What About Iran?

[johnc]

And now, for something completely different...

 

A reasonable summary of what we face: http://belmontclub.blogspot.com/2004/09/closing-door-caroline-glick-argues-in.html

 

Something has to be done because we are threatened (remember the suitcase nuclear bomb) and the Iranians have painted the word "Jerusalem" on the missles capable of carrying nuclear weapons.

 

Diplomacy? Strike? Invasion? Do we let Irsael do the dirty work? Do we all hold hands sitting under a pyramid and let our positive energy protect us?

[Guest Phil1934]

We just sold Israel a half dozen bunker busters. So we'll let them do it. They did it before when Iran first built their nuclear plant.

[Mikelly]

Get your heads out of your arses and focus... What about HERE?

I"m taking bets now that we will have MAJOR attacks on our cities at key poling places prior to or during the elections... It would NOT surprise me if they tried to strike during one fo the debates... If they hit the President and the front running demacrat at the same location, could you imagine the kaos? I'm telling you boys and girls that I'm betting LARGE that we see a number of smaller attacks, that added up will equal to or eclips the 9/11 attacks... if that happens before the vote, color Kerry DONE...

 

If we must focus on the middle east... What about SYRIA? I think Israil's Prime Minister fired a shot across their bow earlier this week, late last week with comments to the effect that Syria's backing of fundamentalist organizations is making them a target more and more each day... Make a hole fo that place and back fill it is my opinion, but you knew that... Remember our Embassy? Remember the USMC barricks? I do... Make a hole and back fill it...

 

Wait and see sheeople...

 

Mike 8)

[JMortensen]

I think Israil's Prime Minister fired a shot across their bow earlier this week, late last week with comments to the effect that Syria's backing of fundamentalist organizations is making them a target more and more each day...

 

Comments??? Shot across the bow??? The Mossad just assassinated a Hamas leader in Damascus. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&ncid=736&e=9&u=/ap/20040928/ap_on_re_mi_ea/syria_palestinians

 

I'm telling you boys and girls that I'm betting LARGE that we see a number of smaller attacks, that added up will equal to or eclips the 9/11 attacks... if that happens before the vote, color Kerry DONE...

 

I don't know what to think on this one. On the one hand they could attack and hope for a Spanish style response, but they have to know better by now. You know the last thing they want is another 4 years of Bush. It's a tough one. We'll see...

[Mikelly]

Hey Mortensen... You say Potato, I say Potahto!

 

Mike

[buZy]

Nothing a bunch of TNT wouldn't take care of. hehe

[Guest 77vegasz]

Our major focus should be on homeland security. We need to sew up the holes in our borders and in our tracking of persons of intrest in this country befor we move into another theater of war.

 

If Iran or anyone else attacks an ally, then we support them. After all, I have not seen anyone rushing to our aid, so why worry about other parts of the world prior to safegeurding our homeland?

 

Jon

[Mikelly]

Speaking of the border, Did you guys see Bush on O'Reilley? See his response to the border issue? He doesn't have a CLUE how to fix it, and won't take a hard stance right now, because he doesn't want to upset the minorety votership anymore than a Republican in the Whitehouse already does...

 

Oh, but have faith boys and girls, Mr. Kerry wouldn't upset that voetship either, since they are currently his base supporters...

 

Oh what a kettle of fish!

 

Mike 8)

[johnc]

He doesn't have a CLUE how to fix it,

 

Man, no one does. Its a problem that doesn't have a 100% solution - even Nazi Germany during WW2 had porouse (sp?) borders. We can do better but, ultimately, it comes down to how much money we are willing to spend. And with all the hand wringing over our budget deficit where are we going to find another few billion dollars.

 

But, back to the TOPIC you digressive goofs! What about Iran?

[Guest Z-rific]

Caught the Oreilly interview. I so wanted him to ask why he has not already given funding to border patrol. He's had 4 years to do it. Just a PC answer with no intentions behind it.

 

As for Iran, well, we can't invade them also. We're spread out too thin as it is. And every time we use force against a fundamentalist Arab nation, we will multiply the hatred of the US tenfold.

 

I can't imagine any Arab nation would be fool enough to attack Isreal. That would warrant global support (minus Arab nations) in an attack on that country. It's one thing for individuals to commit suicide, another for a whole country.

 

Whatever happened to the good ole days when Iran and Iraq kept each other busy with their own war?

 

Maybe that's what we should do, promote Arab vs. Arab violence. And bite the bullet with the ensuing rise in oil prices.

