DVD Talk Forum

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)
-   Religion, Politics and World Events (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/religion-politics-world-events-47/)
-   -   USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/religion-politics-world-events/596043-usa-iran-nuclear-megathread.html)

eXcentris 11-02-11 04:21 PM

USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread
 
Sure are a lot of rumblings about this.

"Netanyahu trying to persuade cabinet to support attack on Iran"

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition...-iran-1.393214

Bibi has Barak and now Lieberman on board, but Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon said he preferred an American military attack on Iran to an Israeli one.

I'm sure Americans will be thrilled with that. :)

This could come as soon as "in the coming weeks".

"IDF test-fires ballistic missile in central Israel"

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...srael-1.393306

Although any connection to a possible attack on Iran was (obviously) denied.

"UK military steps up plans for Iran attack amid fresh nuclear fears"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...attack-nuclear

Brits are considering how to best deploy Royal Navy ships and submarines equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles over the coming months as part of what would be an air and sea campaign.

"Is the US heading for war with Iran?"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...ama?intcmp=239

With an election coming and the economy struggling, conflict may not appeal to Obama, but the drumbeat is getting louder. And "hawks" in the US are likely to seize on next week's report from the International Atomic Energy Agency, which is expected to provide fresh evidence of a possible nuclear weapons programme in Iran.

Discuss.

kvrdave 11-02-11 04:34 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 
Man, all the Jews are in on this. You must be dying. -wink-

Dr Mabuse 11-02-11 04:36 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 
Those dirty Jews! Amirite?

eXcentris 11-02-11 04:48 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 
Well, is this just talk or will those Jews succeed at wagging the dog again? :)

I say unlikely. Americans woudn't have the stomach for it with the economy in the crapper and Afghanistan (ongoing) and Iraq (ending). Would Israel do it alone? Also unlikely. While Bibi is nuts ("Iran is like Nazi Germany and Ahmadinejad is Hitler...") he's also a political coward, great at making speaches but not much else... So sending the IAF on a suicide mission? Probably not...

Navinabob 11-02-11 05:23 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 
Iran has a pretty weak military and sits at about the very bottom when compared to all of its neighbors. Their annual military budget is less then Greece. That and Ahmadinejad has the exact same political political clout in Iran as our Secretary of Transportation; both are 14th in line.

We make such a big deal about Iran and Ahmadinejad when really we have much bigger fish to fry.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/wo...st/24iran.html

Here is a great link to myths about Iran.

http://www.juancole.com/2009/10/top-...now-about.html

Trout 11-02-11 05:44 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 

Originally Posted by Navinabob (Post 10989602)
Iran has a pretty weak military and sits at about the very bottom when compared to all of its neighbors. Their annual military budget is less then Greece. That and Ahmadinejad has the exact same political political clout in Iran as our Secretary of Transportation; both are 14th in line.

But they have one thing most countries don't have...a shitload of fanatics.

Talkin2Phil 11-02-11 08:03 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 

Originally Posted by Trout (Post 10989631)
But they have one thing most countries don't have...a shitload of fanatics.

Bring it on!!!
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43...y_phanatic.jpg

Norm de Plume 11-02-11 09:35 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 
No way will the Yanks bomb Iran at this point. They will refuse all entreaties from their client-state. Netanyahu is another story, but I had no idea it had reached this supposed crisis point.

eXcentris 11-02-11 11:04 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 
I doubt Israel can pull this off alone. Where are they going to fly from? They had "exercises" lat week using a base in Sardinia (Italy).

But the "chatter" continues...

"Haaretz poll: Israelis evenly split over attacking Iran"

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition...-iran-1.393378

Note that current (and relatively new) IDF, Mossad, Shin Bet Chiefs do not seem to be against this. The only opposition comes from "former" defense, IDF, etc... With outgoing Mossad Chief Meir Dagan being the most vocal.

Actually, it seems that the current IAF Chief is far from convinced... Expect him to be replaced shortly. :)

Sean O'Hara 11-02-11 11:36 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 

Originally Posted by eXcentris (Post 10989515)
Sure are a lot of rumblings about this.

