Force Against Iran

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:

“The Muslems” aren’t at war with you, a very, very small number of individuals are. We disagree on a lot of things, but if we disagree here, there’s a serious problem. Do you feel that the US is at war with Islam?

This is true – and they’re killing a lot more Muslims than they are Westerners

Aleksandr wrote:

And I think the term “jihad” is used much more by the media than by the terrorists, but I could be wrong; I haven’t exactly seen a lot of terrorist communications or even heard the messages that have been aired.

Using the term “Irani” or “Iranian” is obviously immaterial, whereas using the term “jihad” inappropriately implicates an entire religion, and it does this unfairly since the Qu’ran doesn’t teach people to do this sort of thing (retarded clerics do that).

The media says a lot more than the terrorists, period.

I think the fact that the terrorists use the word, and that certain Muslim clerics call for such “jihads” justifies the use of the word.

This is especially true with Isalm, that has no real central authority figure like a Pope to speak out against the terrorist-rallying clerics and overrule them on the point of what can be a “jihad.”[/quote]

The Qu’ran is supposed to be the final authority and revelation, it only makes sense Islam is devoid of a pope. God’s word overrules them on the point of what can be a “jihad”.

Honestly, while I am far from an America hater (I quite enjoy this country), you must realize that this is NOT a democracy. America is a republic, you vote people into power who make decisions on your behalf. In a true democracy, the populace would vote on every law, bill, regulation, and directive. Last I knew, India was the only TRUE democracy currently in existence. While there are many freedoms to speak of, they are definitely limited. Think of it this way, the government owns you between 26-40% of the time. You earn income practically on only every other hour. If you are happy with what you recieve in return, then its a fair trade. Otherwise you might come to believe you are more slave than free man. Not everyone attends public schools, seeks loans, welfare, or social security. Ironically these same people are usually the ones in the largest tax bracket. Where is their just compensation? The ability to pick up and leave is their only freedom. It is interesting that income tax was a temporary measure put in place to help afford costs arising from world war and was only instated with the promise it would be repealed soon after.

Having lived under a few different government structures, I honestly do not see what is so ultimately superior about our republic anyway. Life elsewhere can be just as sweet, if not sweeter (even under the rule of a monarchy). The notion that the world must be converted to democracy sounds much akin to the older concept of spreading religion through military conquest. I suppose it is all a matter of perspective, when we do it its in the name of justice and all that is good; for others its evil and must be stopped. I’m sure they think about us what we do about them. In the end it seems to fall to the old adage “might makes right.” IMO the world is fucked, stop worrying about what other people do.

82

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
orion wrote:

Both of you honestly don?t think that it helped in the decision making process that the Iraq has high quality oil that is easily found and can be drilled with little cost?

I guess the fact that the US needs a strategic partner in the region and that Saudi Arabia is becoming inreasingly unreliable also was never part of the equation?

Or maybe they want to keep Saudi-Arabia as a partner, but want to use a democratic Iraq as leverage?

It may not have entered Bush?s mind but neocons never-ever thought of that? Are you telling me that you think conservatives in the administration are frightenigly shortsighted and stupid?

I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’m certainly not going to tell you that strategic considerations for the Persian Gulf played no part in the Administration’s decisions. If they based this action on any single factor, I would think they were indeed frighteningly shortsighted and stupid – and it would contradict what they said going in (I believe they advanced 4 main factors, though the debate always centered on WMD).[/quote]

So if some strategic options might have been considered and if they try to work professionaly they might have stumbled over the fact that sweet, sweet oil was to be found in Iraq? Could that have been one of the reasons they decided to invade it? If it was a close call, could that reason have tipped the scales to one side or the other?

83

[quote]orion wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
orion wrote:

Both of you honestly don?t think that it helped in the decision making process that the Iraq has high quality oil that is easily found and can be drilled with little cost?

I guess the fact that the US needs a strategic partner in the region and that Saudi Arabia is becoming inreasingly unreliable also was never part of the equation?

Or maybe they want to keep Saudi-Arabia as a partner, but want to use a democratic Iraq as leverage?

It may not have entered Bush?s mind but neocons never-ever thought of that? Are you telling me that you think conservatives in the administration are frightenigly shortsighted and stupid?

I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’m certainly not going to tell you that strategic considerations for the Persian Gulf played no part in the Administration’s decisions. If they based this action on any single factor, I would think they were indeed frighteningly shortsighted and stupid – and it would contradict what they said going in (I believe they advanced 4 main factors, though the debate always centered on WMD).

