Iran stockpiling food? Why?

reply to post by glasshouse


Not once have I ever come across any sort of interview or other evidence that Iran said..... "On an almost daily basis they express their desire to commit genocide and see a nuclear weapon as a means to achieve this.".

You made the claim and now the burden of proof is on you. So prove it!

Please don't insult us with one of the many debunked videos that have made the rounds. All of them fail right off the bat when they cannot even translate Farsi properly.

reply to post by glasshouse


This is a perfect example of a propaganda bamboozled sheeple

Originally posted by glasshouse
reply to post by superman2012

 

With all due respect, I've done my homework. I'm not going to do yours as well. A plethora of material exists on the topic ,including but not limited to, countless speeches and interviews with regime figures expressing, on video and in their own words, what I have stated above. I'm not a "gut feeling" kinda guy. I'm not really endorsing all of the U.S.'s actions in regard to Iran nor am I endorsing a strike at the moment but I do believe the things I've stated about the regime are factual and well documented. So, you disagree with me? Cool, good for you for thinking for yourself and coming to your own conclusions. Thanks for the reply

You have not finished your homework though. Really study the Twelver idealogy, you will soon see that it goes against everything you have stated. I'm not saying there aren't extremists (like any other religion) but you are wrong.
I came to my own conclusions after studying it, debating it, and reading through as much info as I could find (either by myself or pointed out to me by other members) and coming to an informed decision. There is no proof. There is conjecture and people claiming things about Iran without knowing 100%. You fall into that category.

reply to post by sheepslayer247

I get the feeling there isn't a whole lot I could provide that would change your mind on the topic. Apparently you feel like you got a more accurate translation. I,for one, don't speak farsi so it would be near impossible for me to say which translation is correct. Do you speak farsi? I would be very interested in checking out some of the debunked material. I'll start looking at it when I get home from work. Thanks for the heads up. Regarding wasting your time, I'm not sure how I would accomplish that over the internet without you making the choice to let it happen. Just sayin.

to release it when the demand is high during the year to control the prices. moreover now they are releasing not stockpiling.

reply to post by superman2012
I'm guessing this will come down to translation. I'll begin a new angle of research. Thanks for the convo

Originally posted by trysts
reply to post by thecrippler

 

You live in fantasy land, where you think a country surrounded and being threatened by war is the aggressor.

quoted for truth

nothing more need be said

Originally posted by glasshouse
reply to post by trysts

 

I don't see the humor in it. What part do you find silly?

the nuclear nonsense perhaps

reply to post by superman2012

Ok, my homework has continued.I've posted a link below( I hope it works)
"A Refutation Of The Campaign To Excuse Ahmadinejad's Incitement To Genocide"
I am by no means saying this is the "end all be all" but I would like to know what you think of it. And yes, I do realize it was written by an Israeli but I don't think that should automatically disqualify everything it contains. I can't speak for you but I'm sure there are plenty on this site that would disagree with that staement.

www.jcpa.org...

reply to post by DerepentLEstranger


yes and USA is still encouraging Iran to develop their nuclear facilities !

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by DerepentLEstranger

So, an advertisement by american nuclear companies using the Shah of iran and a recent vote(1970's) in Plymouth Mass. to tell people nuclear energy is safe makes this humorous because..?

This means Iran has good intelligence data.

As to who's the aggressor, it's both. We're upset because Iran, like many other ME countries, is selling oil for non-American currency. Unlike the other countries, Iran has managed to remain doggedly resistant to other techniques such as the inside insurrection fomentation the US used in those other countries. So our only reasonable response is to attack, preferably via an ally proxy at first.

Iran is, however, developing nuclear capability; there really is no substantial argument against that. However they plan to use said capability is another story. Are they planning to use it as a deterrent to an attack from us, to destroy Israel to bring the last Imam back out of the well, or to start a global conquest? I don't know the answer to that, nor does anyone outside of Iranian military intelligence circles.