"Netanyahu trying to persuade cabinet to support attack on Iran"

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition...-iran-1.393214

Bibi has Barak and now Lieberman on board, but Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon said he preferred an American military attack on Iran to an Israeli one.

I'm sure Americans will be thrilled with that. :)

Well, if Lieberman and Obama support it, the rest of the Dems will fall into line, and the Republicans will support anything that involves explosions in Muslim countries.

Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Yes, I know Barak and Lieberman aren't our Barack and Lieberman.

Burnt Thru 11-03-11 04:42 AM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 

Originally Posted by Navinabob (Post 10989602)
Iran has a pretty weak military and sits at about the very bottom when compared to all of its neighbors. Their annual military budget is less then Greece.

I'd be interested to know where this stat comes from. I have quite a few Persian and Iranian friends and the one thing they agree upon is that the current rulers are paranoid and spend huge amounts on defense.

It seems that most of Israels ex intelligence chiefs are against this move. I doubt USA likes it either since Iran would probably lob a few missiles into Baghdad as a first response. All in all looks like a bit of a nonstarter.

Ky-Fi 11-03-11 07:10 AM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 
The Saudis and other Sunnis wouldn't be too upset to see Iran knocked down a peg.

classicman2 11-03-11 07:14 AM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 
When, and if, the Iranians blockade the Strait of Hormus, then we should really get upset and take whatever action might be required.

Pharoh 11-03-11 10:18 AM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 
:lol:


Maybe Israel can also use those secret squirrel bases in Saudi Arabia as well.
:lol:

Pharoh 11-03-11 10:27 AM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 

Originally Posted by Burnt Thru (Post 10990063)
I'd be interested to know where this stat comes from. I have quite a few Persian and Iranian friends and the one thing they agree upon is that the current rulers are paranoid and spend huge amounts on defense.

...

They do. The problem comes from the fact that Iran is not very good at accurately reporting their military expenditures, if at all. And their military is quite segmented. For example, expenditure figures do not include the IRGC or the Qods. Most of what I have seen put them around the top twenty on % of GDP basis. Some agencies won't even include Iran in their tallies.

I do think it fair to point out though that their military is weakening and aging. Sanctions have taken a toll, and they are likely not a serious offensive threat, at least not in a massive way. They spend enough and have enough arms to be very disruptive though.

Pharoh 11-03-11 10:35 AM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 

Originally Posted by Navinabob (Post 10989602)
Iran has a pretty weak military and sits at about the very bottom when compared to all of its neighbors. Their annual military budget is less then Greece. That and Ahmadinejad has the exact same political political clout in Iran as our Secretary of Transportation; both are 14th in line.

We make such a big deal about Iran and Ahmadinejad when really we have much bigger fish to fry.

....


What a silly way to measure "clout". Or is Mr. LaHood as powerful and influential as Sens. McConnell, Lieberman, Kerry, Durbin, Hatch, or Cornyn? Or Reps. Pelosi, Cantor, Ryan, or Hoyer?

Navinabob 11-03-11 12:09 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 

Originally Posted by Pharoh (Post 10990444)
What a silly way to measure "clout". Or is Mr. LaHood as powerful and influential as Sens. McConnell, Lieberman, Kerry, Durbin, Hatch, or Cornyn? Or Reps. Pelosi, Cantor, Ryan, or Hoyer?

Being 14th in line isn't his entire measure of domestic political impact, but it is a fact that most Americans don't know (they assume he's either at the top, or at least near it) because we hear the title of "president" and think it is equivalent to ours. Anyone in the Guardian Council outranks him... he has zero ability to implement a single decision without getting the permission of any of them. In Iran he's a laughing stock who has yet to get women to be allowed into sports stadiums to watch soccer like he promised upon his election. All of his allies are either distancing themselves from him or have been removed from office.

