Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > General Discussions > Other Talk > Religion, Politics and World Events
Reload this Page >

The MAIN Iran Thread: Eventual Confrontation

Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

The MAIN Iran Thread: Eventual Confrontation

Old 05-03-08, 01:03 AM
  #376  
DVD Talk Legend
 
sracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Prescott Valley, AZ
Posts: 13,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 4KRG
We seem to be the only ones that think that here

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtri...0105_05_01.asp
Sure, keep saying it. Eventually it will happen and you'll be able to say that you knew it all along. There has been a very low probability that Iran would've taken any action up to this point.

Iran has been saber rattling for the last 4 years. They know that once we went into Iraq that we wouldn't go into Iran, so they feel comfortable making a lot of noise. They can shoot their collective mouth off without fear of any tangible response.

They're goading Israel into a pre-emptive strike on them so that they can retaliate with nukes.
Old 05-03-08, 11:34 AM
  #377  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by sracer
Sure, keep saying it. Eventually it will happen and you'll be able to say that you knew it all along.
I don't claim to know anything, sorry you have to read it that way.

Just very odd things going on with regards to Iran RIGHT NOW.

The question posed is, will Bush drop bombs on them before he leaves office?

It looks like it is leaning yes, or at least he will have things setup so that the next president must.

There has been a very low probability that Iran would've taken any action up to this point.

Iran has been saber rattling for the last 4 years. They know that once we went into Iraq that we wouldn't go into Iran, so they feel comfortable making a lot of noise. They can shoot their collective mouth off without fear of any tangible response.

They're goading Israel into a pre-emptive strike on them so that they can retaliate with nukes.
This is what everyony knows already, thanks for the recap.
Old 05-03-08, 01:08 PM
  #378  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
arminius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Here I Is!
Posts: 6,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Iran is almost ready to unleash the ultimate force to bring the west down.
The terror of mecca-godzilla!
Old 05-03-08, 06:11 PM
  #379  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Lower Gum Curve
Posts: 19,086
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by arminius
Iran is almost ready to unleash the ultimate force to bring the west down.
The terror of mecca-godzilla!
Old 05-03-08, 06:53 PM
  #380  
DVD Talk Godfather
Thread Starter
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,603
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by arminius
Iran is almost ready to unleash the ultimate force to bring the west down.
The terror of mecca-godzilla!
Funny (seriously, I did chuckle), but what is even funnier, is who thinks Iran really is the Mecca-G and is currently building up troops to support the paranoia of the evill monsterzilla?

Why...G W B does. That's a bigger laugh. Much bigger.

But oh wait! If we don't attack, they'll be over here1!!!

You can laugh at folks like me who paint a dire picture on the situation, but what about the actual group of people who really believe there is an evil monster which amazingly moves from country to country, and is yet never seen or conquered--but yet pose a threat and require hundreds of millions of dollars to be spent on this elusive beast.

Hmmm.

Last edited by DVD Polizei; 05-03-08 at 07:00 PM.
Old 05-03-08, 11:53 PM
  #381  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 30,101
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by 4KRG
We seem to be the only ones that think that here

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtri...0105_05_01.asp
Yup, I don't believe it either.

All this buildup of forces is the US's own saber-rattling trying to bait Iran into doing something stupid. They are trying to trigger a confrontation because they are running out of "triggers" that would support a case for strikes against Iran. They had two such triggers:

1. Iran was going nuclear.

US intelligence undercut the Bush admin last december by releasing a report which stated that: "Iran has not been pursuing a nuclear weapons development programme for the past four years." So much for that one...

2. Iran's involvment in Iraq

Since trigger #1 went bye bye, how predictable that the "Iran has been funneling weapons into Iraq" argument has been amped up and of course, most likely highly exaggerated. These newly found weapons caches (how convenient!) have never been independently verified.

So that's what the case for taking military action against Iran is made up at this time. So errr... not much, and considering all the lies, half-truths and distorsions made about Iraq's weapons prior to the war, very little which can be thought of as believable indeed.

