NationStates Jolt Archive

So I wonder when the talking will end on this matter. Iran seems hell bent on doing whatever it likes. Which I do want to make clear is there right. However the west also has a right to do whatever it wants. I wonder how long before the offer goes out. Will trade you a bombing campaign for one destroyed nuclear program.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/05/17/iran.nuclear/index.html

We'll never destroy their nuclear program but we can set it back.

Ok UN now its put up or shut up. Do something about this. This is your big chance to prove your worth.

The Iranians are either very smart or very stupid.
Personally, I'm going to go with stupid and beleive its only a matter of time before Israel "takes actions into its own hands"...with the full backing of the West (or atleast America).

Personally, I'm going to go with stupid and beleive its only a matter of time before Israel "takes actions into its own hands"...with the full backing of the West (or atleast America).

They're being shrewd, if Isreal attacks then it'll have Syria, Iran, Palestine and anyone else they've pissed off recently coming at them. And that's not something good.

They're being shrewd, if Isreal attacks then it'll have Syria, Iran, Palestine and anyone else they've pissed off recently coming at them. And that's not something good.


Frankly Israel has kicked all of those countries' asses before. The Israelis are armed to the teeth and aren't near as squeamish as Americans about civilian casualties.

They're being shrewd, if Isreal attacks then it'll have Syria, Iran, Palestine and anyone else they've pissed off recently coming at them. And that's not something good.
Fact is most Arab nations don't want to see a nuclear Iran. I think most of them will look the other way if Israel takes Iran down a peg.

Frankly Israel has kicked all of those countries' asses before. The Israelis are armed to the teeth and aren't near as squeamish as Americans about civilian casualties.

Nor are the Persians or Syrians, remember that.

Hey, we have no right to stop them from developing nuclear technology, either for civil or defense means. We may not like them, but we shouldn't do anything to harm Iran just because the government's retarded.

Hey, we have no right to stop them from developing nuclear technology, either for civil or defense means. We may not like them, but we shouldn't do anything to harm Iran just because the government's retarded.

Actually we do have the right to stop them from developing it for military purposes as that violates the Non-Proliferation Treaty. I do not mind if they develope it for civilian use but military use? Sorry but that goes against the NPT.

Hey, we have no right to stop them from developing nuclear technology, either for civil or defense means. We may not like them, but we shouldn't do anything to harm Iran just because the government's retarded.

Cornlieu is *sighs* right about this one.

I don't see why Israel, India or Pakistan can have nukes, if Iran can't, but hey, it's not really my place to comment on such things.

Iran isn't realistically going to stay in the NPT, is it? Do you honestly see the Iranian government allowing any restrictions on their nuclear program?

Iran isn't realistically going to stay in the NPT, is it? Do you honestly see the Iranian government allowing any restrictions on their nuclear program?

Well so far...they have not done anything as proscribedby the NPT to pull out of the NPT. North Korea did pull out of the NPT so they can develope nuclear weapons though they shouldn't have them either.

Cornlieu is *sighs* right about this one.

I don't see why Israel, India or Pakistan can have nukes, if Iran can't, but hey, it's not really my place to comment on such things.

Yikes! Yootopia said I was right about something. I gotta put this in my journal. :D

Any reason why we don't just help Iran devellop nuclear tech for civilian rpurposes? I mean, if we had a number of scientists and such working with them at their research sites, those could at the same time keep an eye on whether they're exploring military application. And we couldn't be accused of holding them back either.

Yikes! Yootopia said I was right about something. I gotta put this in my journal. :D

You just double-posted... *grumbles* :p

Cornlieu is *sighs* right about this one.

I don't see why Israel, India or Pakistan can have nukes, if Iran can't, but hey, it's not really my place to comment on such things.
Well I'm afraid fairness doesn't come into international politics. It's simply doing what's in your own country's interests, and using whatever unfair advantages are at your disposal to achieve that.