The stage is set; the major pieces are in play; the pawns are moving in for support. Syria is about to fall, and when it does Iran loses a huge strategic partner. Our government knows exactly what they are doing; Iran knows what is coming, and while Russia/China are sitting on the sidelines ready and able to engage, they have not made their intentions clear; Iran is, without their help, looking at a serious threat to their very existence.

Check. Pawn to Queens Rook 6. Silence.

TheRedneck

ETA: Pay no attention to the above post. I was just informed by the great CNN that we Americans should be busily debating gun control or Chik-Fil-A's CEO's stance on gay marriage instead of watching the Middle East. My bad.

Originally posted by TheRedneck
This means Iran has good intelligence data.

As to who's the aggressor, it's both. We're upset because Iran, like many other ME countries, is selling oil for non-American currency. Unlike the other countries, Iran has managed to remain doggedly resistant to other techniques such as the inside insurrection fomentation the US used in those other countries. So our only reasonable response is to attack, preferably via an ally proxy at first.

Iran is, however, developing nuclear capability; there really is no substantial argument against that. However they plan to use said capability is another story. Are they planning to use it as a deterrent to an attack from us, to destroy Israel to bring the last Imam back out of the well, or to start a global conquest? I don't know the answer to that, nor does anyone outside of Iranian military intelligence circles.

The stage is set; the major pieces are in play; the pawns are moving in for support. Syria is about to fall, and when it does Iran loses a huge strategic partner. Our government knows exactly what they are doing; Iran knows what is coming, and while Russia/China are sitting on the sidelines ready and able to engage, they have not made their intentions clear; Iran is, without their help, looking at a serious threat to their very existence.

Check. Pawn to Queens Rook 6. Silence.

TheRedneck

ETA: Pay no attention to the above post. I was just informed by the great CNN that we Americans should be busily debating gun control or Chik-Fil-A's CEO's stance on gay marriage instead of watching the Middle East. My bad.

edit on 7/28/2012 by TheRedneck because: (no reason given)

Actually, I am going to pay attention to your last post filled with propaganda, Mr.Redneck. As to who the aggressor is, I think you should be able to understand the analogy of the home: You live in Mississippi, and somebody from New York(U.S.) tells you how to run your State. They don't voice concerns, they tell you what you have to do in order to continue to live. They threaten you, your family and friends with murder if you don't follow their demands. If New York ignores Mississippi then you and yours are not in danger of being murdered. You(Iran) are only in danger if New York(U.S.) wishes to continue the threats. The U.S. is the aggressor, not Iran.

Iran is not developing a nuclear weapon. That is propaganda.

As far as the rest of the nonsense you posted, I can only hope you're joking

reply to post by TheRedneck

"""As to who's the aggressor, it's both. We're upset because Iran, like many other ME countries, is selling oil for non-American currency. Unlike the other countries, Iran has managed to remain doggedly resistant to other techniques such as the inside insurrection fomentation the US used in those other countries. So our only reasonable response is to attack, preferably via an ally proxy at first."""

well they have tested their proxy against Iran already. (Saddam). USA is wise enough, I can not remember they have involved in such unpredictable wars. this is why they survived the WW2. they are far conservative. Iran is not comparable to Iraq or Afghanistan. do not pay attention more than it deserves to their boastings those from Iran and those from US. US will not get near Iran for military actions even for decades. it still sticks to economical and political attacks.

"""Iran is, however, developing nuclear capability; there really is no substantial argument against that. However they plan to use said capability is another story. Are they planning to use it as a deterrent to an attack from us, to destroy Israel to bring the last Imam back out of the well, or to start a global conquest? I don't know the answer to that, nor does anyone outside of Iranian military intelligence circles."""

their Imam is not in well ! it is a superstition, I wonder how it reached to you ! it's Arrival is not when Israel gets destroyed, it is when a minority (for example Israel) destroys the world !
moreover sanctions not only did not make Iran to recede but they are wondering to boost it up to 60%.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

"""The stage is set; the major pieces are in play; the pawns are moving in for support. Syria is about to fall, and when it does Iran loses a huge strategic partner. Our government knows exactly what they are doing; Iran knows what is coming, and while Russia/China are sitting on the sidelines ready and able to engage, they have not made their intentions clear; Iran is, without their help, looking at a serious threat to their very existence."""

