Iranian Guard: We'll 'Punch' the US

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
21

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
This is the most important quote in the article IMO. If we will recieve a HEAVIER punch from the guards in the future, when exactly was the “first” punch? [/quote]

Good question.

Seeing that they’re called the “Revolutionary Guards”, and that most of them were personally behind the overthrow of the Shah, it follows that the punch was getting rid of the tyrant.

They got rid of a puppet of the West in an oil-rich country. That’s a hell of a punch.

If you see any flaw in this analysis, let me know.

22

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Maybe Iran should follow some of your advice.[/quote]

Absolutely. I harshly condemn such provocations. But look at the chronology of events. You called them terrorists, they flexed their muscles. Consider that none of this would be happening if you weren’t in Iraq.

The Ayatollah is very pissed at all this, but can’t do much to stop those branches from rattling. Ultimately, he’s the one with the final say in foreign policy matters. He just can’t censor the president or the IRG. The population would raise against him if he was to tell the Guards to shut up in the face of a terrorist branding by the US.

23

[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
This is the most important quote in the article IMO. If we will recieve a HEAVIER punch from the guards in the future, when exactly was the “first” punch?

Good question.

Seeing that they’re called the “Revolutionary Guards”, and that most of them were personally behind the overthrow of the Shah, it follows that the punch was getting rid of the tyrant.

They got rid of a puppet of the West in an oil-rich country. That’s a hell of a punch.

If you see any flaw in this analysis, let me know.[/quote]

Okay. The Shah, under the belief that Jimmy Carter (no, I’m not making this up) would support him as he (the Shah) attempted to establish a modern secular state, allowed about 500 whack jobs to roam freely in Iran, instead of shooting them. This 500 or so formed an unholy alliance calling themselves the Revolutionary Guard. Like a large terror cell, they pulled a Bolshevik style revolution (where a tiny minority takes over the government). The population was silenced by the dictum ‘This is Allah’s revolution!!’ Iran thus became the theocratic, vote-for-the-candidate-of-OUR-choice hellhole that it is.

A great country, Iran, has been captured by maniacs, a lot like the Nazis. Gotta root 'em out or bug bomb the whole place. Take your pick.

24

[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Maybe Iran should follow some of your advice.

Absolutely. I harshly condemn such provocations. But look at the chronology of events. You called them terrorists, they flexed their muscles. Consider that none of this would be happening if you weren’t in Iraq.

The Ayatollah is very pissed at all this, but can’t do much to stop those branches from rattling. Ultimately, he’s the one with the final say in foreign policy matters. He just can’t censor the president or the IRG. The population would raise against him if he was to tell the Guards to shut up in the face of a terrorist branding by the US.[/quote]

Nonsense. The people would LOVE to be rid of all these wannabe 15th century jihadists. Suleiman is gone…time to enter the modern world (which for Iran would be about the 18th century, as an improvement.)

25

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
he (the Shah) attempted to establish a modern secular state [/quote]

The guy had less legitimacy than Louis XVI.

Would have this happened if the West accepted the right of Iranians to decide their own destiny? I have to ask.

Mossadeq was democratically elected, you know.

God forbid you let a democracy blossom in Iran.

The place is like a 100 times more democratic than Saudi Arabia, yet I see you very pleased with the Al Sauds.

26

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Nonsense. The people would LOVE to be rid of all these wannabe 15th century jihadists. [/quote]

There is a huge difference between reflexively coming together in the face of a foreign threat (calling them axis of evil, terrorists is generally perceived as such) and wanting to change the system in place.

Iran has all the assets to evolve steadily into a democratic nation. As you rightly point out, many would LOVE to improve the situation and get rid of the prevailing fundamentalism. They are challenging the establishment everyday, but you’re not helping them at all by isolating the country. It only consolidates the power of the people in place. Kinda like your interventionism in Cuba turned Castro into a dictator, or how the 2003 coup radicalized Chavez.

Trust me, it adds up perfectly. You just need to take some perspective.