 

Mike, you can rest assured that Bush and Kerry are well protected. The conventions went off without a hitch and I think the debates will as well.

[Pop N Wood]

There is a huge difference between a weapons enrichment plant and one for making power plant grade uranium. As everyone probably knows that was the key challange in producing the first nuclear bomb and is still the reason more countries don't have nukes: producing weapon's grade material. I don't think the Iranians are talking weapons, only fuel.

 

Of course once they build their own reactors they can produce plutonium for weapons.

 

Still think we should just offer to build power plants for them. Or at least have some other nation provide them with fuel in exchange for the spent fuel rods.

[johnc]

I'm not sure where you're getting the information that Iran is NOT enriching uranium.

 

http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3193020

 

On Saturday September 18th, the 35-nation board of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN's nuclear watchdog, called for a full accounting of Iran's nuclear programme when it meets next, in November.

 

This followed a critical report by Mohamed ElBaradei, the IAEA’s head, circulated ahead of the meeting. The report scolded Iran for producing experimental amounts of uranium hexafluoride gas (a step in enriching uranium for bombs) and revoking an agreement to stop making centrifuge components (used to separate the bomb-grade uranium from the gas). The report also reprimanded Iran for not divulging more about a second, secret centrifuge programme that came to light earlier this year. And inspectors have still not received a satisfactory explanation for some traces of enriched uranium found at different sites in Iran.

 

EDIT: Some kind of enrichment is needed to get the U235 percentages around 5%, which is what most modern nuclear power plants require. So, I guess the real question is what Pop said above, are they enriching beyond the 5% used for US Style power plants?

[Pop N Wood]

EDIT: Some kind of enrichment is needed to get the U235 percentages around 5%, which is what most modern nuclear power plants require. So, I guess the real question is what Pop said above, are they enriching beyond the 5% used for US Style power plants?

 

Exactly my point. Power plants need enrichment levels around 3 to 5%. Weapons grade uranium is something like 99% or more. It is pretty easy to get the 3 to 5%, and the standard way since the Manhattan project has been gaseous diffusion of uranium hexafluoride. Getting weapons grade takes quite a bit more effort.

 

If you believe their press releases they are just doing it for power generation ……

[JMortensen]

If you believe their press releases they are just doing it for power generation ……

 

Why would any OPEC country need an outside source of energy for power production??? Come on Pop think about it. These guys could burn any number of petroleum products and produce energy without having to stir the shit.

 

It seems clear to me that they want to be the big bad Islamic theocracy with a missile. I think Israel will take unilateral action, and I think if I were Israeli I'd be wanting to take unilateral action. Whether they can defuse the situation alone remains to be seen.

[Guest importwerks.com]

You'd have to be pretty naive to think that the Syrian government harbors terrorists. My mothers cousin was arrested and put in jail 20 years ago for suspected terrorism. He hasnt been seen by my mothers family since. His son has never seen his dad. I used to live in Syria and the syrian people are scared shitless of the government. My brother just moved back to Syria and he has a beard and my whole family keeps telling him to shave it because they're afraid of the government. I've even met some Syrians here in the U.S. that tell me to be quiet when i speak negatively about the Syrian government. These people were afraid of a government that is thousands of miles away. To say that Syria harbors and supports terrorists is just plain wrong. Israel can do whatever it wants in Syria and the government won't do a thing. I think of Bishar Al Assad and Ariel Sharon as homosexual lovers. They might as well be. These governments do whatever they want and then the pople of syria, israel, and palestine suffer.

[Pop N Wood]

Note the dots after my statement. Matter of what you believe.

 

But to answer the question

 

Why would any OPEC country need an outside source of energy for power production??? Come on Pop think about it. These guys could burn any number of petroleum products and produce energy without having to stir the dodo.

 

Because they make more money selling oil then they do burning it. Nuclear energy is a very cost effective alternative (for everyone but the US). As far as I know, Iran doesn't have any coal so when the oil runs out they are out of power. Nuke plants can produce phenomenal amounts of power for 30 or 40 years. If you want to join the leagues of industrialized nations you need a stable power source.

 

Some countries think nuclear energy is a great investment right now. Japan is buying up the world's supply of plutonium. They are convinced it is under priced due to low demand, but that the price will eventual skyrocket. The list of nations building nuke plants continues to grow

 

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/reactors.htm

 

It is perfectly understandable that Iran would want nuclear for energy purposes. Of course I have no way of knowing what ulterior motives they may have. But rather than go to war, give them access to nuclear energy in way it can be monitored.