I'm not making this up, facts are easily obtained with research. While he does have some political standing, all of it needs approval. Not only is he not allowed to decide for himself if he can run for reelection, most experts don't think he has a chance at winning if he did.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/wo...st/24iran.html


In demonizing Mr. Ahmadinejad, the West has served him well, elevating his status at home and in the region at a time when he is increasingly isolated politically because of his go-it-alone style and ineffective economic policies, according to Iranian politicians, officials and political experts.

Political analysts here say they are surprised at the degree to which the West focuses on their president, saying that it reflects a general misunderstanding of their system.

“The United States pays too much attention to Ahmadinejad,” said an Iranian political scientist who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. “He is not that consequential.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...power-struggle


Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has suffered a series of dramatic setbacks in his power struggle with the country's supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, after a failed attempt to challenge the clerical establishment, according to Iranian observers and diplomats.

Ahmadinejad, who drew on crucial backing from Khamenei during his disputed re-election in 2009, has been so roundly rebuffed by his erstwhile patron that it is by no means certain he will complete his second term as president.

In recent days, Ahmadinejad and the men described as his strongest allies – his chief of staff, Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei, and executive deputy, Hamid Baghaei – have come under direct attack from senior figures in the powerful Revolutionary Guards and some of most important clerics in the Islamic regime.

Ahmadinejad's many enemies across the political and religious spectrum have scented blood after the arrest of at least 25 people close to him and Mashaei. The president's immediate entourage has been reduced to a handful of serious people and has faced accusations of corruption, revolutionary "deviancy" and even espionage.

Even the president's spiritual mentor, Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, who strongly supported him in the 2009 presidential election, is distancing himself.

In a recent interview with an Iranian publication, Yazdi said: "That a human being would behave in a way that angers his closest friends and allies and turns them into opponents is not logical for any politician." .

He told Shoma Weekly that he believed "with more than 90% certainty" that Ahmadinejad had been bewitched". "We saw that this questionable person [Mashaei] has conquered this gentleman [Ahmadinejad] and is in his fist," he said.

Ayatollah Ahmad Janati, a close ally of Khamenei and head of the Guardian Council, also attacked Ahmadinejad directly. "We did not expect this from him," Janati said. In a reference to Mashaei, he said that "some people seek to cause a deviation, and act against the country and the supreme leader".

Yazdi and Janati's comments have been repeatedly echoed by senior officials in the Islamic Republic in recent days.

"It is like wolves who have been waiting for a sign of weakness and they are now lunging in," said Meir Javedanfar, an Iranian-Israeli Middle East analyst and co-author of book on Ahmadinejad, The Nuclear Sphinx of Tehran.

In the latest sign of his dwindling authority, Ahmadinejad's bid to streamline his cabinet and merge eight ministries into four was blocked by the supreme leader in a private meeting attended by the parliamentary chief, Ali Larijani.

Unable to proceed with his initial plan, Ahmadinejad fought back by dismissing three ministers and temporarily taking over the oil ministry but drew unprecedented criticism from Khamenei's camp.

It has not helped the president that the attacks come at a time when the cash-strapped government, straining under international sanctions, has gambled on removing long-standing but costly subsidies on fuel, food and other daily essentials, triggering widespread popular resentment.

With zero growth projected this year, organised labour is beginning to flex its muscles. Last week, some union members refused to go to work, in protest at delayed salaries and rising unemployment. They blamed Ahmadinejad for the crisis.

Ahmadinejad emerged from relative obscurity to win the presidency in 2005, not least because the supreme leader adopted him as his protege.

In recent months, he has sought to assert the presidential prerogative in hiring and firing ministers. He got his way in December, sacking the foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, a Khamenei favourite, without warning.

When he tried to do the same thing in April to the intelligence minister, Heydar Moslehi, Khamenei struck back and ordered Moslehi's reinstatement. In response, Ahmadinejad took the quixotic decision of boycotting his own job and disappeared from office for 11 days. Ultimately, however, he had little choice but to return and grudgingly put up with Moslehi.

"Ahmadinejad must know he was always pushing his luck. He has always been a risk-taker, and he always knew that sooner or later he would hit something hard," a western diplomat said.