Trying to do anything to the Iranians (which by the way, did nothing to provoke you) will ensure the radicals get even more power. You were attacked by a bunch of bearded guys with nothing but pocket knives, and you instinctively surrendered many of your rights to the government. Imagine what the Iranians are willing to surrender in the face of the most powerful army on earth. In the position of an Iranian, you’d cut your testicles and hand them to the Ayatollah on a plate. Think about it.

27

[quote]lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
he (the Shah) attempted to establish a modern secular state

The guy had less legitimacy than Louis XVI.

This 500 or so formed an unholy alliance calling themselves the Revolutionary Guard. Like a large terror cell, they pulled a Bolshevik style revolution (where a tiny minority takes over the government). The population was silenced by the dictum ‘This is Allah’s revolution!!’ Iran thus became the theocratic, vote-for-the-candidate-of-OUR-choice hellhole that it is.

Would have this happened if the West accepted the right of Iranians to decide their own destiny? I have to ask.

Mossadeq was democratically elected, you know.

A great country, Iran, has been captured by maniacs, a lot like the Nazis. Gotta root 'em out or bug bomb the whole place. Take your pick.

God forbid you let a democracy blossom in Iran.

The place is like a 100 times more democratic than Saudi Arabia, yet I see you very pleased with the Al Sauds.

[/quote]

All the Iranians have to do is shut up and sell oil. They could then give everyone in Iran a share, much like we do in Alaska (a state here that shares oil revenues).

But no, let’s call for Jihad, call for our ally to be wiped off the map, and send IEDs to terrorists in Iraq, a country where democracy is in ‘blossom’ as you so wonderfully put it. Let’s tell the Americans that if they label us as terrorists for killing Americans in Iraq that we’ll ‘punch’ them.

Burn the nest…

28

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Burn the nest…

[/quote]

Maybe one of these days you’ll look closely enough to differentiate between the leadership and the populace, or the terrorists and the populace?

29

[quote]lixy wrote:

They got rid of a puppet of the West in an oil-rich country. That’s a hell of a punch.

If you see any flaw in this analysis, let me know.[/quote]

Why would you assume he was talking about something that happened 20 years ago as opposed to yesterday or a month ago? Unless you are in denial about Iran supplying arms to Iraq insurgents and the Karbala incident.

30

[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Maybe Iran should follow some of your advice.

Absolutely. I harshly condemn such provocations. But look at the chronology of events. You called them terrorists, they flexed their muscles. Consider that none of this would be happening if you weren’t in Iraq.

The Ayatollah is very pissed at all this, but can’t do much to stop those branches from rattling. Ultimately, he’s the one with the final say in foreign policy matters. He just can’t censor the president or the IRG. The population would raise against him if he was to tell the Guards to shut up in the face of a terrorist branding by the US.[/quote]

We did not just call them terrorists. Israel captured a ship loaded with arms to Hezbollah. Since Hezbollah is considered a terrorist organization by the US for it’s wave of terror against US and UN peacekeepers in Lebanon during the 80’s, it stands to reason that Iran is supporting terrorists.

Why should Iran be offended at being called a terrorist supporting nation when it has been calling the US Great Satan for over 20 years. Maybe they should set an example and shut the hell up already. They have proved one thing: they can dish it out but they can not take it.

31

[quote]Inner Hulk wrote:
Or perhaps, just maybe, American press mistranslated? They’ve mistranslated the Iran president’s words numerous times in the past. I don’t see why they couldn’t have here.[/quote]

Misquoted? You wouldn’t happen to know what he “meant” to say?

32

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Why would you assume he was talking about something that happened 20 years ago as opposed to yesterday or a month ago? Unless you are in denial about Iran supplying arms to Iraq insurgents and the Karbala incident.[/quote]

Not a bad question.

However, it does seem to give rise to the question of why we all (myself included) assume it means something that we assume but don’t have proof of right now?

Why wouldn’t they look at a previous success and refer to that?

The press and the administration are doing a great job of demonizing Iran… whether or not it is truly warranted is something I certainly don’t know.

