US to Israel: Leave the military option against Iran to us

Originally posted by john124

Originally posted by breakingdradles
THEY ARE GOING TO GET US TO FIGHT THEIR BATTLE AGAIN!!!!???!!!?!?!?!?!

It's the unfortunate situation the US is in all of the time because they are the strongest democracy and your leaders are often willing to send your soldiers to die for freedom of people in distant lands.

Personally I think the battle in Iran should be fought by their own people. They want freedom, they should fight for it!

[edit on 1-8-2009 by john124]

Pfft those aren't rose tinted glasses your wearing its a blindfold.And the only loony advocating a war against a country that poses no threat to israel nor America is you,in which many many thousands probably close to a million people would die.Get a god damn grip and stop your pathetic war mongering and fantasies about Israel or America wanting to save the poor iranians.And they did not want to overthrow the regime,what was it they were protesting about? the *presidential* elections.Thats a far cry from regime change.Unless you know what the majority of the 70 odd million people want which i very much doubt.

Originally posted by Sky watcher
Israel will pull the trigger soon on their own. This is all lip service to fool the Iranians into thinking that Obama has some say over what Israel does. Israel will never let their security be left up to anyone but themselves.

Israel can handle itself.

If that's true, could Israel and the west agree to sign a piece of paper agreeing that under the event of Israel being in a state of war, that no help or assistance be given to Israel, or requested by Israel. Any any such requests will go unanswered. And no more orders for weapons by accepted. And that de-nuclearisation will go ahead in accordance with de-nuclearisation of other states with similar yields and amounts of nuclear warheads.

Originally posted by Solomons

Originally posted by john124

Originally posted by breakingdradles
THEY ARE GOING TO GET US TO FIGHT THEIR BATTLE AGAIN!!!!???!!!?!?!?!?!

It's the unfortunate situation the US is in all of the time because they are the strongest democracy and your leaders are often willing to send your soldiers to die for freedom of people in distant lands.

Personally I think the battle in Iran should be fought by their own people. They want freedom, they should fight for it!

[edit on 1-8-2009 by john124]

Pfft those aren't rose tinted glasses your wearing its a blindfold.And the only loony advocating a war against a country that poses no threat to israel nor America is you,

No I'm not advocating anything, I'm just providing an observation of why the US has become involved in many wars, and what I think may or may not happen.

Please read my previous posts, and this one again carefully. I said Iranian's should fight for their own freedom.

in which many many thousands probably close to a million people would die.Get a god damn grip and stop your pathetic war mongering and fantasies about Israel or America wanting to save the poor iranians.And they did not want to overthrow the regime,

I agree, that's why I don't want a war to happen. Please stop your insane ramblings for your own good. I agree that the primary goal of Israel & the US & the west is for iran not to obtain a nuke. Israel seem more willing to threaten war. This regime represents the threat that these countries leaders perceive.

what was it they were protesting about? the *presidential* elections.Thats a far cry from regime change.Unless you know what the majority of the 70 odd million people want which i very much doubt.

Oh really... is that why Iranian's were shouting "death to the regime" and "down with Khamenei" and "death to Khamenei". The stolen election appears to have been a spark to vent their anger towards decades of oppression. You have no idea whatsoever. I don't claim to have a complete picture, but at least I can provide some rational argument.

The situation is complex. Just because I don't like the regime does not mean I advocate war against them. Just because I think Israel may bomb them does not mean I agree with it. And just because I feel that Iran would be better for themselves and for the rest of the world if the regime was gone does not mean I want Israel to bomb them.

I hope Iranian's can manage to do that themselves because they want that to happen, not because I want that to happen.

From the extremely poor comment you made I take it you base your opinion on your own anger alone towards other posts, because you fail to understand what they are saying. Or that you cannot be bothered to read them properly.

Note: it says "your leaders are often willing to send your soldiers to die for freedom of people in distant lands." where you've highlighted in bold.


[edit on 1-8-2009 by john124]

Originally posted by Sky watcher
Israel will pull the trigger soon on their own. This is all lip service to fool the Iranians into thinking that Obama has some say over what Israel does. Israel will never let their security be left up to anyone but themselves.