So if some strategic options might have been considered and if they try to work professionaly they might have stumbled over the fact that sweet, sweet oil was to be found in Iraq? Could that have been one of the reasons they decided to invade it? If it was a close call, could that reason have tipped the scales to one side or the other?
[/quote]

Oh I see, more speculation on your part. You simply can’t provide any proof whatsoever that it’s about oil. With your logic I could basically say anything about anyone!

It might be time for you to cool the rhetoric until you can come up with the proof.

84

[quote]orion wrote:

So if some strategic options might have been considered and if they try to work professionaly they might have stumbled over the fact that sweet, sweet oil was to be found in Iraq? Could that have been one of the reasons they decided to invade it? If it was a close call, could that reason have tipped the scales to one side or the other?
[/quote]

I hesitate to tread on this ground, but let’s just concede the obvious. One of the reasons the Russians, the Europeans, the Chinese and we consider the Middle East to be more strategically important than either Bosnia or Central Africa (to pick two troubled regions out of many) is due to its energy production. If for some reason they all nuked each other over there, the world would sink into an economic depression pretty quickly. The same couldn’t be said if Ivory Coast and Ghana somehow managed to nuke each other.

That said, we didn’t go over there to get our hands on their oil, to control their oil, or any of that other crap that gets floated (not saying you floated it).

There are a lot of strategic considerations that go into a calculation of what I will roughly call “U.S. interests.” I don’t pretend to understand them all, and I’m not privy to the cabinet meetings so no one tells me what they are either. But it seems clear enough that it’s a multi-player game in which each major player (like those listed in my second sentence above) pursues multiple agendas simultaneously, and any analysis that comes to the conclusion “We only did it to get their oil” seems simpleminded at best.

85

bluey wrote:

“How is Iran a threat to America? Even if Iran has nuclear weapons how are they going to deliver them to continental America?”

Wow.

That is stunning.

I expect to see you on leno, bluey. When he asks you who we declared independence from, please don’t say canada.

Thanks,

JeffR

86

new zealand wrote:

“this is all about oil and nothing to do with terrorists who at one time worked for your own cia. …”

Fantastic!!!

Are you an exiled democrat?

That is straight out of their playbook.

Thanks for the wonderful post,

JeffR

87

“and after all is said and done you still dont know what your fighting for. …”

You watch WAY TOO MUCH CNN.

Most people understand full well that Iraq is THE CENTRAL FRONT in the War on Terror.

There has been one hell of a sea change in our political spectrum. cnn, abc, cbs, nbc have fallen on hard times. They are so obviously biased that the majority (unless I want a good laugh) ignore them completely.

Please remember when you watch cnn, they do not represent the majority view.

Thanks,

JeffR

88

Hey orion,

Perhaps you don’t have access to the written word in Queensland.

Perhaps you haven’t been keeping up with the Oil for Food Scandal.

I’ll fill you in on the low-lights:

Massive corruption of the u.n. beaurocracy and permanent Security Council Members. saddam bribing and bribing some more.

Any chance in hell that Security Council Resolution 1441 and previous agreements would have been enforced?

Nope.

Let me insert a thought into your sun-baked brain: If you allow the bully to pay you off and you respond to his trangressions with empty threats, the bully will be emboldened.

Thanks for playing your little Anti-American tune.

We love it!!!

Oh, I’m pleased that your country repudiated people like yourself and re-elected John Howard.

Thanks,

JeffR

89

Jerffy,

Do you have fits or something… you can’t just come in and make an intelligent post, or perhaps critique something?

You have to foam at the mouth for four or five consecutive posts? Wow, you have some kind of obsession chief cheerleader.

Maybe you should take your medication?

90

[quote]doogie wrote:
Can one of you peacenik douchebags explain what the U.S. could do, short of everyone converting to Islam, to make the terrorists happy?[/quote]

Send you and RJ to Iraq?

91

[quote]rainjack wrote:
orion wrote:
I just think it?s funny that you think that Iran should stick to international rules or else, the Iraq war was a clear violation of intenational law and you seem to be able to live with that fact quite well.

That’s total bullshit and you know it. You have stated no facts only unsupported BS that you think I should belkieve becuse you said so.

I swear, what is the deal with all of these idiots spewing outright lies and trying to pass them as fact?

[/quote]

Well, ZEB does it all the time. Why isn’t anyone else allowed to?

92

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
orion wrote:

So if some strategic options might have been considered and if they try to work professionaly they might have stumbled over the fact that sweet, sweet oil was to be found in Iraq? Could that have been one of the reasons they decided to invade it? If it was a close call, could that reason have tipped the scales to one side or the other?