Frankly Israel has kicked all of those countries' asses before. The Israelis are armed to the teeth and aren't near as squeamish as Americans about civilian casualties.

Saudi Arabia is scared of what Iran might do now it no longer has to worry about having Saddam for a neighbour.

Israel is unlikely to care whether the others gang up on them when Iran has stated that Israel should be wiped off the map.

Ahhh the good ol' NPT. So powerful and respected that it can be set to the same standard as the War Powers Act.
The problem with Iran developing nukes is that Iran has the right temperment to USE them. Same with North Korea. Many other countries want them to say 'Were big and scary! RAWR!', sort of like the time in third grade when you picked up a stick and said, "I have a stick, do what I say!' and some little first grader tried to pick up a much larger stick.
This may or may not have happened, but you get the idea.

Cornlieu is *sighs* right about this one.

I don't see why Israel, India or Pakistan can have nukes, if Iran can't, but hey, it's not really my place to comment on such things.

Because to have nuclear weapons you need to really have a responsable government. Its like gun liscencing laws in the US. You have to run a background check and be very careful about who you give a gun to (although frankly I dont see the US as being anywhere near as careful as it should be in this regard). Iran's government has not demonstrated itself to be responsable, partically with the comment about wiping Israel off the map. Israel is a state in its own right, as much as Japan, Canada, Uganda, Holland, Syria or Brazil.

Israel is a state in its own right, as much as Japan, Canada, Uganda, Holland, Syria or Brazil.Holland is a province, not a state..

Any reason why we don't just help Iran devellop nuclear tech for civilian rpurposes? I mean, if we had a number of scientists and such working with them at their research sites, those could at the same time keep an eye on whether they're exploring military application. And we couldn't be accused of holding them back either.

Because the only way that would work is if the western world starts showing genuine respect to the country and starts treating it as an equal, instead of as a backward loony.
Personally, I am all for that. Why fight someone if you can get them to join you ? Hell - give them that UN security council seat. They do have a point when they call it an outrage there is no muslem representation.

Holland is a province, not a state..

Holland=The Netherlands.

Holland=The Netherlands.

North and South Holland are 2 provinces in The Netherlands. Holland and Netherlands arent the same thing but it's often confused.

We'll never destroy their nuclear program but we can set it back.

Ok UN now its put up or shut up. Do something about this. This is your big chance to prove your worth.

The israelis can and will. Between Iraq, Israel and the US we've gotem' pinned. Israel won't miss a chance to get even with Iran for HAMAS and those rockets that land daily in Israel.

Of course, the UN will pull the same double minded when it comes to Iran as it did Iraq.

Ok UN now its put up or shut up. Do something about this. This is your big chance to prove your worth.

Yeah. Come on USA do something!

What with Russia, China, France and Britain as your co pilots i'm sure the USA will be able to do something.... right?

Yeah. Come on USA do something!

What with Russia, China, France and Britain as your co pilots i'm sure the USA will be able to do something.... right?

No, he was talking about the United Nations.

Like, ok UN, since you thought we (America) did the wrong thing with Iraq lets see you do better with Iran.

Atleast thats what I got from it.

No, he was talking about the United Nations.

Like, ok UN, since you thought we (America) did the wrong thing with Iraq lets see you do better with Iran.

Atleast thats what I got from it.

------>USA, Russia, China, France, Britain<-------

=UN

We should let Iran enrich its uranium freely and without IAEA inspections; if they try to make any clear moves towards getting a nuke Israel and/or the US will take care of it by launching airstrikes like we did in the 80's with Saddam. They get their power, they can enrich uranium freely, and they can form any deals they want for peaceful nuclear technology.

In a globalized world it is virtually impossible to keep technology from crossing borders and almost equally as hard to keep purchases of it secret. The US and Israel have the spy satellites and drones necessary to monitor from afar, and our intelligence agencies are getting better with each passing year making it very hard for Iran to do anything we don't want them to. I say vigilant trust is the best policy in regard to Iran.