Israel can handle itself.

What do you mean?

They do have power over him.

They are making him fight Iran for them!

Need we mention oil as motive? I was curious as to how much oil they actually produced so I googled it, 4th largest producer in the world!

Rank Countries Amount Date
# 1 Saudi Arabia: 10,250,000 bbl/day 2007
# 2 Russia: 9,876,000 bbl/day 2007
# 3 United States: 8,457,000 bbl/day 2007
# 4 Iran: 4,033,000 bbl/day 2007
# 5 China: 3,725,000 bbl/day 2008

Source

There you have it folks, the dogs of war are beginning to howl. Israel will not back down on this one and won't sit idly as the US sits on it's hands. They will strike very soon if the US backs off.

The President of Iran who is a puppet for the Ayatollah has claimed on numerous occasions that he intends to wipe Israel off the map! Being a puppet means he is just spouting Iranian foreign policy for the Ayatollah who is the country's supreme leader and indirectly running the show.

How convenient, that when Ahmadenijad spouts death to Israel; they are ratcheting up a nuclear program. With that kind of language one can connect the dots that it is for nuclear weapons and not nuclear power. What is it called in legal circles? Motive and opportunity. In math class 2+2 always equals 4. I think Israel has been very patient with the Iranians, and now, maybe it is time for them to show some teeth and let the chips fall where they may. They can attack, and with the US in the region; it is only a matter of time before the US gets involved. However, I hope no combat is involved when dealing with Iran because it will be a very messy affair.

[edit on 1-8-2009 by Jakes51]

From article:

3. If Iran continues to forge ahead with its nuclear and missile development, the US will resort to its military options.

Hold on a minute here. WHAT evidence does anyone have of this being the case that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program? Our own NIE's and even the IAEA has said repeatedly that there is little to no evidence of Iran continuing a nuclear weapons development program after 2003. And the Russians are ok themselves with continuing to fuel Bushehr as long as the IAEA continues to monitor Iran's nuclear installations.

Iraq number 2 is all this is. Nope, no WMD's over there! Nope, no WMD's under here! (laugh).

No. CRY.

You warmongering, greedy bastards are going to do it again, and the American people are going to pay for it with blood and money as usual. SOS different day.

Originally posted by TheSam
Need we mention oil as motive? I was curious as to how much oil they actually produced so I googled it, 4th largest producer in the world!

Rank Countries Amount Date
# 1 Saudi Arabia: 10,250,000 bbl/day 2007
# 2 Russia: 9,876,000 bbl/day 2007
# 3 United States: 8,457,000 bbl/day 2007
# 4 Iran: 4,033,000 bbl/day 2007
# 5 China: 3,725,000 bbl/day 2008

Source

It's not just that though,the strait of hormuz is where oil gets shipped off from including saudi arabias.Wikipedia says 20% of the worlds oil shipments goes through it.So it's not just Irans oil we are talking about.I don't know what that would mean for the price a barrel of oil or what it would jump up to,but over $200 easily i would imagine.Not so good during this economic climate.America gets a large chunk of theirs from canada i believe.Jakes show me where they said *Israel will be wiped off the map* most farsi translators disagree with that statement.



[edit on 1-8-2009 by Solomons]

reply to post by john124


This is a little weird request. Name me 1 country that did not buy something from others in time of war. Not to mention those countries that were Israeli opponents. Or you would claim that Egypt made T-62 and Syria T-72 , Mig is middle Eastern firm operating from Jordan and AK-47s were invented in Iraq.

Personally i think they should leave Iran alone.

Israel should back down and stop leading the blood-thirsty Americans into a war they cannot win.

Ah but Israel rules America doesn't it?

--

My prediction. Israel will commit another attack on American soil and blame it on Iran. The Americans will stupidly believe that the Iranians are the 'bad guys' or 'terrists' and will launch air attacks on key nuclear facilities, disabling Iran - thus enabling Israel to finish them off.

