Showdown with Iran

Status
Not open for further replies.
90% of the regions oil flows through the straight, while 50% of the worlds oil does so.

It would cause the world economy to go into beast mode. And Iran doesn't have the power to enforce a blockade.

Nothing but saber-rattling, folks.
 
Guardian Bob said:
Isn't there always a US Navy presence near the Strait of Hormuz? It shouldn't be a shock to Iran. Also, I imagine hiding a supercarrier isn't easy to do.
Click to expand...

The news came from the Iranian news agency. I´d imagen its purpose is more domestic.


theignoramus said:
Binyahim Netanyahu's own intelligence chief caught undermining his "crazy mullah" bullshit.

nuclear-armed Iran wouldn't necessarily constitute a threat to Israel's continued existence, Mossad chief Tamir Pardo reportedly hinted earlier this week.
This is the second Mossad chief to say this. Ehud Barak has said it too.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/mossad-chief-a-nuclear-iran-isn-t-necessarily-a-existential-threat-1.404227
while the "irrational, suicide state" theory and allusions to Hitler was always vulgar propaganda for European and American consumption, it's nice to hear Israeli heavyweights dismiss it time and time again.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/28/u-s-israel-discuss-triggers-for-bombing-iran-s-nuclear-infrastructure.html
Click to expand...

This isn´t really new. And I think Bibi listens more to these guys than he lets on. He´s playing the politics game using Iran to make himself look strong. Remember he hasn´t really flashed Israeli´s army much. Cast Lead was under Olmert. He has to live up to his right-wing persona. I think their more mad that people are downplaying in Iran as a threat for Iran in public. There´s been the Israeli is going to attack Iran tomorrow for the last, what, 3 years?
 
Another message for Iran

WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States has reached a deal to sell $3.48 billion worth of missiles and related technology to the United Arab Emirates, a close Mideast ally, as part of a massive buildup of defense technology among friendly Mideast nations near Iran.
Pentagon spokesman George Little announced the Christmas Day sale on Friday night. He said the U.S. and U.A.E. have a strong defense relationship and are both interested in "a secure and stable" Persian Gulf region.

The deal includes 96 missiles, along with supporting technology and training support that Little says will bolster the nation's missile defense capacity.

The deal includes a contract with Lockheed Martin to produce the highly sophisticated Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, weapon system for the U.A.E.

Tom McGrath, vice president and program manager for Lockheed Martin's THAAD program in Dallas, said in a statement it was the first foreign military sale of the THAAD system.
Click to expand...

We need to keep Iran around . . . it provides us with a nice export market for one of the few remaining things we are good at manufacturing.
3AQmK.gif

http://news.yahoo.com/us-seals-3-48b-missiles-technology-sale-uae-034722886.html
 
US President Barack Obama has signed into law tough new sanctions against Iran's central bank and financial sector, marking the sharpest economic confrontation between Washington and Tehran yet and potentially stoking tensions in the Gulf.

Saturday's measures, meant to punish the Islamic Republic for its nuclear programme, were contained in a $662 billion defense bill, which officials said Obama signed despite concern it could complicate his bid to build an international front against Tehran.

The sanctions require foreign firms to make a choice between doing business with Tehran's oil and financial sectors or central bank or the mighty US economy and financial sector.

Foreign central banks which deal with the Iranian central bank on oil transactions could also face similar restrictions under the new law, which has sparked fears of damage to US ties with nations like Russia and China.
Click to expand...
Obama said in a statement issued as he signed the bill that he was concerned the measure would interfere with his constitutional authority to conduct foreign relations by tying his hands in dealings with foreign governments.

The bill, which passed with wide majorities in Congress, did reserve some wiggle room for Obama, granting him the power to grant 120 day waivers if he judges it to be in the national security interests of the United States.

Senior US officials said Washington was engaging with its foreign partners to ensure the sanctions can work without harming global energy markets, and stressed the US strategy for engaging with Iran was unchanged by the bill.
Click to expand...

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2011/12/20111231204613268574.html

Nothing remotely positive will come of this and it practically guarantees something uglier will happen down the road.