[JMortensen]

I saw the ...... after I replied, sorry about that.

 

I understand what you are saying but if I had 5,000,000,000,000 gallons of lamp oil I wouldn't be shopping for candles, if you know what I mean...

[Guest freedomfighter]

He doesn't have a CLUE how to fix it,

 

Man, no one does. Its a problem that doesn't have a 100% solution - even Nazi Germany during WW2 had porouse (sp?) borders. We can do better but, ultimately, it comes down to how much money we are willing to spend. And with all the hand wringing over our budget deficit where are we going to find another few billion dollars.

 

But, back to the TOPIC you digressive goofs! What about Iran?

 

Born and raised in sunny San Diego... I can tell you... having clients, friends, neighbors that are Border Patrol... that the border issue is beyond epidemic. This is clearly our greatest weakness. I don't think the issue is any where near as much political as it is financial. I can understand the guy in charge not wanting to acknowledge or empower a weakness. Of course he knows what to do... or what would have to be done. They've known for years what it would take. Could you imagine what the world would think if the Pres went on international television and said "We just can't afford to do it right... so we'll just have to do the best we can with what we got!" Not to mention the political msg. that would send... can you just hear Pres Fox calling Pres Bush now... "Why you got your tanks and guns pointed at me... I thought we were neighbors?!" I think the msg would be well deserved... but of course, I'm no diplomat. Just an American tired of illegal aliens flooding my great country!

Personally, I'm for sticking the national guard down there and sealing her up at any cost... but then again... even that would never be perfect and what about the national debt... oh, sorry, that's another thread. 8)

 

LOL... I forgot to add my 2 cents on Iran... Nuuuuukem'... as Mike Kelly would say! We're not spread to thin... thats political talk... we have every ability to handle a multi-front war... without firing up the 'ol draft. Iran and Syria would take about a nano second to handle. Both countries are clear and present problems, at the same time, I respect the attempts being made to handle this diplomatically. My bet would be on after the election... then we'll take it to them... if... they don't fall into lock step!

[tannji]

You'd have to be pretty naive to think that the Syrian government harbors terrorists. My mothers cousin was arrested and put in jail 20 years ago for suspected terrorism. He hasnt been seen by my mothers family since. His son has never seen his dad. I used to live in Syria and the syrian people are scared shitless of the government. My brother just moved back to Syria and he has a beard and my whole family keeps telling him to shave it because they're afraid of the government. I've even met some Syrians here in the U.S. that tell me to be quiet when i speak negatively about the Syrian government. These people were afraid of a government that is thousands of miles away. To say that Syria harbors and supports terrorists is just plain wrong. Israel can do whatever it wants in Syria and the government won't do a thing. I think of Bishar Al Assad and Ariel Sharon as homosexual lovers. They might as well be. These governments do whatever they want and then the pople of syria, israel, and palestine suffer.

 

I hear ya on the extremes the Syrian government is willing to go to, but you lost me on how that means they harbor no terrorists. Syria has been one of the most egregious sponsors of terrorism in the world. I dont know to what extent terrorists are allowed to operate bases in Syria.... but it is all semantics, as a very large number of terror leaders call syria home, and syrian-controlled areas in Lebanon supply any needed real estate for the more humble terrorist henchmen. Here is a very in-depth and informative link that might widen your eyes a bit about terrorism and syria, they have quite a history together.

 

http://www.ict.org.il/inter_ter/st_terror/syrian_terror.htm

 

 

One comment on the prospect of HEU processes in the middle east.... the technology is for sale, and there is money laying around. We recently busted Iran on their purchases of supplies for the required centerfuges.... so anything is possible. More to the point.... Terrorists dont necessarily NEED HEU (highly enriched uranium) it is far more likely that they would use a "dirty bomb", which is easily made from conventional explosives, and relatively easily obtainable power plant waste products.

[Afshin]

Well, I usually try to stay out of these discussions, since most have firm opinions either way and are seeking to justify their view as opposed to understand underlying issues and the history that results in them. However, the numbers of these threads have been increasing, and the pro-violent, clearly racist and ignorant perspective is becoming too bothersome. So I will attempt to provide some background for any open non-racist minds.

