Build a case for war on Iran

We need to continue building a case for war on Iran. The sooner we attack the better, for Iran is certain to be preparing its response now. The longer we wait the better they will be prepared.

VP Cheney has done a good job in recent days by visiting Saudi Arabia and Egypt to rally support for an Iran attack. Saudi Arabia for one is worried about increasing Iranian influence in the mid east. Their aim is no doubt to establish a Shiite, Iranian style theocracy all over the region, especially in Iraq. In addition they would like to see Israeli influence reduced to nothing and preferably orchestrate the downfall of that nation. There may be preparations for bringing that about with the help of Hezbollah now.

In addition Iran is a direct party to the Iraq war for it is supplying weapons to terrorists and insurgents in the country. It is also the world's top sponsor of terrorists, see

www.abovetopsecret.com...

In addition it is necessary to keep in mind their nuclear ambition. It would be childish in light of their refusal to cooperate with international inspectors to assume that they are not interested or even trying to build nuclear bombs, which they might use given their militant policies.

Do you believe everything the goverment tells you?

Serious question because I don't know what to believe after the Iraq war.

They could be pulling the same stunt, or maybe they are being honest. We have been lied to before so I wouldn't be so quick to say they are building nukes.

If they did, so what? They would never use them. Owning nuclear weapons insures that you won't ever be nuked. Shouldn't every country have that right?

Just a few questions to ponder

-Reform America

Step one : Pick a people who have many differences from yours.
Step two : Tell your public they are a threat.

Sit back, the public will generate their own fear, and before you know it they will BEG you to attack them... you won't even need a reason.

Step three : Reap the rewards of your publics absolute obedience to you... you have just graduated Fachist training 101.

I'd prefer not to have a hezbollah attack on our soil and $6 a gallon gas, thanks anyways.

Originally posted by Vipassana
I'd prefer not to have a hezbollah attack on our soil and $6 a gallon gas, thanks anyways.

If you were suggesting that staying out of Iran will cause hezbollah to attack us and gas prices to go up... you just became the very type of media drone we are speaking of.

Don't believe what the media suggests to you.

Gas prices are controlled by the oil companies and the governments taxes on them... not by the war.

Hezbollah is in Lebanon, not Iran. lol. And it's a defense organization, not a terror network. They don't operate outside of their country.



But I suppose anything with a middle eastern name looks like terrorism to most Americans now.

Welcome to the world of disinformation.


[edit on 15-5-2007 by johnsky]

Well, There's 2 ways of looking at it.

Attack now, without warning, thus limiting the type of defenses and militia that can be prepared

OR

If indeed 'this-time' the government is being honest, it would be unwise to wait until they have ability...

Had we of not illegially invaded Iraq, the world wouldnt be double guessing its confidence in its leaders...

and we might have had an ally, against the persians....... if indeed they are the real threat...

I don't think China would let the US attack Iran, they have a lot of economic interests there (China-Iran relations). Anyway, I don't think attacking Iran would be a wise decision. Ahmadinejad will probably get voted out in 2009 and replaced with someone who's more moderate.

[edit on 15-5-2007 by Cthulwho]

Quote: "Hezbollah is in Lebanon, not Iran. lol. And it's a defense organization, not a terror network. They don't operate outside of their country."


If you think Hizbulah is not in Iran as well, then you are SADLY mistaken my friend.

You honestly think they cannot shoot down a missle????
they do not need to go to war
remember scudd missiles?
shot them down no problem
LOL
man you can sell anything to anyone.
thats why we have war?

Is the original poster gonna voluntter to go first?


[edit on 16-5-2007 by junglelord]

Originally posted by Prokurator
In addition it is necessary to keep in mind their nuclear ambition. It would be childish in light of their refusal to cooperate with international inspectors to assume that they are not interested or even trying to build nuclear bombs, which they might use given their militant policies.

Man oh Man, I posted this in another thread but it seems it is needed here to knock this little fallacy down.

