Why Iran Should Get the Bomb

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
161

How does my assurance not count, am I a goat? lol

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]shorty_blitz wrote:
His opinions are pretty much spot on, Chushin.

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]BPCorso wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

I wasn’t talking about the Shah. I was talking about the rural, tribal fundies who wanted to overthrow him. The same ones who led the 79 revolution and now complain about us overthrowing the Shah because they need a pretence to hate us.[/quote]

That is incorrect and an over-simplification of the Iranian people and their mindset. It’s not accurate to portray the majority of Iranians as rural, tribal fundamentalists even in the late 70s. There haven’t been tribes in Iran in thousands of years. It is not Afghanistan or an Arab country with legacies of a nomadic, tribal life style. The people take pride in not being a tribal society including the rural folk.

It’s an educated populace desperately trying to be as modern as their government will allow. The people who led the 79 revolution were students and in the beginning it was not an islamic revolution. Rather the islamic theocracy gained control of the revolution at a strategic time. Also an overwhelming majority of Iranians in Iran and in diaspora both past and present hate the Shah. It has nothing at all to do with pretense for hating America. It has to do with the Shah being a puppet dictator who was ruthless, vainglorious, and did not respect the will of the people.

Iranians by and large are a secular society especially relative to the region they are in. I understand the majority of you reading this will scoff at that remark but it is the truth. I can’t prove that with facts and figures but neither can any of you disprove it. Quoting statements from the regime and mentioning propaganda videos (that come from the Iranian regime) does not prove the population has a fundamentalist character.

Propaganda that the Iranian government releases to the world media showing anti-U.S. protests is not the reality of the country. The video footage you see is propaganda, designed to show that the regime is powerful and has the backing of the people. Of course there are hard-line supporters of the regime that maintain a revolutionary zeal but they are in the minority and looked down upon. The Iranian government provides both payment and transportation for people to show up to scheduled protests.

Generally, Iranian people are pro-Western and welcome all the benefits of modern, Western society. Of course I’m talking about the general populace and not the regime and I’m talking in generalities and not in absolutes. My take-home point is that the Iranian populace is not merely comprised of members of the IRGC and Basij militias. It seems like many of you hold this view.[/quote]

That’s a whole lot of opinion.

What’s it based on?[/quote]
[/quote]

Seems to correlate with Iranians I know but it is just opinion. All of them that I know are decidedly non religious. They do all live here though.
[/quote]

Not particularly fitting with what I learned from the Iranian woman I lived with and her friends.

But that means nothing.

Thus, I ask what his opinions are based on.

And no, “shorty,” your assurances don’t count. [/quote]

162

But tell everyone the memoirs from the Iranian woman who lived next to you, I’m sure everyone is dying to find out now.

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]shorty_blitz wrote:
His opinions are pretty much spot on, Chushin.

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]BPCorso wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

I wasn’t talking about the Shah. I was talking about the rural, tribal fundies who wanted to overthrow him. The same ones who led the 79 revolution and now complain about us overthrowing the Shah because they need a pretence to hate us.[/quote]

That is incorrect and an over-simplification of the Iranian people and their mindset. It’s not accurate to portray the majority of Iranians as rural, tribal fundamentalists even in the late 70s. There haven’t been tribes in Iran in thousands of years. It is not Afghanistan or an Arab country with legacies of a nomadic, tribal life style. The people take pride in not being a tribal society including the rural folk.

It’s an educated populace desperately trying to be as modern as their government will allow. The people who led the 79 revolution were students and in the beginning it was not an islamic revolution. Rather the islamic theocracy gained control of the revolution at a strategic time. Also an overwhelming majority of Iranians in Iran and in diaspora both past and present hate the Shah. It has nothing at all to do with pretense for hating America. It has to do with the Shah being a puppet dictator who was ruthless, vainglorious, and did not respect the will of the people.

Iranians by and large are a secular society especially relative to the region they are in. I understand the majority of you reading this will scoff at that remark but it is the truth. I can’t prove that with facts and figures but neither can any of you disprove it. Quoting statements from the regime and mentioning propaganda videos (that come from the Iranian regime) does not prove the population has a fundamentalist character.

Propaganda that the Iranian government releases to the world media showing anti-U.S. protests is not the reality of the country. The video footage you see is propaganda, designed to show that the regime is powerful and has the backing of the people. Of course there are hard-line supporters of the regime that maintain a revolutionary zeal but they are in the minority and looked down upon. The Iranian government provides both payment and transportation for people to show up to scheduled protests.

Generally, Iranian people are pro-Western and welcome all the benefits of modern, Western society. Of course I’m talking about the general populace and not the regime and I’m talking in generalities and not in absolutes. My take-home point is that the Iranian populace is not merely comprised of members of the IRGC and Basij militias. It seems like many of you hold this view.[/quote]

That’s a whole lot of opinion.

What’s it based on?[/quote]
[/quote]

Seems to correlate with Iranians I know but it is just opinion. All of them that I know are decidedly non religious. They do all live here though.
[/quote]

Not particularly fitting with what I learned from the Iranian woman I lived with and her friends.

But that means nothing.