An attack on Iran could not be carried out without a clear provocation and at least some preparation of public opinion, as well as congressional approval. We're not even close to meeting those requirements.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini also mocked the accusations of increased military support, saying "if someone adds up the U.S. claims about hauling weapons to Iraq by Iran, it will be a huge and unbelievable amount."
Who would have thought they have a sense of humor.

Last edited by eXcentris; 05-04-08 at 12:16 AM.
Old 05-04-08, 12:56 AM
  #382  
DVD Talk Godfather
Thread Starter
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,603
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Only one problem, eXcentris. Bush doesn't care to listen to anyone who doesn't follow his special plans--including his own intel advisors if they advise contrary to his liking. And he has enough support in the administration and the military to do what he wants. He also has Israel supporting him. You won't see a televised event like we had with Iraq. It will be an air strike, secret, and we'll be the last ones reading about it.

We don't really need a nuclear reason to attack Iran. Gen P and others have stated this quite effectively. How? Well, we're gonna say Iran is training and supplying arms to anti-Iraqi Government forces. Effectively, we're saying Iran can't do what we've been doing for decades, which is, supplying terrorists to fight other countries and attempt to destabilize their government.

At the same time we--meaning US Intel--don't need a nuclear reason to attack Iran, because we have Israel telling the US:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,353584,00.html

Shaul Mofaz, a former defense minister and military chief, said in a speech Wednesday at Yale University in the United States that Iran could have the knowhow to build nuclear arms within months, his spokeswoman Talia Somech said Thursday. Despite international sanctions meant to persuade Iran to stop the program, Tehran is steadily progressing with its pursuit of nuclear technology, Somech cited Mofaz as saying.

Mofaz is in the U.S. holding talks with American intelligence officials.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's office would not comment on Mofaz's new assessment of the Iranian program.
Uhoh, did I just hear a key phrase? "within months". Trust me, Bush is on a last-minute campaign to stir up a bunch of shit before he leaves. Whoever takes over his mess is going need migraine pills.

And this Iran Report where it had stopped development of nuclear weapons since 2003, is being overshadowed by new "immediate threats" which will take several more years for yet another intelligence report to conclude the Iranian strike was not necessary. In the meantime, Bush has time to conduct his operation.

Olmert is having his own problems, and the US has something to do with it because Olmert has been slow to react to many situations in his country. Bush wants new leadership in Israel. Bush wants someone from Israel to give a nod to the Iranian strike. It appears we have it taking form.

So, to recap, the US could have all the goddamn info it wants regarding Iran's distancing from nuclear weapons. It don't mean shit, folks. And this was the major point of my thread. It doesn't matter what the American Public wants or worse, what our own group of intelligence leaders have advised against. We still have one man who is making the decisions, and enough greedy conflict-of-interest supporters to help him achieve his goals.

Trigger #1 went bye-bye? Hell, Bush just grabs another gun.

Last edited by DVD Polizei; 05-04-08 at 12:59 AM.
Old 06-14-08, 10:57 PM
  #383  
DVD Talk Godfather
Thread Starter
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,603
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Bush, Sarkozy warn Iran on nuclear program
Tehran rejects incentives to halt uranium enrichment

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25160269

PARIS - Iran rejected a six-nation offer of incentives to stop enriching uranium on Saturday, prompting President Bush and French President Nicolas Sarkozy to jointly warn Tehran anew against proceeding toward a nuclear bomb.

"Our allies understand that a nuclear-armed Iran is incredibly destabilizing, and they understand that it would be a major blow to world peace," Bush said at a news conference with Sarkozy at Elysee Palace.

The quickly unfolding series of events began in Tehran, where European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana played the role of messenger for the offer from the United States, France, Germany, Britain, Russia and China.


----

Just to update y'all.

Bush [while the USAF fly over Tehran]: "We come here because of peace! Why are you people shooting back at us? We're here because of peace! Oh an hey there. Why is oil up to $500 per barrel?"

Last edited by DVD Polizei; 06-14-08 at 11:01 PM.
Old 06-15-08, 03:10 AM
  #384  
Needs to provide a working email
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: MD
Posts: 1,741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
Just to update y'all.

Bush [while the USAF fly over Tehran]: "We come here because of peace! Why are you people shooting back at us? We're here because of peace! Oh an hey there. Why is oil up to $500 per barrel?"
HAHA! OMG! !!1!one!

