Iran, The real issue, An open discussion

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

Does Iran have a right to Nuclear energy? Yes!,

Yes, why not your government even sold it to them in the first place(a long time ago).

Who cares what people think about you slayer, you are who you are, this thread won't change anyone's opinion of you i hope you know that

You want to speak about the real issue with an open discussion let's do it.

Does the USA have the right to nuclear energy being the only country to use nuclear weapons on another nation?

Really the US gave Ian nuclear technology then explain why for the last 2 decades there have been Russian nuclear technicians in Iran?

The majority of the concern of an nuclear Iran has been their neighbors pretty safe and easy for someone living 5000 miles away to say let Iran go nuclear not their buts on the line.

And it doesn't make sense with all the "alternative energy" push of the last decade when there are cleaner and cheaper alternatives out there for energy.

The dangers of nuclear power reactors are well known to the world, Fukishima,Cherynbol.,3 mile island.

And really pick up a history book and learn just how many people chemical weapons killed making an issue that occurred 70 years ago in a war makes for great dogma but serves only to miss the entire point of the op.

With the comments made by Iran and the repeated rhetoric why wouldn't people have a problem with a nuclear Iran.

And by the way the largest exporter of uranium is Canada the merchants of mass murder.

i think you make a lot of reasonable points and I agree mostly but... there nothing reasonable when the country who's started the most wars in recent history and has more nukes than anyone else is telling Iran not to pursue the technology... That's just pure hypocrosy and a continuation of their rotten foreign policy
Threats of closing the strait should be understandable if you know what foreign countries are doing to Iran... economic sanctions.. which is an act of war in itself
I don't see why the tensions are rising between the countries. American intelligence agencies already concluded Iran is after nuclear energy, not weapons. It should really end there... but it seems to me there are forces who wish to continue rattling the cage

doublepost

Originally posted by SLAYER69


The Iranian Government IMHO has [to the best of their ability in my understanding] tried to maintain order over their population just like any other country [I'll give them that as a right] But, Let's be honest here. There seems to be a fair amount of over the top rhetoric coming from Tehran. No, I'm not ANTI-Iran but rather Anti-BS.

Well, its hard to get anything factual, to come out of that Country, when the Theocracy controls the media outright. Many misconceptions about Iranians, and their country, exist today, because of the strict rules and regulations. I think if peace is to be achieved, without the rhetoric, this has to be the number 1 thing to change.

The Media of Iran are privately and publicly owned but subject to the control of the government. A special court has authority to monitor the print media and may suspend publication or revoke the licenses of papers or journals that a jury finds guilty of publishing antireligious material, slander, or information detrimental to the national interest. Since the late 1990s, the court has shut down many pro-reform newspapers and other periodicals.

A number of foreign broadcasts into the country exist, including Persian language programmes from Kol Israel and Radio Farda; however, these broadcasts tend to encounter occasional jamming.[2] The government engages in one of the world's largest and most strict censorship programs to limit 'bad influences' seen in western culture, and anything seen as divergent from the country's strict religious regulations.[3][4] The majority of Iranians -- upwards of 80 percent -- get their news from government-owned media.[5]

Media of Iran

As for the Internet.......

n preparation for the March 2012 elections, the Iran government is instituting strict rules on cybercafes and preparing to launch a national internet.[8] It also requires all Iranians to register their web sites with the Ministry of art and culture.[9]

Internet censorship in Iran

I find it hard to believe, that those claiming they are from Iran and are ATS members have the same freedoms to say what they want here, especially since you have to register Web Sites, with the Ministry of Art and Culture. ATS is full of Western Ideals, typical of the very websites, Iran would not want the average person on, or subscribing to.

Its a shame we cant have more dialog with true Iranians, to see what they think is best for all sides involved.

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Personally and for the record. I'd like to see Iran and Israel put down their penis extensions and come to a face to face at a discussion table [Like the USSR and the US did] and talk it out! Who here can disagree with this proposition?

You are asking God's "chosen" people to have a face to face discussion with Iran?

Good luck.

Well apparently anyone reading this thread thus far can see which side has expressed their desire for dialog and which side still wants to sew doubt.