Thus, I ask what his opinions are based on.

And no, “shorty,” your assurances don’t count. [/quote]

163

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
He was the most liberal leader Iran has ever had.
[/quote]
What about Cyrus?

164

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
He was the most liberal leader Iran has ever had.
[/quote]
What about Cyrus? [/quote]

That was Persia not the modern country of Iran.

165

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
He was the most liberal leader Iran has ever had.
[/quote]
What about Cyrus? [/quote]

That was Persia not the modern country of Iran.[/quote]

Minor point, but the name “Persia” was used only by the people who were not themselves Persian, i.e. the Greeks and the Romans.

The Greeks knew it as Pars (a name that properly referred only to one tribe within the entire empire), the Romans as Persia (which was of course the Latinization of “Pars”) But the “Persians” have always referred to their country as “Iran”. Reza Shah (the last Shah’s father) asked that foreigners refer to the country by its proper name in 1935, but his son kind of waffled about it and said essentially “call it whatever you want.”

Nomenclature aside, a what point in history would you estimate that “Persia” became “the modern country of Iran”? Twentieth century or before?

166

For that matter, at what point would you say that England became the “modern country of England” or Germany became the “modern country of Germany”? Newer “modern” countries like Israel or Australia or Murka have a definite inception date, but other, more ancient societies have lines that are a bit more blurry.

168

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

Minor point, but the name “Persia” was used only by the people who were not themselves Persian, i.e. the Greeks and the Romans.

The Greeks knew it as Pars (a name that properly referred only to one tribe within the entire empire), the Romans as Persia (which was of course the Latinization of “Pars”) But the “Persians” have always referred to their country as “Iran”. Reza Shah (the last Shah’s father) asked that foreigners refer to the country by its proper name in 1935, but his son kind of waffled about it and said essentially “call it whatever you want.”

Nomenclature aside, a what point in history would you estimate that “Persia” became “the modern country of Iran”? Twentieth century or before?
[/quote]

I wouldn’t necessarily choose an arbitrary point in time for ‘modern Iran’. I just meant that I was talking about modern times as opposed to two thousand, five hundred years ago.

169

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
For that matter, at what point would you say that England became the “modern country of England”
[/quote]

England was unified by Alfred the Great who based his laws on Noah’s commandments and OT law.

Germany is relatively new. Unified recently by Bismarck, the Hohenzollerns were upstarts compared to the other noble houses of the continent.

[quote]
Newer “modern” countries like Israel or Australia or Murka have a definite inception date, but other, more ancient societies have lines that are a bit more blurry. [/quote]

Australia was federated in 1901 but Australia day marks the anniversary of the arrival of the first fleet in 1788.

170

Iran are not building a bomb, they are attempting to build nuclear energy to bring their living standards up. Their government is bad and inhumane, like every government ever. The Idea Iran with a nuclear capability would attack another country is so silly. American and Israeli utter military dominance would wipe out Iran out with a swiftness. They know where Iranian Nuclear facilities are, they could smash the Iranian infrastructure so fast that Iran would not be able to launch any Nuclear warheads.

I would be much much more worried about the fact both india and Pakistan have nuclear capability and hate each other so much both sides leadership regularly talk about nuking the other one.

Has there ever been any proof that Iran is trying to build a nuclear weapons program rather than nuclear power to fully industrialise Iran to western standards of living? If there have been I will gladly retract my stance. I have no horse in this race.

172

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Kareem Said wrote:
Iran are not building a bomb, they are attempting to build nuclear energy to bring their living standards up. Their government is bad and inhumane, like every government ever. The Idea Iran with a nuclear capability would attack another country is so silly…

[/quote]
[/quote]

Like I said, if you can provide me with proof they are I will happily retract my Faux pas.

174

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Kareem Said wrote:
Iran are not building a bomb, they are attempting to build nuclear energy to bring their living standards up. Their government is bad and inhumane, like every government ever. The Idea Iran with a nuclear capability would attack another country is so silly. American and Israeli utter military dominance would wipe out Iran out with a swiftness. They know where Iranian Nuclear facilities are, they could smash the Iranian infrastructure so fast that Iran would not be able to launch any Nuclear warheads.

I would be much much more worried about the fact both india and Pakistan have nuclear capability and hate each other so much both sides leadership regularly talk about nuking the other one.

Has there ever been any proof that Iran is trying to build a nuclear weapons program rather than nuclear power to fully industrialise Iran to western standards of living? If there have been I will gladly retract my stance. I have no horse in this race.
[/quote]

Yes, that is why they have been so secretive and evasive, and have endured economy-crippling sanctions.

Sheesh.[/quote]

Yeah, I wonder why Iran would be secretive about its nuclear power when Israel and America constantly bomb the shit out of nuclear sites. What an odd policy. Tell me again why Iran should have to be open about it to a foreign power which has nuclear power swell as one of the two highest Nuclear arsenals in the world. And supplied every major dictator with the weapons and gas to murder their people. Oh and funded Iraq in a war with Iran.