Syria will not fall easily, unless it takes some of it's enemies with itself.(for example Israel !)

reply to post by thecrippler


Americans should also do this, MHO

Especially when over half, trust the Government, to help them, when Disaster strikes......

reply to post by trysts

I think you should be able to understand the analogy of the home:

I think the term you are referring to is initial aggressor. In that sense, yes, the USA was indeed the initial aggressor. At this point in time, however, Iran has retaliated with their rhetoric and has thus become an aggressor as well. Just as, in your example, Mississippi would become an aggressor by retaliating against the initial New York aggression. Being an aggressor does not mean one is not defending themselves.

The real stumbling block is the dollar pegged to OPEC oil. That agreement worked well for a very long time, but the US's idiotic monetary policies eventually led to Iran's concern over the peg. That resulted in the US overthrowing a democratically-elected government and replacing it with the Shah. That led to the Ayatollah's seizing power, the resulting Iranian hostage crisis and the oil shortage of the 70s, the escalating tensions since, the recent moves by multiple OPEC countries to depeg from the dollar, and their overthrow at the hands of 'rebels'.

Also, I strongly recommend taking a deep breath here. Neither you nor I can change foreign policy of either country. It is what it is, and I can state what I see happening without agreeing with it in principle. I can also take steps to protect me and mine from the resulting carnage if I can see it happening. Other than that, I have no dog in the race for whose going to survive the inevitable encounter..

Iran is not developing a nuclear weapon. That is propaganda.

Naturally-occurring uranium has a U-235 concentration of about 0.7%. If enriched to 3-5%, it becomes suitable for large-scale commercial power production (nuclear power). Past that point, up to 20% enrichment can be used for experimental reactor designs. Anything higher is weapons-grade. I have seen enough reports of enrichment in the range of 30% and a little higher in Iran to believe them, and with enrichment so expensive and time-consuming, why would anyone enrich to that point (and continue trying to enrich past it) unless they planned on making weapons?

TheRedneck

reply to post by maes9

US will not get near Iran for military actions even for decades. it still sticks to economical and political attacks.

I tend to agree, at least to the extent the US will not attack Iran directly. With Russia and China on the edge, that would be suicide. But it is conceivable that a third party, friendly to US interests and with tacit backing of the US through alliance treaties, could attack.

their Imam is not in well ! it is a superstition, I wonder how it reached to you !

Forgive me if I stepped on a nerve; it was not intentional.

All i know of the religion is that they believe in this person called the Iman and he is to show up at the end times... at least that is the extent of my understanding or misunderstanding as the case may be. TBH, I spend so much time trying to understand my religion that I don't have time to study others.

Syria will not fall easily, unless it takes some of it's enemies with itself.(for example Israel !)

Agreed. Syria is not going to be a pushover. That is why the preferred method of attack is inside resistance with covert outside support, and it is still putting up a much more serious battle than any of the other Arab Spring operations did.

I do think it will succeed, but at a high cost for both sides.

TheRedneck

I wouldn't worry too much, it's just for WW3.

They must be anticipating the modern day equivalent of Siege Warfare in the near future. We and the Israelis are not the only countries with an Intelligence network.

Ok, my homework has continued.I've posted a link below( I hope it works)
"A Refutation Of The Campaign To Excuse Ahmadinejad's Incitement To Genocide"
I am by no means saying this is the "end all be all" but I would like to know what you think of it. And yes, I do realize it was written by an Israeli but I don't think that should automatically disqualify everything it contains. I can't speak for you but I'm sure there are plenty on this site that would disagree with that staement.

www.jcpa.org...