We leave them alone to pursue nuclear power, and in exchange they make no moves towards a nuclear weapon under threat of a covert military response...it's a win-win situation.

Did anyone else see the story that Chavez is thinking about selling his F-16s to Iran?

Did anyone else see the story that Chavez is thinking about selling his F-16s to Iran?

Only 21 of them, and many of them are out of date because we don't sell updates or new equipment to Venezuela. That's not a surprise, since Iran's military is nothing more than a bunch of reverse-engineered US and Soviet technology from the 1980's and a bunch of cobbled together homemade weapons; the newest stuff they have comes from China or Russia and even that is out of date compared to those nations' newest weapons.

Their military is generally out of date and of dubious quality...I wouldn't be surprised if most of it were to fall apart in the event of invasion like Saddam's did in 1991 or 2002. The Revolutionary Guards are the only really elite military unit they have, and that's not enough to stop a massive invasion by a coalition of nations boasting vastly superior manpower, weaponry, quality, and technology.

We should let Iran enrich its uranium freely and without IAEA inspections; if they try to make any clear moves towards getting a nuke Israel and/or the US will take care of it by launching airstrikes like we did in the 80's with Saddam. They get their power, they can enrich uranium freely, and they can form any deals they want for peaceful nuclear technology.

We leave them alone to pursue nuclear power, and in exchange they make no moves towards a nuclear weapon under threat of a covert military response...it's a win-win situation.

the UN HAS offered to help with the Iranian nuclear program...they offered a light water nuclear reactor, which is the type that doesn't enrich uranium to the weapons-grade level. however, the manner in which they are enriching it now IS a necessary move towards a nuclear weapon, hence the dilemma. the problem is not that the West won't let Iran have a nuclear energy program, the problem is that Iran denies the West has any say in the matter at all, even though nuclear proliferation is a global issue with transnational ramifications. thus the NPT, and moreover, the UN reluctance to give Iran free rein.

Only 21 of them, and many of them are out of date because we don't sell updates or new equipment to Venezuela. That's not a surprise, since Iran's military is nothing more than a bunch of reverse-engineered US and Soviet technology from the 1980's and a bunch of cobbled together homemade weapons; the newest stuff they have comes from China or Russia and even that is out of date compared to those nations' newest weapons.

Their military is generally out of date and of dubious quality...I wouldn't be surprised if most of it were to fall apart in the event of invasion like Saddam's did in 1991 or 2002. The Revolutionary Guards are the only really elite military unit they have, and that's not enough to stop a massive invasion by a coalition of nations boasting vastly superior manpower, weaponry, quality, and technology.

Oh invasion now is it?

To what end exactly? How do you envisage that succeeding?

'Liberating' the people from their own Revolution?

Telling them what form of government is best for them?

Occupy them?

Or just go in, get their leadership and exit, leaving a nice vacuum for even worse extremists to get to power?

Oh invasion now is it?
To what exactly? How do you envisage that succeeding?
'Liberating' the people from their own Revolution?

Telling them what form of government is best for them?
Occupy them?
Or just go in, get their leadership and exit, leaving a nice vacuum for even worse extremists to get to power?

Why waste the time and money to invade them?

Just keep airstrikes and covert operations on hand in case Iran goes for nukes, but otherwise let them enrich as much fuel uranium and build as many plants as they want.

Only 21 of them, and many of them are out of date because we don't sell updates or new equipment to Venezuela. That's not a surprise, since Iran's military is nothing more than a bunch of reverse-engineered US and Soviet technology from the 1980's and a bunch of cobbled together homemade weapons.

Their military is generally out of date and of dubious quality...I wouldn't be surprised if most of it were to fall apart in the event of invasion like Saddam's did in 1991 or 2002[3]. The Revolutionary Guards are the only really elite military unit they have, and that's not enough to stop a massive invasion by a coalition of nations boasting vastly superior manpower, weaponry, quality, and technology.