Have at it!


Pours another tall one

Originally posted by solarstorm

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Personally and for the record. I'd like to see Iran and Israel put down their penis extensions and come to a face to face at a discussion table [Like the USSR and the US did] and talk it out! Who here can disagree with this proposition?

You are asking God's "chosen" people to have a face to face discussion with Iran?

Good luck.

Referring to the 12ers in Iran who consider themselves to be "gods chosen".

reply to post by neo96

Really the US gave Ian nuclear technology then explain why for the last 2 decades there have been Russian nuclear technicians in Iran?

Because the American and British puppet the Shah was overthrown over 2 decades ago, the Russians went in after the Americans were kicked out

The majority of the concern of an nuclear Iran has been their neighbors pretty safe and easy for someone living 5000 miles away to say let Iran go nuclear not their buts on the line.

Then let their neighbours deal with it, nothing to do with the west

And it doesn't make sense with all the "alternative energy" push of the last decade when there are cleaner and cheaper alternatives out there for energy.

Not for you or the west to dictate how a country deals with its energy needs

The dangers of nuclear power reactors are well known to the world, Fukishima,Cherynbol.,3 mile island.

Then you will be shutting down the reactors in American and Israel then? No, thought not

And really pick up a history book and learn just how many people chemical weapons killed making an issue that occurred 70 years ago in a war makes for great dogma but serves only to miss the entire point of the op.

The chemical weapons used were by Iraq and supplied by America, so your point is?

With the comments made by Israel and the repeated rhetoric why wouldn't people have a problem with a nuclear Israel.

There fixed for you

And by the way the largest exporter of uranium is Canada the merchants of mass murder.

And what has this to do with Iran? Orr Israel? Just some troll comment perhaps?

My two cents?

I feel bad for the people of Iran. They deserve the same chances that any of us get. As an American I just don't see that happening for them.

As for going back and forth about what any governments did or did not do? None of them are blameless. They all have blood on their hands. And other than consolidating their own power and enriching themselves - it seems that governments aren't good at much else. Any of them.

The truly sad part is that it's the people who suffer and they get us to blame one another for it. I guess the house always does win....

~Heff

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Well, I didn't want to be top post for this but I have a comment to throw out there. When Obama suggested in 2008 that he'd sit down with Iran and negotiate, many saw that as weakness and laughed. At the time, I did too.

No, negotiation is not a weakness - it's all in how one approaches the table. I don't think Obama has it in him for a successful negotiation, as he generally approaches foreign dignitaries from a position of submission, so they have nothing to negotiate about - they can just dictate to him. It might work if he hires a negotiator, one who negotiates to win.

reply to post by PrinceDreamer

Because the American and British puppet the Shah was overthrown over 2 decades ago, the Russians went in after the Americans were kicked out

Pick up a history book the Russians have been in Iran a long time, then agian Persians leaders having tea with Hitler, and changing their name to Iran.

During Russian occupation guess who came running to the US? That would be Iran.
news.google.com...,3044093

Then let their neighbours deal with it, nothing to do with the west

Really guess that give Isreal the right to take its security in to their own hands.

Not for you or the west to dictate how a country deals with its energy needs

How anyone got dictation from the statement of fact is beyond me the facts are alternative is cleaner and cheap the church of climatology says so good enough for the WEST right?

Then you will be shutting down the reactors in American and Israel then? No, thought not

What after you said this:

Not for you or the west to dictate how a country deals with its energy needs

Which way do people want to have it?

The chemical weapons used were by Iraq and supplied by America, so your point is?

World War 1 open a damn history book that lead to the international ban of chemical weapons usage.

With the comments made by Iranand the repeated rhetoric why wouldn't people have a problem with a nuclear Iran and take any measure to ensure its security..

Now its fixed.

And what has this to do with Iran? Orr Israel? Just some troll comment perhaps?

Stating a fact talking about nuclear weapons and power right?

Dear god, we are going to blow each other off the planet, aren't we.