“The United States actively supported the Iraqi war effort by supplying the Iraqis with billions of dollars of credits, by providing U.S. military intelligence and advice to the Iraqis, and by closely monitoring third country arms sales to Iraq to make sure that Iraq had the military weaponry required. The United States also provided strategic operational advice to the Iraqis to better use their assets in combat… The CIA, including both CIA Director Casey and Deputy Director Gates, knew of, approved of, and assisted in the sale of non-U.S. origin military weapons, ammunition and vehicles to Iraq. My notes, memoranda and other documents in my NSC files show or tend to show that the CIA knew of, approved of, and assisted in the sale of non-U.S. origin military weapons, munitions and vehicles to Iraq”

What exactly gives America the right to stop Iran from possessing a nuclear energy program or a nuclear weapons capability? America and all its allies have them. America is the only nation to use them on a civilian population. And Iran should be open with that imperialist powerhouse?

Was the US giving open viewing to the soviet union of its nuclear energy facilities and nuclear weapons facilities? If not why should Iran give viewings to an openly hostile nation that actively supports the overthrow of the government?

I wouldn’t advocate America have to show Iran its facilities so why would you expect the opposite?

177

600×604 50.8 KB

…yes america bombed civilian populated japan cities. they did so in order to save tens of thousands of american lives that it would have taken to invade their country. remember we didn’t surprise attack japan as they did us. we gave them an ultimatum and they refused twice.

then… bam. live action.

liberal intellectuals are frightened of confronting islam’s honor - shame culture.

…any civilization that condones honor killings (and in an honor culture, it is legitimate, expected, even required to shed blood for the sake of honour, to save face and redeem the dishonored face) should never be allowed a weapons of mass destruction.

iran has stated they would wipe israel off the map. even if america pussy foots about in their diplomatic way with iran, israel will not.

P.S.

stock up on your canned tuna. watch for inflation to begin in march-april. it goes downhill from there. $17 trillion in debt doesn’t make for a healthy economy. in a short while you will need a shoebox full of money to buy your toilet paper and grocery items.

179

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Kareem Said wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Kareem Said wrote:
Iran are not building a bomb, they are attempting to build nuclear energy to bring their living standards up. Their government is bad and inhumane, like every government ever. The Idea Iran with a nuclear capability would attack another country is so silly. American and Israeli utter military dominance would wipe out Iran out with a swiftness. They know where Iranian Nuclear facilities are, they could smash the Iranian infrastructure so fast that Iran would not be able to launch any Nuclear warheads.

I would be much much more worried about the fact both india and Pakistan have nuclear capability and hate each other so much both sides leadership regularly talk about nuking the other one.

Has there ever been any proof that Iran is trying to build a nuclear weapons program rather than nuclear power to fully industrialise Iran to western standards of living? If there have been I will gladly retract my stance. I have no horse in this race.
[/quote]

Yes, that is why they have been so secretive and evasive, and have endured economy-crippling sanctions.

Sheesh.[/quote]

Yeah, I wonder why Iran would be secretive about its nuclear power when Israel and America constantly bomb the shit out of nuclear sites. What an odd policy. Tell me again why Iran should have to be open about it to a foreign power which has nuclear power swell as one of the two highest Nuclear arsenals in the world. And supplied every major dictator with the weapons and gas to murder their people. Oh and funded Iraq in a war with Iran.

“The United States actively supported the Iraqi war effort by supplying the Iraqis with billions of dollars of credits, by providing U.S. military intelligence and advice to the Iraqis, and by closely monitoring third country arms sales to Iraq to make sure that Iraq had the military weaponry required. The United States also provided strategic operational advice to the Iraqis to better use their assets in combat… The CIA, including both CIA Director Casey and Deputy Director Gates, knew of, approved of, and assisted in the sale of non-U.S. origin military weapons, ammunition and vehicles to Iraq. My notes, memoranda and other documents in my NSC files show or tend to show that the CIA knew of, approved of, and assisted in the sale of non-U.S. origin military weapons, munitions and vehicles to Iraq”

What exactly gives America the right to stop Iran from possessing a nuclear energy program or a nuclear weapons capability? America and all its allies have them. America is the only nation to use them on a civilian population. And Iran should be open with that imperialist powerhouse?

Was the US giving open viewing to the soviet union of its nuclear energy facilities and nuclear weapons facilities? If not why should Iran give viewings to an openly hostile nation that actively supports the overthrow of the government?

I wouldn’t advocate America have to show Iran its facilities so why would you expect the opposite?[/quote]

Lol.

Nope, no horse in this race.[/quote]

Non at all, both governments are oppressive, both fund foreign wars and both have shitty human rights records.

Again, you really have not provided a single shred of evidence Iran is building a nuclear weapons program. Instead of doing so you are posting irrelevant one liners, the type Alex Jones conspiracy wackos do when you ask them to show proof of the new world order.

You wouldn’t make claims in real life with no evidence would you? So why do it online? Can we not have a sensible dialogue on the subject?

You assert Iran is building a nuclear weapons program, I asserted there is no evidence Iran is doing anything other than pursuing a nuclear energy program. Now do you have any evidence to show Iran is running a nuclear weapons program? If so I would very much like to see it.