I hesitate to tread on this ground, but let’s just concede the obvious. One of the reasons the Russians, the Europeans, the Chinese and we consider the Middle East to be more strategically important than either Bosnia or Central Africa (to pick two troubled regions out of many) is due to its energy production. If for some reason they all nuked each other over there, the world would sink into an economic depression pretty quickly. The same couldn’t be said if Ivory Coast and Ghana somehow managed to nuke each other.

That said, we didn’t go over there to get our hands on their oil, to control their oil, or any of that other crap that gets floated (not saying you floated it).

There are a lot of strategic considerations that go into a calculation of what I will roughly call “U.S. interests.” I don’t pretend to understand them all, and I’m not privy to the cabinet meetings so no one tells me what they are either. But it seems clear enough that it’s a multi-player game in which each major player (like those listed in my second sentence above) pursues multiple agendas simultaneously, and any analysis that comes to the conclusion “We only did it to get their oil” seems simpleminded at best.

[/quote]

This is one of the most intelligent responses on this subject I’ve ever read. Nice work, BB.

WMD

93

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:

There are a lot of strategic considerations that go into a calculation of what I will roughly call “U.S. interests.” I don’t pretend to understand them all, and I’m not privy to the cabinet meetings so no one tells me what they are either. But it seems clear enough that it’s a multi-player game in which each major player (like those listed in my second sentence above) pursues multiple agendas simultaneously, and any analysis that comes to the conclusion “We only did it to get their oil” seems simpleminded at best.

[/quote]

Great point. But are we just supposed to accept the fact that there are some covert “US interests” that the cabinet is withholding from the public?

I’ve been searching forever for a possible reason for US involvement in Iraq and the WMD reason to me isn’t legitimate. Perhaps the administration was lead to war under misguided pretenses.

Are there any articles that explain the reasons for the war that talk about Middle East relations? I can’t find any.

94

Here’s my take, alot of you liberals and apologists aren’t going to like it. We need to simply turn the hwole middle east into a parking lot full of oil fields. The whole area breeds nothing but violence and problems. We need to simply steam roll iraq, iran and syria, anyone who opposes us can just take a flying leap.

95

Ahahahahha! Hahahahahahaahhahaah! Ahahahahaha! Bahahahahaha!

96

[quote]snipeout wrote:
Here’s my take, alot of you liberals and apologists aren’t going to like it. We need to simply turn the hwole middle east into a parking lot full of oil fields. The whole area breeds nothing but violence and problems. We need to simply steam roll iraq, iran and syria, anyone who opposes us can just take a flying leap. [/quote]

What an incredible idea. Your knowledge of international affairs and its relationship to domestic politics really shines through. Same goes for your brilliant strategic warfare ideas. Keep posting more. Seriously.

97

[quote]WMD wrote:
doogie wrote:
Can one of you peacenik douchebags explain what the U.S. could do, short of everyone converting to Islam, to make the terrorists happy?

Send you and RJ to Iraq?
[/quote]

Yes, indeed, WMD you have hit the nail on the head. I would rather be a peacenik who claimed it then a warnik who talked the talk, but let others walk the walk. Oh, whats that doogie? You would rather stay and teach the schoolchildren… go home at night to your own children?

Those damn peaceniks, I hate those cowardly bastards!

98

Vroom, you have any military experience? Just wondering. I do realize it’s not a logical response, but this side of the world needs to be addressed and appeasing them does no good. You have to realize you’re dealing with a society with beliefs that are about 200 years outdated, they are ucivilized and play by no ones rules or civilized law.

99

[quote]snipeout wrote:
Here’s my take, alot of you liberals and apologists aren’t going to like it. We need to simply turn the hwole middle east into a parking lot full of oil fields. The whole area breeds nothing but violence and problems. We need to simply steam roll iraq, iran and syria, anyone who opposes us can just take a flying leap. [/quote]

Nice, nice, you have got the solution. If you run in 08 you have got my vote.

100

[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
WMD wrote:
doogie wrote:
Can one of you peacenik douchebags explain what the U.S. could do, short of everyone converting to Islam, to make the terrorists happy?

Send you and RJ to Iraq?

Yes, indeed, WMD you have hit the nail on the head. I would rather be a peacenik who claimed it then a warnik who talked the talk, but let others walk the walk. Oh, whats that doogie? You would rather stay and teach the schoolchildren… go home at night to your own children?

Those damn peaceniks, I hate those cowardly bastards![/quote]

I did my eight years in the reserves and did everything that was asked of me. Now I’ve moved on. Should I be embarrassed about that?

Does this stupid response from ya’ll mean you have no ideas on what would make the terrorists stop hating us?