Still, if oil prices soar in the next year, it will only be a right and proper consequence of this. All of Iran's enriched uranium is under the surveillance of IAEA inspectors and until that changes, penalizing countries that do business with Iran's central bank is a wildly disproportionate bully move. I hope the Knesset clones in Congress enjoy the inevitable backlash.

edit:
if I sound emotional about this, it's because I am. If you want to go down the warpath with another country, one of the best ways of doing that is crippling their economy.
 
I asked my mom what her family (in Iran) thinks about everything going on right now. She clasped her hands and said "I would not dare ask (her sister) about it." she said the government has silenced the country from discussing the situation. If anyone is caught discussing it, something terrible would happen to them. I don't know how true this is, I think she could be exaggerating a bit. Can anyone confirm or deny this?
 
So Obama signed those oil export sanctions into law and Iran tested a Nuclear fuel rod:
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/01/01/world/meast/iran-nuclear-rod/index.html

Tehran, Iran (CNN) -- Iran succeeded in building and testing the country's first nuclear fuel rod, the semiofficial news agency FARS said Sunday.
The rod, containing natural uranium, was successfully tested and is being "radiated in the core of the Tehran research nuclear reactor," the news agency said, citing Iran's atomic energy agency website.
Natural uranium is used to fuel reactors.
Click to expand...

I say we're way past the point of no return now.
 
We will all lose in this dick-measuring contest between Iran and the West. Surely they understand how serious we are about them not obtaining nuclear weapons. Surely we understand how serious they are about it without coming out and saying they are.

Bombs will fall in the next couple of years.
 
RevDM said:
I asked my mom what her family (in Iran) thinks about everything going on right now. She clasped her hands and said "I would not dare ask (her sister) about it." she said the government has silenced the country from discussing the situation. If anyone is caught discussing it, something terrible would happen to them. I don't know how true this is, I think she could be exaggerating a bit. Can anyone confirm or deny this?
Click to expand...

my gf is from tehran, and she discusses it with her family via skype, telephone calls via calling card, and facebook all the time.
 
PhoenixDark said:
I'm not voting for Obama if we attack Iran this year. This is ridiculous
Click to expand...

Your options on the other side are even worse. They'll drop a whole lot more bombs than Obama would. Perry at least has stated multiple times that he would not tollerate Iran and would take action if he were elected.
 
Tapiozona said:
Your options on the other side are even worse. They'll drop a whole lot more bombs than Obama would. Perry at least has stated multiple times that he would not tollerate Iran and would take action if he were elected.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't vote for any republican. If anything I'd write in someone, or contemplate a Gary Johnson protest vote.
 
Gaborn said:
Iran is entitled to a peaceful nuclear program under international law.
Click to expand...

Just curious. Do you honestly think those are their end goals for their nuclear program? Civilian nuclear power and not nuclear weapons? Seems multiple people say the same thing. Seems silly to me. It's like the people who actually believe Barry Bonds didn't know he was using steriods.
 
Gaborn said:
Iran is entitled to a peaceful nuclear program under international law.
Click to expand...

Nobody cares about International Law unless it's in their favor.

Tapiozona said:
Just curious. Do you honestly think those are their end goals for their nuclear program? Civilian nuclear power and not nuclear weapons? Seems multiple people say the same thing. Seems silly to me. It's like the people who actually believe Barry Bonds didn't know he was using steriods.
Click to expand...

That's not the point really, because then you could put out sanctions against every country you think is suspicious. That's obviously not the way to go and will ultimately result in more nuclear weapons instead of less.
 
Tapiozona said:
Just curious. Do you honestly think those are their end goals for their nuclear program? Civilian nuclear power and not nuclear weapons? Seems multiple people say the same thing. Seems silly to me. It's like the people who actually believe Barry Bonds didn't know he was using steriods.
Click to expand...

I think it's clear they want nuclear weapons, and they certainly have ties to terrorism - we also know they arm insurgents in Iraq. But attacking Israel would ensure their total destruction, and given how isolated they are from the rest of the ME I can't see other countries having a problem with that.

A nuclear Iran ensures the US doesn't attack them, why wouldn't they want a weapon?
 