"Whether this is terminal for him, it's a bit early to say, but the defence of the supreme leader and the attack on Ahmadinejad has had the look of a whole government acting in concert. People were sent out to the regions, including the IRGC [the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps], to send the message that the supreme leader is in control."

Ahmadinejad, whose presidency is limited to two terms under Iranian law, must step down in 2013. The depth of rift with the supreme leader has raised speculation he might leave early, triggering a crisis.

Some are comparing him to Abdulhassan Banisadr, Iran's first post-revolutionary president, who was impeached in 1981 after clashing with Ayatollah Khomeini and forced to flee the country.

Speaking from Paris, Banisadr said: "Khamenei is so fed up with Ahmadinejad that [the president] might not even survive before his term finishes."

Conversely, Ahmadinejad could resign. But to do so before securing the position of a chosen successor would leave him little protection once out of office.

For Khamenei, the worry is whether the Islamic republic can survive him in its present form; Khamenei turns 72 in July.

"There's always the issue of Khamenei's death and what happens then," said Hamid Dabashi, a professor of Iranian studies at Columbia University. "Ahmadinejad and his people have an eye on the days after Khamenei's death from now and are seeking to make the position of the next supreme leader as rather symbolic."

Navinabob 11-03-11 01:01 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 

Originally Posted by Burnt Thru (Post 10990063)
I'd be interested to know where this stat comes from. I have quite a few Persian and Iranian friends and the one thing they agree upon is that the current rulers are paranoid and spend huge amounts on defense.

It seems that most of Israels ex intelligence chiefs are against this move. I doubt USA likes it either since Iran would probably lob a few missiles into Baghdad as a first response. All in all looks like a bit of a nonstarter.

I'm getting my data from:

http://milexdata.sipri.org/

Click on Iran and check out what trend they are on. They spent 7 billion in 2008. That is 1.8% of their gross domestic product, which is about 80th in line today if you ranked everyone.

Pharoh 11-03-11 01:27 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 

Originally Posted by Navinabob (Post 10990610)
Being 14th in line isn't his entire measure of domestic political impact, but it is a fact that most Americans don't know (they assume he's either at the top, or at least near it) because we hear the title of "president" and think it is equivalent to ours. Anyone in the Guardian Council outranks him... he has zero ability to implement a single decision without getting the permission of any of them. In Iran he's a laughing stock who has yet to get women to be allowed into sports stadiums to watch soccer like he promised upon his election. All of his allies are either distancing themselves from him or have been removed from office.

I'm not making this up, facts are easily obtained with research. While he does have some political standing, all of it needs approval. Not only is he not allowed to decide for himself if he can run for reelection, most experts don't think he has a chance at winning if he did.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/wo...st/24iran.html





http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...power-struggle

I don't remember commenting directly on the clout of the Iranian buffoon. Merely that the readers of this forum, not the "American people", know who and what he is, making the order of succession irrelevant. However, since I did imply he has more standing than you imply, I'll briefly touch on it.

Clearly, he has lost some of his influence and clout over the past few years, largely do to his overreaching which has caused his allies to abandon him, but don't mistake that for a historical lack of power. He has had many allies on the Assembly of Experts, with the most prominent of course being mesbah yazdi, who came very close to being elected Speaker. This gave him standing.

His support also came from his appeal in the rural areas, where any type of uprising is the last thing Tehran wants. That, along with the support of the far right clerics, gave him clout, which he used to expand the power of the office and appoint his cronies throughout the government, furthering his power. He never was a simple figurehead, despite some media efforts to portray him as such.

By the way, the latest is that Iran may do away with the office of the presidency altogether and move towards an appointed PM.

Pharoh 11-03-11 01:30 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 

Originally Posted by Navinabob (Post 10990698)
I'm getting my data from:

http://milexdata.sipri.org/

Click on Iran and check out what trend they are on. They spent 7 billion in 2008. That is 1.8% of their gross domestic product, which is about 80th in line today if you ranked everyone.

SIPRI verifies what I stated in my previous post on this matter. Figures, especially 2008 are uncertain, and that almost 65%+ of military expenditures are not even included in those uncertain figures. Where would 4 to 5% o GDP put them?