First: Iran had a democracy under Dr. Mossadegh in the early fifties (he was Time’s man of the year in 1951). Was properly elected, and very well liked, for good reasons (non religious, non fundamentalist). As a nationalist, he felt that Iran oil profits should go to Iran as opposed to Britain which took over 80% of the profit. The Brits did not like this and took the matter to the UN and rightfully lost. They then approached Truman and proposed overthrowing this new democracy in order to maintain control of the oil. Truman said it would be wrong and turned them down. Come 1952 Dwight Eisenhower is elected, the Brits see another opportunity and along with direct involvement from the CIA overthrow a democratic non fundamentalist government and reinstitute a socially liberal but political intolerant and very brutal dictator, the Shah. In return the Shah let the US have 40%, Britain 40% and Iran 20% of the profit from it’s own oil.

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles8/DN_Iran-Coup-1953.htm

Wow! could anyone explain why they might be pissed at us (only a moron would buy the argument that it's because we have freedom, as if that would cause hatred)

In 1979 the revolution to overthrow the dictator take force, then the fundamentalist cleverly take the opportunity within the chaotic revolution period and take over resulting in a bad theocratic government. As a cry towards the 26 years of brutal dictatorship that the Iranians suffered and the loss of a democratic government because of the CIA, some students took American government workers as political hostages, but still never harmed any American civilians (however many Iranians in the US where harmed.

Then in 1980, we back Saddam, give him the means to make and deploy chemical warfare against Iranians, killing hundred of thousands of drafted non fundamentalist young men (it’s not like the fundamentalist politician bastard was on the frontline). So can someone remind me agin why they don't like our government?

Iran, despite having a repressive government, has not initiated any act of violence, OUR government on the other hand has done vast irreparable damage and is responsible for the death of hundred of thousands of Iranians. So who is the threat, us or them ?

In terms of Al Queda and the Taliban, Iran was fighting them by supporting the northern alliance, while we had supported Osama and the Taliban.

How about all the news about Iran supporting terrorist, well, unclear if it was true or not 20 years ago, but certainly not since. I don’t see how anyone without a serious bias could claim that their support of Palestine makes them a terrorist government while our much more significant backing of Israel that has caused much more death and torture and killing of Palestinians would not constitute equal backing of another terrorist state The Israel Palestinian conflict is complex and can’t be broken down to terrorist on one side and non-terrorist but killers and oppressors on the other side. It’s more of an ongoing war.

 

So based on what is it that they are evil and we are good?

By what example is Iran a threat, who have they attacked, which foreign democracy have they overthrown, how many dictators have they backed, how many wars did they start?

 

Now to look in the mirror: We have been attacking non stop, fact remains, we have overthrown more democracies and backed more brutal dictators than anyone since World War II, you can see the underlying long list:

 

http://www.doublestandards.org/enemies.htm

 

So please, take a look at our own government and maybe you might realize that there is a reason that WE are seen as the biggest threat to most of the world and so hated.

Perhaps it’s more complicated than we are good and they are evil (that’s as sophisticated as a 5 year old mind, or that they hate freedom). And maybe a real freedom fighter would work on taming our own government as opposed to suggest nuking or attacking entire nations with millions of innocent people.

How about seeking truth and understanding the real issues instead of looking for more wars to start. Is this your idea of civilized society and democracy, kill anyone who you think could do something? If this where justifiable, then the middle east should bomb us, Pakistan and India should start killing each other now (they are threats to each other after all), Korea and china and Japan and Taiwan should all start bombing each other, because they are a potential threats to each other, too many African nations to mention... Why wait, every country should attack a potential threat, what a safe world that will be.

FOR CRYING OUT LOUD !!!, you can’t jail someone who might steal, you can’t kill someone who may commit a violent crime, you can’t attack a country that may or may not attack you.

Do you really think that Iran is going to use any bomb on the US?

Moreover, they are no even close to having any nuclear bombs, it’s just a good way to scare good people to agree with plans to take over oil producing countries, just like they used WMD and terrorism as a way to scare you into agreeing to take over Iraqi oil under the pretence of security. Do you think enough people would have agreed to start a war just because he was another ruthless dictator that gained power thru our support?

And again, before pointing the finger or arguing some childish point that they have done something wrong (ALL governments do), remember we have supported terrorists, overthrown democracies and supported horrible dictators, what give us the right to preach morals and use violence to ensure an environment suitable to our interest?

 

OK, now that I'm done with my rant and got it off my chest, I will get back to my original intention when getting on the site and continue searching for more pleasant and fun threads related to the never ending list of potential modifications for my Z.