PhoenixDark said:
I wouldn't vote for any republican. If anything I'd write in someone, or contemplate a Gary Johnson protest vote.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, such a move could indirectly aid in a much worse situation. don't let your frustration cloud your judgment and critical thinking. Things are not great, but things could be MUCH worse.

PhoenixDark said:
A nuclear Iran ensures the US doesn't attack them, why wouldn't they want a weapon?
Click to expand...
not a safe assumption. at all.
 
Because they have extremists in power who talk about using them. I understand they have a right to them just like the US and so many other countries did when they developed their own. Even if Iran does get them I can't imagine a single scenario where they'd use them, but all the death to Israel, death to Saudi Arabia, death to America, death to non-muslim rhetoric is a bit scarey when they have nuclear weapons in their hands.
 
Tapiozona said:
Just curious. Do you honestly think those are their end goals for their nuclear program? Civilian nuclear power and not nuclear weapons?
Click to expand...

I honestly think until they start violating international law it would be incredibly dangerous to bomb a country merely for doing what they were entitled to do. Is it possible they want a nuclear weapon? Sure, it's possible but they've done nothing wrong with their nuclear program so far.

Seems multiple people say the same thing. Seems silly to me. It's like the people who actually believe Barry Bonds didn't know he was using steriods.
Click to expand...

What alternative is there? What would YOU do if you were President confronted by a country that DARES to test a nuclear fuel rod for a nuclear power plant?
 
It's pretty much 100% certain that whatever happens, eventually someone will intervene to prevent Iran from making nukes.
 
Tapiozona said:
Because they have extremists in power who talk about using them. I understand they have a right to them just like the US and so many other countries did when they developed their own. Even if Iran does get them I can't imagine a single scenario where they'd use them, but all the death to Israel, death to Saudi Arabia, death to America, death to non-muslim rhetoric is a bit scarey when they have nuclear weapons in their hands.
Click to expand...

To be fair, Iran hasn't been the aggressor in a conflict in...a looong, loooooooooong time.

Fears that they will suddenly be emboldened to invade its neighbors seems comically misplaced.
 
Tapiozona said:
Because they have extremists in power who talk about using them. I understand they have a right to them just like the US and so many other countries did when they developed their own. Even if Iran does get them I can't imagine a single scenario where they'd use them, but all the death to Israel, death to Saudi Arabia, death to America, death to non-muslim rhetoric is a bit scarey when they have nuclear weapons in their hands.
Click to expand...

No, I don't anybody in the government has ever come out and said to use a nuclear weapon. The production, stockpiling, or use of nuclear weapons is specifically forbidden by their religious authorities due to it's only real use being attacking civilian centers. There is no way they could swing a nuclear weapons program by their own populace after several years of ruling those weapons as anti-Islamic. But then there is no way they could use nuclear weapons as a deterrent unless they publicized the existence of such a program.

I personally think they should have full freedom to pursue nuclear technology within the constraints of IAEA regulations, which they have kept within. I just hope something comes from Iran's gesture yesterday for another round of talks.
 
Al-ibn Kermit said:
No, I don't anybody in the government has ever come out and said to use a nuclear weapon. The production, stockpiling, or use of nuclear weapons is specifically forbidden by their religious authorities due to it's only real use being attacking civilian centers. There is no way they could swing a nuclear weapons program by their own populace after several years of ruling those weapons as anti-Islamic. But then there is no way they could use nuclear weapons as a deterrent unless they publicized the existence of such a program.

I personally think they should have full freedom to pursue nuclear technology within the constraints of IAEA regulations, which they have kept within. I just hope something comes from Iran's gesture yesterday for another round of talks.
Click to expand...

Please, don't use religion to support rationality.
 
Dreams-Visions said:
To be fair, Iran hasn't been the aggressor in a conflict in...a looong, loooooooooong time.

Fears that they will suddenly be emboldened to invade its neighbors seems comically misplaced.
Click to expand...

Taking hostages in an embassy doesn´t count? Funding terrorists?

They haven´t started wars because they never were able.
 
Ether_Snake said:
Please, don't use religion to support rationality.
Click to expand...