America are fighting the wrong enemy in my opinion. Oh wait yeah sorry you're allies... Yeah i keep forgetting.

reply to post by savetimerushonline


Well the propaganda campaign against Iran has been steadily growing already, I thought they'd be at war by now with all the crap they've been spewing.

I wonder what ever happened to all those protests and dissent eh? They sure don't want us knowning that things might be changing for good over there, that would ruin their whole thing.

The US is just trying to keep Israel on it's leech. The US is spread too thin right now anyway, they can't afford another war and the American public won't put up with another, especially not one that is the direct result of some other countrie's grievences.

~Keeper

Originally posted by Solomons

Originally posted by TheSam
Need we mention oil as motive? I was curious as to how much oil they actually produced so I googled it, 4th largest producer in the world!

Rank Countries Amount Date
# 1 Saudi Arabia: 10,250,000 bbl/day 2007
# 2 Russia: 9,876,000 bbl/day 2007
# 3 United States: 8,457,000 bbl/day 2007
# 4 Iran: 4,033,000 bbl/day 2007
# 5 China: 3,725,000 bbl/day 2008

Source

It's not just that though,the strait of hormuz is where oil gets shipped off from including saudi arabias.Wikipedia says 20% of the worlds oil shipments goes through it.So it's not just Irans oil we are talking about.I don't know what that would mean for the price a barrel of oil or what it would jump up to,but over $200 easily i would imagine.Not so good during this economic climate.America gets a large chunk of theirs from canada i believe.Jakes show me where they said *Israel will be wiped off the map* most farsi translators disagree with that statement.



[edit on 1-8-2009 by Solomons]

Here is some information that you may find enlightening during your deliberation regarding the President of Iran's disposition toward Israel. There has been some debate about the Farsi translation with "Israel will be wiped off the map?" Here is a New York Times article that puts everything into perspective quite well and a quote from the article.

But translators in Tehran who work for the president's office and the foreign ministry disagree with them. All official translations of Mr. Ahmadinejad's statement, including a description of it on his Web site (www.president.ir/eng/), refer to wiping Israel away. Sohrab Mahdavi, one of Iran's most prominent translators, and Siamak Namazi, managing director of a Tehran consulting firm, who is bilingual, both say "wipe off" or "wipe away" is more accurate than "vanish" because the Persian verb is active and transitive.

The second translation issue concerns the word "map." Khomeini's words were abstract: "Sahneh roozgar." Sahneh means scene or stage, and roozgar means time. The phrase was widely interpreted as "map," and for years, no one objected. In October, when Mr. Ahmadinejad quoted Khomeini, he actually misquoted him, saying not "Sahneh roozgar" but "Safheh roozgar," meaning pages of time or history. No one noticed the change, and news agencies used the word "map" again.

www.nytimes.com...

Maybe the words got lost in translation or he was misinterpreted? However, it doesn't negate the man's fiery disposition toward the State of Israel. His virulent rhetoric is very telling and shows his disdain for Israel. It's like a farmer allowing a wolf to walk among his sheep because it hasn't shown aggression yet, but it may? So I don't think anyone should take his words or his actions lightly. He appears to be a loose canon and his rhetoric doesn't constitute the status quo of the Iranian people. Lets hope it doesn't escalate into armed conflict because it will be a disaster for all involved.

[edit on 1-8-2009 by Jakes51]

reply to post by Jakes51


I wouldn't have a soft spot in my heart for a country that was openly aggressive and banging the war drums night and day through the media either,especially when that country actually *does* have the capability to turn Iran into a glass crater.That doesn't mean Iran is an actual threat to israel in the slightest.The only country who should feel threatened in this scenario is Iran.And no,the quote was a mistranslation plain and simple.www.globalresearch.ca...



[edit on 1-8-2009 by Solomons]

reply to post by john124


Im just going to take your last point on Iranians wanting to overthrow the supreme leader.It's a simple numbers game here.Are you saying the majority of the 70 million iranians explicitly stated they want the supreme leader overthrown? yes or no? or was it just groups you saw on the tv and news? Lets just throw a number out which is nowhere near the actual figure.Two and a half million iranians were chanting they wanted rid of the supreme leader and not protesting about the presidential election.Thats 3.5% of the population.Of course we will never know if the majority do or not as we haven't asked them all,but you are stating they do which is being untruthful.

