombs. These are nuclear warheads that are intended to dig into the earth before detonating. The USA has also developed 'standard' (i.e. non-nuclear) versions of these bombs which have the same explosive power of an atomic bomb in an attempt to blur the lines between nukes and non-nukes.
 

kilo39

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
5,425
Xarog said:
Not true - they've been hard at work trying to get the international community to accept their so-called "bunkerbuster" bombs. These are nuclear warheads that are intended to dig into the earth before detonating. The USA has also developed 'standard' (i.e. non-nuclear) versions of these bombs which have the same explosive power of an atomic bomb in an attempt to blur the lines between nukes and non-nukes.
Yup - US has no need to use nuclear weapons - their 'standard' arsenal will do just fine.
 

Xarog

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
19,041
Yup - US has no need to use nuclear weapons - their 'standard' arsenal will do just fine.
Ya, but the point is if they can get people to accept "smaller" nuclear warheads, then they can slowly chip away at the dissapproval regarding their use and start using larger and larger bombs, to the point where they're so large that conventional warheads couldn't reach the same size.
 

BTTB

Moderator
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
7,963
Nuclear vs Conventional

kilo39 said:
Yup - US has no need to use nuclear weapons - their 'standard' arsenal will do just fine.
Wanted to add a thought to that.

Nuclear Weapons have always been taboo, mainly because of the Radiation Fallout.
How much does it cost to build an Atom Bomb?
How many atom bombs would they need to flatten the main targets as opposed to a long campaign of bombing, mobile infantry attacks like we saw in Iraq which is still ongoing now after 4 years. Initial estimates in 2002 were about $80Billion.
What is the ongoing cost after 4 years to that?

You cannot tell me someone back at home in the USA isn't making a chunk of change out of the war effort. What does a Cruise Missile cost and how many do you need to flatten a town as opposed to one Atom Bomb that can take out a whole City.

During the Second World War many Industrialists became Super Wealthy supplying the War Effort in Europe. Nothing has changed.

I was chatting with friends the other day about the USA and it's Military Forces and the cost to run that operation on a daily scale.
Must cost Billions.
The Military is basically a major employer in the USA?
Take that all away.
What I am saying. Let's say the World is covered in an aura of peace for several decades. The current USA's weaponry has become obsolete and needs replacing. Will they replace all these weapons with a new generation as there is no war imminent.
Or rather toy with the notion of creating some conflict in a distant world far away from the fat people of the USA so that the war machine can carry on producing weapons and ammunition and employ millions of people at the same time?

And who is pulling the strings behind the scenes? ;)
And it is not Jacob Zuma btw.
He may have pulled the shower cable that's all. :D
 
Last edited:
Top