You're like the Baghdad Bob of Iran.
Old 06-19-08, 10:20 PM
  #385  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Jeckyl Island
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1gx0BfYHL54&hl=en"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1gx0BfYHL54&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

There are no words(except in the vid)
Old 06-20-08, 09:58 AM
  #386  
DVD Talk Godfather
Thread Starter
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,603
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Hank Ringworm
HAHA! OMG! !!1!one!

You're like the Baghdad Bob of Iran.
U.S.: Israel military sends message to Iran
Israel sent dozens of aircraft on large-scale exercise, Pentagon officials say

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25280860

WASHINGTON - Israel's big military exercise earlier this month was aimed partly at showing Jerusalem's abilities to attack Iranian nuclear facilities, U.S. military officials said Friday.

Two Pentagon officials said that Israel sent dozens of aircraft on a large-scale exercise in the Eastern Mediterranean. Israel's military has refused to confirm or deny that the exercise was practice for a strike in Iran.

But one U.S. defense official said the maneuver could be taken as a demonstration to Iran and the international community that Israel is serious about the need to challenge Iran's nuclear program and could be prepared to do so militarily.
Old 07-17-08, 09:32 AM
  #387  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 36,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080717/...sa_presence_dc


Are we normalizing the relationship with Iran?
Old 07-21-08, 03:02 AM
  #388  
DVD Talk Godfather
Thread Starter
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,603
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Venusian, I strongle sense we have competing heads in the WH and within our US Government. One is extending, the other is retracting.

Rice To Tehran: Why So Not Serious?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25777328

SHANNON, Ireland - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice accused Iran on Monday of not being serious at weekend talks about its disputed nuclear program despite the presence of a senior U.S. diplomat, and warned it may soon face new sanctions.

In her first public comments since Saturday's meeting in Switzerland, Rice said Iran had given the run-around to envoys from the U.S. and five other world powers. She said all six nations were serious about a two-week deadline Iran now has to agree to freeze suspect activities and start negotiations or be hit with new penalties.

At the meeting, Iran had been expected to respond to a package of incentives offered in exchange for halting enrichment of uranium, which can be used to fuel atomic weapons. The Bush administration broke with long-standing policy to send a top diplomat to support the offer.

Story continues below ↓
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
advertisement

WHY SO SERIOUS?

PLAYING NOW IN THEATERS!!!11!!!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

However, Rice said that instead of a coherent answer, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili delivered a "meandering" monologue full of irrelevant "small talk about culture" that appeared to annoy many of the others present at the table in Geneva.

"We expected to hear an answer from the Iranians but, as has been the case so many times with the Iranians, what came through was not serious," Rice told reporters aboard her plane as she flew to the United Arab Emirates. "It's time for the Iranians to give a serious answer."

"They can't go and stall and make small talk about culture, they have to make a decision," she said. "People are tired of the Iranians and their stalling tactics."

Harsh remarks

Rice's remarks about the Iranian presentation were much harsher than those of the host of the meeting, European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, who lamented only that Iran had not provided "all the answers to the questions."

On Sunday, Iranian state radio reported that President Mahmoud Ahmadenijad called the talks a "step ahead" and said country's formal assessment would be issued soon.

On Saturday, one member of the Iranian delegation said there was "no chance" Iran would suspend uranium enrichment, again denying assertions that Iran's nuclear program was for anything other than power production. Jalili avoided the suspension issue entirely.

Unless Iran responds positively in the next two weeks, it can expect more sanctions to be imposed by the United States and the European Union as early as late August or September and may then be hit with a fourth sanctions resolution at the U.N. Security Council, Rice said.

"We will see what Iran does in two weeks, but I think the diplomatic process now has a new kind of energy to it," she said. "If they do not decide to suspend then we will be in a situation where we have to return to the Security Council."

U.S. attended session
Rice was briefed on the meeting by the State Department's No. 3 diplomat, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns, who attended the session in a shift from Washington's previous insistence that it would not meet with the Iranians unless the enrichment had stopped.