I think adding a bit of context for Iran could be helpful. One of the largest differences I've discovered about Iran in my time researching this for a couple threads I've written here on it, is how different from Iraq or Afghanistan or Libya they really are. Iraq and Libya in particular were best described as a cult of personality and the entire system was based around and to a single man. Branches of Government were....whatever Saddam or Gaddafi said they were going to be.

By contrast, Iran has distinct and very functional divisions of it's Government and system. It's a system they're created and so it's unlike what we have but it's no system sworn to a tyrant like we've dealt with in all the locations in recent memory.

Iran isn't even "Iran" in terms of being able to call it a single entity or consider the nation of over 70 million people to fit nicely into one hole. I happen to have these around from pervious threads I've done and they seem helpful here.

First, Iran isn't Arab. These are Persians. It's a minor thing to us in the West...but it's a BIG thing to them.



Next, we don't even have a common language and our people better stock up on their Rosetta Stone packages..they'll need several.



Finally, there is the whole other aspect to the entire situation. For those who are aware of it, it stands there like the Woolly Mammoth in the broom closet. For those who aren't, don't feel bad... Western media and Government has worked their butts off to insure it's NOT a major part of public awareness. The fact of the matter is, among the layers upon laters of events happening over there, we're on the WRONG side in relation to more than one.

(It's BIG)

It has always been my view that some sort of peace agreement between Iran and the US is inevitable. To cut a very long post short, the United States has better things to worry about, whilst for Iran the United States constitutes its greatest source of worry.

It isn't a very popular stance around here and I could very well be wrong, but when war is in the interest of neither country and peace - however temporary or uncomfortable - serves the interests of both, it seems clear which outcome this situation is trending towards.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
Dear god, we are going to blow each other off the planet, aren't we

To avoid that we need all parties to discuss their issues openly and honestly...
With each side exposing their part of the equation..

I remember my Kindergarten Teacher telling me not or run with scissors


Now being older seems like good advice

Chemical Weapons, Iranian Agents and Massive Death Tolls Exposed in WikiLeaks’ Iraq Docs

So it’s more than a little ironic that, with its newest document dump from the Iraq campaign, WikiLeaks may have just bolstered one of the Bush administration’s most controversial claims about the Iraq war: that Iran supplied many of the Iraq insurgency’s deadliest weapons and worked hand-in-glove with some of its most lethal militias.

The documents indicate that Iran was a major combatant in the Iraq war, as its elite Quds Force trained Iraqi Shiite insurgents and imported deadly weapons like the shape-charged Explosively Formed Projectile bombs into Iraq for use against civilians, Sunni militants and U.S. troops.

A report from 2006 claims “neuroparalytic” chemical weapons from Iran were smuggled into Iraq. (It’s one of many, many documents recounting WMD efforts in Iraq.) Others indicate that Iran flooded Iraq with guns and rockets, including the Misagh-1 surface-to-air missile, .50 caliber rifles, rockets and much more.

www.wired.com...

It's ok for Iran to have nuclear power eh?

Right.

reply to post by Soshh


I've never seen any PEACE talks as a problem!

I've always had issues with the one way regurgitation of BS from EITHER side!

Heres a bit of news, that I find puzzling. Russia has been a staunch supporter of Iran, especially when it comes to supplying them, with Arms.

Why would they not give these to Iran, if they have been so pro-Iranian ?
What does Russia know?

A long-simmering but little-publicised dispute is heating up between Iran and Russia over Moscow's refusal to supply Tehran with sophisticated missiles that would complicate any Israeli or US attempt to attack Iran's nuclear facilities.

Iran resents that Russia, a nominal ally, pulled the plug two years ago on an US$800 million (Dh2.93 billion) deal to deliver five S-300 air defence systems, which can detect and destroy missiles and low-flying aircraft.

The row escalated last week when a Russian official warned that Moscow would take a tougher stand against Iran's nuclear programme unless Tehran withdraws the lawsuit.

Iran and Russia at odds over missile deal


Blackmail?

You've been a busy bee lately.

Why?

reply to post by Hefficide


That is if they want change,want 'liberation'..surely thev'e seen the effects that's had in states like Afghanistan,Iraq,Libya
maybe if they dropped ballots not bombs we would see meaningfull change within Iran..