VIENNA, May 11 (Xinhua) -- The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Friday said Iran has not hampered the IAEA's inspection of Iran's nuclear facility.
"The information... is untrue," IAEA spokesman Marc Vidricaire told a press conference when asked about recent reports that last month Tehran refused to give IAEA inspectors access to its Natanz uranium enrichment base.
"We have not been denied access at any time, including in the past few weeks," he said.
"Normally we do not comment on such reports but this time we felt we had to clarify the matter," he said.

news.xinhuanet.com...

lets go to war with iran be cause their leader is a poopie head no wait thats are leader .i am so confused. so they say lets go to war with iran because they are lending aid to hamas and alqeda well so what the 911 hijackers were mostly from saudi arabia paid for with saudi oil money
why don't we invade saudi arabia or not that might get us in trouble.

My oh my... Do you guys even realise that the people who are making money from the wars, while basicly destroying US economy in the long run are the same people who tell you the news about how the bad people are coming for the US. I mean seriously how #ed up do you have to be to see what is going on in your own country? US is dumping billions of dollars to the war industry who are basicly the same people making the decisions to go there in the first place and "free" < insert country here > and now you think it would be best to take on Iran which basicly means all out war in asia and middle east. All I can say is good luck with that.

Only way you can stop the "terrorists" is to stop #ing up their countries and their religious beliefs and stop attacking other nations with bull# reasons while you rob their national resourses. Only way to stop terrorism is to make them not to hate you. That would be the opposite of what the US is doing right now.

The concept of War of Terror in it self is an interesting one. I mean the second you started invading other countries you had lost the war on terror, unless you plan on invading the whole world that is.

Just my 2 cents

[edit on 22-5-2007 by Gonjo]

[edit on 22-5-2007 by Gonjo]

I would also like to point out that in this thread: Halliburton Charged with Selling Nuclear Technologies to Iran

External Source

Halliburton Secretly Doing Business with Key Member of Iran’s Nuclear Team

Scandal-plagued Halliburton, the oil services company once headed by Vice President Dick was secretly working with one of Iran’s top nuclear scientists on natural gas related projects and, allegedly, selling the scientists’ oil company key components for a nuclear reactor, according to Halliburton sources with intimate knowledge of both companies’ business dealings.

Now comes word that Halliburton, which has a long history of flouting U.S. law by conducting business with countries the Bush administration said has ties to terrorism, was working with Cyrus Nasseri, the vice chairman of Oriental Oil Kish, one of Iran’s largest private oil companies, on oil development projects in Tehran. Nasseri is also a key member of Iran’s nuclear development team.

“Nasseri, a senior Iranian diplomat negotiating with Europe over Iran's controversial nuclear program is at the heart of deals with US energy companies to develop the country's oil industry”, the Financial Times reported.

So instead of starting war with Iran maybe the US should start locking up those unpatriotric Halliburton traitors.

[edit on 22-5-2007 by Fett Pinkus]

Originally posted by Prokurator
We need to continue building a case for war on Iran. The sooner we attack the better, for Iran is certain to be preparing its response now. The longer we wait the better they will be prepared.

Oh My God are you for real Prok??????????????
With that attitude you are only quickening the end of your US of A.

Val

Just to clarify Iran-Hezbollah relationship.

Quoting a Finnish intel officer who has served several tours in UNIFIL:
"Hezbollah should not be considered as a militia nor a terror organisation, it's simply a Special operations brigade, that is trained, armed and commanded by Iranian leadership. And Hezbollah members are open and clear about this."

And remember this Iran going nuclear info isn't coming from US-intel only, Germany, France and basically all EU are behind it... unlike the Iraq war.

[edit on 22-5-2007 by northwolf]

You don't need to be planning a war on Iran.

You need to be listening to Ron Paul, because what the man said - and continues to say - is correct.

You need to understand that whatever knee jerk reaction you do now may seem to nullify a problem, but actually breeds more hatred.

You need to understand that 99% of the Iranian population really does not give a toss about what goes on day to day in the US, or the rest of the world, because they are people just like you and I who have to go to work, look after our families and put food on the table. They don't "hate your freedoms" - they are just different to you.