Navinabob 11-03-11 01:45 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 

Originally Posted by Pharoh (Post 10990749)
SIPRI verifies what I stated in my previous post on this matter. Figures, especially 2008 are uncertain, and that almost 65%+ of military expenditures are not even included in those uncertain figures. Where would 4 to 5% o GDP put them?

I missed where you got "65%+ of military expenditures are not even included in those uncertain figures". But yeah, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps was not included in those figures and they are a HUGE entity. But, it is hard to point down their military worth since they are so closely tied to national infrastructure and economics. With them being a commercial and political force now, I'm not sure what category they fall under to tell the truth.

And thanks for clarifying your opinion of Ahmadinejad. I wasn't talking so much about his historical influence, but more of his much lessened current state. While Mesbah did support him once, clearly he is not in his corner today and talks of him like he is insane.

Pharoh 11-03-11 02:15 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 

Originally Posted by Navinabob (Post 10990795)
I missed where you got "65%+ of military expenditures are not even included in those uncertain figures". But yeah, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps was not included in those figures and they are a HUGE entity. But, it is hard to point down their military worth since they are so closely tied to national infrastructure and economics. With them being a commercial and political force now, I'm not sure what category they fall under to tell the truth.

And thanks for clarifying your opinion of Ahmadinejad. I wasn't talking so much about his historical influence, but more of his much lessened current state. While Mesbah did support him once, clearly he is not in his corner today and talks of him like he is insane.

The 65% number came from some of the reported figures that SIPRI themselves listed but could not verify. Personally, I think it is probably closer to 100%, which a decent number of analysts, including some folks from Janes, believe. Remember, their entire missile programme is part of the IRGC, as is their "peaceful" nukuloor programme.
:shrug:

I will state again though, I agree they aren't a major offensive threat. That is, they aren't going to be invading anybody anytime soon.

Navinabob 11-03-11 02:40 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 

Originally Posted by Pharoh (Post 10990847)
The 65% number came from some of the reported figures that SIPRI themselves listed but could not verify. Personally, I think it is probably closer to 100%, which a decent number of analysts, including some folks from Janes, believe. Remember, their entire missile programme is part of the IRGC, as is their "peaceful" nukuloor programme.
:shrug:

I will state again though, I agree they aren't a major offensive threat. That is, they aren't going to be invading anybody anytime soon.

Gotcha. I'll defer to your point of view because you seem to have a better grasp on it then I do. Reading up on the IRGC is such a mess it is unclear what the hell they are and there is no good equivalent example in the US I could compare it to. They are like a crazy bastard love child of Haliburton, Enron, Lockheed and the Church of Scientology.

superdeluxe 11-05-11 02:45 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 

Originally Posted by eXcentris (Post 10989515)
Sure are a lot of rumblings about this.

"Netanyahu trying to persuade cabinet to support attack on Iran"

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition...-iran-1.393214

Bibi has Barak and now Lieberman on board, but Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon said he preferred an American military attack on Iran to an Israeli one.

I'm sure Americans will be thrilled with that. :)

This could come as soon as "in the coming weeks".

"IDF test-fires ballistic missile in central Israel"

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...srael-1.393306

Although any connection to a possible attack on Iran was (obviously) denied.

"UK military steps up plans for Iran attack amid fresh nuclear fears"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...attack-nuclear

Brits are considering how to best deploy Royal Navy ships and submarines equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles over the coming months as part of what would be an air and sea campaign.

"Is the US heading for war with Iran?"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...ama?intcmp=239

With an election coming and the economy struggling, conflict may not appeal to Obama, but the drumbeat is getting louder. And "hawks" in the US are likely to seize on next week's report from the International Atomic Energy Agency, which is expected to provide fresh evidence of a possible nuclear weapons programme in Iran.

Discuss.


This is not Iraq or Afghanistan, a War with Iran would be Extremely difficult to win without the N word.

Josh-da-man 11-05-11 04:10 PM

Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?
 
It's been over sixty years since we've had a decent World War.

Might be just what we need to get us out of this recession.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:42 PM.


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