.....I was being pretty clear and concise I thought. The government's entire authority in the country is based on their religious authority, therefore invalidating the religious laws is not something they can really do, at least not so overtly.
 
Al-ibn Kermit said:
.....I was being pretty clear and concise I thought. The government's entire authority in the country is based on their religious authority, therefore invalidating the religious laws is not something they can really do, at least not so overtly.
Click to expand...

Suicide is also forbidden in Islam..............
 
el retorno de los sapos said:
Taking hostages in an embassy doesn´t count? Funding terrorists?

They haven´t started wars because they never were able.
Click to expand...

Isignificant in comparison to the US's aggressive and heinous actions in the region as of late. Unless you're horribly jaded and have taken in to US propaganda wholly, it's pretty obvious who the aggressor is here. Only in the US can you spin a captured spy drone as an act of aggression by the country who's air space was invaded. US has been run by a bunch of murderers and crooks for the longest time now, and I don't mean of a small calibre, but of grotesque proportions, that make even 9/11 seem timid in terms of the number of civilian deaths.

It's all getting out of hand now.
 
Al-ibn Kermit said:
And most Muslims believe that, look at the extraordinarily low suicide rates in Muslim countries. Even talk about suicide is taboo, you see it implied rather than shown in Iranian cinema for example.
Click to expand...

Wait... is there a loop hole that if you have a bomb around your chest it's okay then?

Might need to add that to my list under "hole in the sheet".
 
I say go ahead with the nuclear launching. I could use an atomic winter. Winter in New England is lacking this year.
 
A27 Tawpgun said:
I say go ahead with the nuclear launching. I could use an atomic winter. Winter in New England is lacking this year.
Click to expand...

You obviously listen to Infowars, and those big jars of vitamins won't really be much use when the Internet dies. As the government will use the forthcoming war with Iran to restrict internet access to the populace, unless it's 'something really important'.
 
Osietra said:
You obviously listen to Infowars, and those big jars of vitamins won't really be much use when the Internet dies. As the government will use the forthcoming war with Iran to restrict internet access to the populace, unless it's 'something really important'.
Click to expand...

Such as Sasha and Malia doing their homework.
 
Tapiozona said:
Because they have extremists in power who talk about using them. I understand they have a right to them just like the US and so many other countries did when they developed their own. Even if Iran does get them I can't imagine a single scenario where they'd use them, but all the death to Israel, death to Saudi Arabia, death to America, death to non-muslim rhetoric is a bit scarey when they have nuclear weapons in their hands.
Click to expand...


Fear mongering at its finest.
 
good OP as i read through all of it. I'll point out a couple of my beliefs on this issue:

1) 2012 will be the year of no bullshit politics. People in all parts of the world in all forms of government are going to be forced to act. The EU is going to have to figure out if they have balls or not to do the right thing about their currency with this issue with Iran brewing. On the flip side, our so far moronic president will actually have to own the sanctions bill due to go into effect in July.

2) We, the US should not even begin to think about military action in Iran. We do not have the money, we do not have the time and we do not have the right to attack Iran. Right now i feel like we are Rome. How many years have we know peace? It is not our responsibility to be the world police; however it is the responsibility of the world for all of us to look out for each other. In other words, the world is not ready for world war 3 over the price of oil and Iran continuing to posture.

3) Depending on if the sanctions go into effect and if gas prices go up, then Obama won't see a 2nd term which I'm sure he fears. Truth is though, its scary to think what war mongerer we'll have in office this next year. If we do this, we must start the energy race, like the space race, to find a true alternative, renewable and cheap replacement for oil.

tl;dr
No shouldn't go to war
Yes protect people
Lets find a new product to end dependence on oil.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Hot Chocolate Showdown
Science 
21
1K
Valedix replied
The Pitt - ER with a 24 spin with ER's Noah Wyle
47
2K
Sonik replied
What’s up with the forum’s slowness?
Business 
49
1K
HeisenbergFX4 replied
Primitive War trailer - Vietnam War with Dinosaurs.
24
937
chromhound replied
Help with neogaf website functionality. Constant freezes
2
64
2K
Major Insano replied
Top Bottom