You also need to understand that from the moment the first bomb drops, or bullet is fired, that 99% figure will decrease for every man, woman and child killed. People with dead family have long long memories.

If you want to breed hatred and distrust for the next century, then go ahead and attack Iran but be damn sure thats what you want, because from the moment it happens, the US will never be the same again, because an attack on Iran is an invitation to every fundamentalist lunatic to come and do something stupid to Americans, and the price that gets paid may very well be a damn site higher than what happened on 9/11, and you won't be fighting a war on a battlefield, you'll be fighting one or two people at a time, in dribs and drabs in a war of attrition that will bleed the life out of both sides.

Learn from the experience of your closest ally that had to fight the IRA for so so many years. You need to be talking to the Iranians, constantly, denying ignorance and furthering cultural understandings. Diplomacy is a more effective solution than bombs.

I really hope the US doesn't do something stupid with Iran. If it does I hope people like the OP don't start coming home in body bags, but I imagine that they will

Originally posted by neformore
I really hope the US doesn't do something stupid with Iran. If it does I hope people like the OP don't start coming home in body bags, but I imagine that they will

I think the true sadness starts when people who aren't like the OP start coming home in body bags, or when loads of Iranians start "disappearing." I guess it is still sad though, when a fool dies bravely without ever knowing that he was fighting for a lie.

I'm not really old but I'm in my fifties. I've seen alot transpire in the world. Survived the Cold War. Survived coming within hours of nuclear war over Cuba. Survived recessions. Survived the 70's oil crisis. Survived the 80's real estate crash. Survived the 90's dot-com crash...

I have not, however, seen this country as truly screwed-up as it is right now. We have rushed down a dangerous, dangerous path in the last six years that has decimated our military, crippled our economy and currency, undermined our world standing and engendered unprecedented fear and suspicion at home. And in the process we, as a people, have gained nothing. Some few have gained a great deal but the majority are far worse off.

War with Iran? Another war? Are you remotely serious? Iran is no threat to us --- nuclear weapon or not. Lots of countries have nuclear weapons. Lots of countries that would love to kick our ass. But they don't. They don't because they know that if they tried they would cease to exist in an instant.

We could go start something with Iran, spend a few hundred billion more dollars we don't have and be in the exact same situation in 10yrs after they rebuild. All we'd achieve in the process, besides further crippling our economy and military, would be to further erode an already bad international reputation and make a handful of people even more wealthy than they already are.

Don't be a fool. If we spent a fraction of what the war is costing on alternative energy the middle east would be reduced to a historic footnote and the terrorists would go back to throwing rocks and sticks in short order.

Originally posted by Sauron
Man oh Man, I posted this in another thread but it seems it is needed here to knock this little fallacy down.

The article is in response to questions about access to one location: Natanz (not the entire program) and is only applicable to this one single “facility”…pfft.

Here is one example from the IAEA…there are hundreds of items that require attention and have not been clarified…so placing Iran any where near the light of transparency is ridiculous…start here and work backwards:

9. On 16 October 2006, the Agency wrote to Iran referring to the long outstanding verification issues relevant to Iran’s nuclear activities, and to the fact that Iran had not addressed those issues or provided the necessary transparency to remove uncertainties associated with some of its nuclear activities. In its letter, the Agency urged Iran to provide all the necessary information and required access to facilitate the resolution of all long outstanding verification issues.
IAEA (pdf.)

Also:

The report to the Security Council next Monday is expected to say that since the Iranians stopped complying in February 2006 with an agreement on broad inspections by the agency around the country, the I.A.E.A.’s understanding of “the scope and content” of Iran’s nuclear activities has deteriorated.
Inspectors are concerned that Iran has declined to answer a series of questions, posed more than a year ago, about information the agency received from a Pakistani nuclear engineer, Abdul Qadeer Khan. Of particular interest is a document that shows how to design the collision of two nuclear spheres — something suitable only for producing a weapon.
NYT May 14

But hey…it’s all peaceful…right? Wide open and transparent…right? C’mon.


mg