I have met and worked with Iranian people, back before all this happened, while living in California. They were IT people and they didn’t seem to have any radical notions as far as they expressed.

I think there is a great divide between the statements of the government and the people of Iran. This is similar to the fact that Bush doesn’t really represent the opinions of the entire population of the US either… especially these days with his approval rating so low.

It’s tough to decipher these things, assuming you are willing to try.

33

[quote]lixy wrote:
Kinda like your interventionism in Cuba turned Castro into a dictator, or how the 2003 coup radicalized Chavez.
[/quote]

Revisionism at it’s best right there.

But you’re right, any US action would galvanize the Iranians into allegiance with the fundamentalists. They had a moderate president and replaced him with a fundamentalist nut job already, so who knows what they would do next.

34

You guys really arguing over this?

Of course they’re mouthing off, we’ve been talking about invading them forever and we have a bad history with them.

Let’em yap, fuck’em. We’re not going to do anything, and neither are they.

And whomever said that our reliationship with Israel has been terrible for us, I agree. We should withdraw support for them.

35

The Nest…

"U.S. Forces Tracking Iranians in Iraq
By KIM GAMEL, Associated Press Writer
4 hours ago

BAGHDAD - American forces are tracking about 50 members of an elite Iranian force who have crossed the border into southern Iraq to train Shiite militia fighters, a top U.S. general said Sunday. The French foreign minister, meanwhile, arrived in Baghdad on a groundbreaking visit after years of icy relations with the United States over Iraq.

In east Baghdad, a mortar barrage slammed into a mainly Shiite neighborhood, killing 12 and wounding 31, police said, and a major battle raged north of the capital where residents of a Shiite city were fighting what police said was a band of al-Qaida in Iraq gunmen.

Separtely, Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, whose command includes the volatile southern rim of Baghdad and districts to the south, said his troops are tracking about 50 members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps in their area _ the first detailed allegation that Iranians have been training fighters within Iraq’s borders.

“We know they’re here and we target them as well,” he said, citing intelligence reports as evidence of their presence.

He declined to be more specific and said no Iranian forces have been arrested in his territory.

“We’ve got about 50 of those,” he said, referring to the Iranian forces. “They go back and forth. There’s a porous border.”

The Bush administration is moving toward blacklisting Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps as a “terrorist” organization, subjecting at least part of the entity to financial sanctions, U.S. officials said this week.

Hussein Saadon, 56, an owner of a small minibus station, was soaked in blood after he drove four victims to the hospital. He said the district had been without electricity for several days and the people were suffering in the heat.

“It fills me with pain and anger to see an attack on such poor area where is no presence of police nor army bases or checkpoints,” Saadon said.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Burn the nest…

36

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
But you’re right, any US action would galvanize the Iranians into allegiance with the fundamentalists. They had a moderate president and replaced him with a fundamentalist nut job already, so who knows what they would do next.[/quote]

They did so because you called them axis of evil.

37

[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
But you’re right, any US action would galvanize the Iranians into allegiance with the fundamentalists. They had a moderate president and replaced him with a fundamentalist nut job already, so who knows what they would do next.

They did so because you called them axis of evil.[/quote]

The truth hurts.

38

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
All the Iranians have to do is shut up and sell oil. They could then give everyone in Iran a share, much like we do in Alaska (a state here that shares oil revenues).
[/quote]

You can’t be seriously comparing a no-man’s land to a civilization that gave humanity the windmill.

39

[quote]lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
All the Iranians have to do is shut up and sell oil. They could then give everyone in Iran a share, much like we do in Alaska (a state here that shares oil revenues).

You can’t be seriously comparing a no-man’s land to a civilization that gave humanity the windmill. [/quote]

What the hell does that have to do with anything?

Iran invented the windmill, so they don’t have to share the wealth of their oil?

Please show me the logic in that.

40

Are you suggesting that Iran must share their oil?^

Is that what you are seriously saying?

The only intelligent response to this is no.