The 2nd invasion of Iraq was in 2003 :D

Cornlieu is *sighs* right about this one.

I don't see why Israel, India or Pakistan can have nukes, if Iran can't, but hey, it's not really my place to comment on such things.

Apparently you don't really understand the whole point of the Non-proliferation treaty. If you did you wouldn't say such a silly thing.

I find it quite funny that the same folks who think there should be controls on gun ownership also feel that anyone who can build a nuke should be allowed to. ROFLMAO!

So I wonder when the talking will end on this matter. Iran seems hell bent on doing whatever it likes. Which I do want to make clear is there right. However the west also has a right to do whatever it wants. I wonder how long before the offer goes out. Will trade you a bombing campaign for one destroyed nuclear program.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/05/17/iran.nuclear/index.html
I see your bombing campaign and raise you lower approval ratings, massive and unpopular conscription, and an even further strained fiscal budget.

I see your bombing campaign and raise you lower approval ratings, massive and unpopular conscription, and an even further strained fiscal budget.

How does bombing campaign=conscription? That does not compute/

How does bombing campaign=conscription? That does not compute/
Are we to pretend that you can solely carry out a military campaign in the air?

Are we to pretend that you can solely carry out a military campaign in the air?

I remember an air war around Bosnia.

Are we to pretend that you can solely carry out a military campaign in the air?


Worked well for Kosovo. I also think the conscription scaremonger tactic is just that. They will not bring on conscription unless a massive war starts. Such as a war with China.

Worked well for Kosovo. I also think the conscription scaremonger tactic is just that. They will not bring on conscription unless a massive war starts. Such as a war with China.
We already have troops stretched thin between Iraq and Afghanistan and now we are going to put six thousand troops on the Mexican border. Where would we get the troops needed for a campaign against Iran?

The 2nd invasion of Iraq was in 2003 :D

You're correct.

If you really wanted to be technical, you could say the buildup of troops and increases in bombing runs in the no-fly zone in 2002 were also part of it, but that has little to do with the actual dissolution of Saddam's troops in 2003.

We already have troops stretched thin between Iraq and Afghanistan and now we are going to put six thousand troops on the Mexican border. Where would we get the troops needed for a campaign against Iran?

That's why we have an Air Force. We can bomb them into submission :D

I see your bombing campaign and raise you lower approval ratings, massive and unpopular conscription, and an even further strained fiscal budget.

I actually think approval may go up with the destruction of Iranian nuke and military capability via a air campaign. Also the approval rating for the president is actually greater than it is for congress. The strain on the fiscal budget can be eased via budget cuts in other areas. Also like I have said conscription is a scaremongers pipe dream. Won't happen....

You're correct.

If you really wanted to be technical, you could say the buildup of troops and increases in bombing runs in the no-fly zone in 2002 were also part of it, but that has little to do with the actual dissolution of Saddam's troops in 2003.

Ok, I'll grant ya that :)

I see your bombing campaign and raise you lower approval ratings, massive and unpopular conscription, and an even further strained fiscal budget.

Well, then we'll just use Israel as our proxy. They did it in the 80's with Saddam, and they will hopefully do it again if and when Iran begins to produce highly enriched uranium suitable for a nuclear weapon.

Until they do that, they should be free to pursue nuclear technology without outside interference. That doesn't mean we won't be spying on them, though...we don't trust them that much.

Until they do that, they should be free to pursue nuclear technology without outside interference. That doesn't mean we won't be spying on them, though...we don't trust them that much.
Hell, we don't even trust American citizens that much.

Hell, we don't even trust American citizens that much.

Touché...but as far as I know, the government is probably supposed to trust its citizens. But then again, apparently "it's different this time (that's a warning sign in any situation) so things have changed. At least we haven't brought back HUAC yet...