High-level contact between the United States and Iran is extremely rare and Burns' presence at the talks may have confused the Iranians, Rice said, acknowledging a tactical change to demonstrate U.S. unity with the other five powers: Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia.

"From time to time, it is important to invigorate the diplomacy," she said. "I think that the fact that we went may have been a bit surprising to the Iranians, and they didn't react in a way that gave anyone any confidence."

The offer envisions a six-week commitment from Iran to stop expanding enrichment, during which time no additional sanctions would be imposed. That is intended to create the framework for formal negotiations that, it is hoped, will lead to a permanent halt of enrichment.

Rice was dismissive when asked if Burns or another U.S. diplomat would be present to hear Iran's response in two weeks.

"I think we've done enough to demonstrate that the United States is serious and to assure our partners that we're serious," she said.

-----

Rice must have seen TDK over the weekend. I wouldn't be surprised if she has a picture of Ahmadenijad in her office, with red lipstick over his mouth.

Will we attack Iran? Well, I have to say we seem to have two different authorities in the US Government at the moment, conflicting with each other. The majority of the military seems to not want it, except for a few. The Bush Administration seems to embrace a confrontation. I guess we'll have to sit back and see what happens.

But let's suppose an attack is in the works. When will it happen. Well, originally, I was stating around July. Of course, the economy kind of took the wind out of an assault on a country who has oil capacity output, so this negated the other. Between now and the elections, it would be a very bad time, guaranteeing McCain would never get into office, and probably a landslide Democratic victory.

However, after the elections. Once the next President is chosen, the damage is done. If Obama makes it, Bush still has about 3 months of power. If McCain wins it, all the better for Bush. So, if there is an attack on Iran, it will be after the elections. Taking into consideration the levels of sanctions which will need to be implemented first, we would be looking at another few months anyway. But Iran still has a few weeks to come up with something.

And I'd also like to find out just what this "meandering small talk about culture" statement from Rice was about.

We certainly are getting a lot of conflicting stories.

Here's a quote from Adm. Mike Mullen, Chariman of USJCOS:

Mike Mullen: Don't Want A Three-Headed War

Convinced that the Iranians are seeking to build an atomic bomb, Mullen said he felt "that's a very destabilizing possibility in that part of the world."

"I'm fighting two wars and I don't need a third one," Mullen said, referring to US engagement in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The admiral stressed that the United States did have the capacity and "the reserves" to attack Iran as a last resort, but warned of "possible unintended consequences" and the difficulties in predicting regional impacts of an attack on Iran.
And in response to Rice's "Why Not So Serious" rant:

Admiral Michael Mullen told the Fox network he felt "encouraged by the talks" that were held Saturday in Geneva between Iranian, European and US officials as part of a bid to resolve a long-running dispute over Iran's nuclear plans.

Last edited by DVD Polizei; 07-21-08 at 03:10 AM.
Old 08-03-08, 06:43 AM
  #389  
DVD Talk Godfather
Thread Starter
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,603
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,...533501,00.html

While the world powers await Tehran's official response to their latest proposal, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad reiterated that there would be no Iranian retreat in the nuclear dispute.

"In whatever meetings we take part and whatever issue we raise, the main aim is institutionalizing our nuclear rights," Fars news agency quoted Ahmadinejad as telling visiting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on Saturday, Aug. 2.

"The Iranian nation would not retreat one iota from its rights in this regard," the Iranian president reiterated.

Although Saturday was reported to be the deadline for Iran to reply to the latest proposal by the world powers, Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said that no deadline had been set regarding the ongoing dispute over the Islamic republic's nuclear program.

Still waiting

The European Union is however still awaiting Tehran's official response to an offer of new talks to resolve the dispute over Iran's nuclear activities, but an answer may be coming on Monday, EU diplomats said on Saturday.

Two weeks after the Geneva talks involving top officials from Iran, the five permanent UN Security Council members and Germany, it was being pointed out that no specific deadline had been set for Tehran to respond.

At the time, on July 19, EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana had said the EU was expecting a "clear answer" from Tehran "in about two weeks' time."

The offer on the table is for far-reaching economic cooperation with Iran, including in the field of civilian-sector nuclear power, in return for a pledge by Tehran to refrain from uranium enrichment activities.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.