[edit on 1-8-2009 by Solomons]

reply to post by kyred

I don't think the WAR GAME scenario as you described went as planned by Schwartzkopf. True, he had done some planning as to scenarios concerning Iraq.

But nothing as described.

Even when Schwartzkopf presented his attack plan in Washington, his plan was a "hey diddle, diddle, right up the middle."

His plan was flawed.

A retired Air Force Colonel was called in to review the plan. He had a fit.

That grand flanking maneuver that succeeded? That's right. Submitted by Colonel John Boyd.

A lot of the things we hear of, about all the planning, foreseeing events, and so on - we arbitrarily give too much credit to folks.

Nothing, and I mean nothing in combat actually goes according to plan. The first shot, and it's more like improvisation while maintaining the basic framework of a plan.

So whatever plan the Americans came up with to placate Israel, you can bet it had some dates and some specific actions laid out. Iran really needs to come to Jesus on this.

As Obama's popularity falls, as his economic *-ups continue, he's going to need his own war.

Hell, why not Iran?


[edit on 1-8-2009 by dooper]

reply to post by dooper


I have to agree that the Iranian's need a come to Jesus meeting and very quickly. This scenario can get very serious at a moments notice! They need to assure the Israeli and the US that their nuclear problems is for energy purposes and not military. How hard is it to let the UN or the IAEA go in there and have an unabridged inspection. They don't strike me as being very forthright about the issue?

How hard is it for the President to come out and say "If you want an inspection or records we will give it to you, the Iranian government has nothing to hide." This will alleviate a lot of tensions regarding this issue. However, I think the President and the ruling elite are some hard-cases and this behavior is at their own peril. The chess pieces are in motion and it is only a matter of time before armed conflict begins. Lets hope it doesn't resort to that but a military strike is being kicked around at the moment.

reply to post by Jakes51


The reason the government doesn't offer that to Iran is that then they would have no reason to attack them or to pull this bs propaganda campaign against them.

So they just keeping implying that Iran is doing things they aren't suppose while Iran just states that they are doing what they are doing.

I sure hope that Iran gets a nuke really soon, just to shut everybody else up.

~Keeper

reply to post by Jakes51


How can you say that when Israel ALREADY has illegal nuclear weapons! the hypocrisy here is dumbfounding! Has Israel ever allowed the UN to check out Dimona? NO!

[edit on 1-8-2009 by Solomons]

Originally posted by Solomons
reply to post by Jakes51

 

How can you say that when Israel ALREADY has illegal nuclear weapons! the hypocrisy here is dumbfounding! Has Israel ever allowed the UN to check out Dimona? NO!

[edit on 1-8-2009 by Solomons]

I knew this was going to come up, and yes, according to revelations given by Mordecai Vannunu, Israel has a nuclear weapons program. I am not condoning the secrecy of Israel's nuclear arsenal, however, it shouldn't matter any more that they have them; there is nothing anyone can do about it. The international community is railing against Iran acquiring nuclear weapons capabilities. How about this, lets put all semantics aside for one moment, and why don't the Iranians comply to the international demands, and after doing such; then request transparency from Israel? That seems like a reasonable negotiation doesn't it? However, reason has taken the back seat lately. You are right though, the Israeli's have a nuclear capability.

reply to post by Jakes51


Actually the UN watchdog was checking for many years until the West keeped barking saying they should halt all activities immediatly. All the members of the watch dog has stated that there is no indication that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons.

Article IV of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty:

1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.

2. All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also co-operate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.

----

Notice, the word 'shall'? It doesn't say 'may'. In other words, the USA is obligated by treaty to help Iran develop peaceful uses of nuclear technology.

Let's not cry over this, America is just paniking because as you can see the empire is on the brink of collapse just like the Soviets when they got a kickass by the Afghans.