Opinions on Iran policy-wise

[caligula101]

Hehe this never ends thats fine im getting more enjoyment out of this than the game itself....

 

Did we start that war? ... No

 

Were Japan and Germany trying to develop nukes? .... yes

 

Would they have readily used them on us? ..... yes

 

We actually cut down the number of casualties that would have resulted from the final invasion into Japan saving many more than the lives lost in the two nuclear weapons dropped in japan killed.... Yes even the Japanese casualties that would have resulted.

 

Have we used the nukes since then? .... no

 

At that point in time it was them or us. A concept blurred by the spread of nuclear weapons which could be a good thing but certainly not if the weapons fall into the hands of terrorists and why should we expect nothing less than Iran to give them to the terrorists? They did supply hezbollah long range rockets to fire at israel even a few soldiers to show them how to use them.

 

 

 

To bad most of them were civilians then...

 

 

 

And don't say "its war anything goes" ever heard of the geneva convention?

[Destroyer822]

Ok i was wrong about hitler targeting only the jews but i do believe they were more heavily targeted if we get somone who knows more about the holocaust u can talk to them about that. i NEVER said we should nuke them, conventional bombs dropped on nuclear targets. Yes we supplied Israel but think to yourself if Israel put down their arms they would be slaughtered if Hezbollah put down their arms there would be peace. I have repeatedly explained why Iran cannot have nuclear weapons why do u not respond to that rather than restate the question?

 

 

 

"Hehe this never ends thats fine im getting more enjoyment out of this than the game itself....

 

Did we start that war? ... No

 

Were Japan and Germany trying to develop nukes? .... yes

 

Would they have readily used them on us? ..... yes

 

We actually cut down the number of casualties that would have resulted from the final invasion into Japan saving many more than the lives lost in the two nuclear weapons dropped in japan killed.... Yes even the Japanese casualties that would have resulted.

 

Have we used the nukes since then? .... no

 

At that point in time it was them or us. A concept blurred by the spread of nuclear weapons which could be a good thing but certainly not if the weapons fall into the hands of terrorists and why should we expect nothing less than Iran to give them to the terrorists? They did supply hezbollah long range rockets to fire at israel even a few soldiers to show them how to use them."

 

 

 

As for Iran being a target Iran is painting the target onto themselves by continuing down this road. Sit down and negotiate for peace ie stop funding terrorist groups.

 

 

 

I admitedly dont know enough to talk specifics on north korea but they are a nation they have a normal army. They dont act through terrorists.

 

Flame me on this one i dont know crap about them.

 

 

 

North Korea doesnt have a missle capable of reaching the US. and even if it did as it is a normal country the assured destruction of korea is a deterant. it would be mutual assured destruction but i know they dont have big enough nuclear capacity as russia and china had during the cold war. In Iraq and Afganastand we are trying to establish a stable goverment this is a completly different set of goals than a war.

 

 

 

Of course war is expencive but we can wage it of course. My suggestion is meant to cause as few casualties as possible to civilians and to disable their nuclear program. Now may i ask why would this war be unwinable?

 

It would be quite a problem but i dont see all of the middle east uniting to the cause of Iran.

 

 

 

the goal is not to start a war its to preserve peace and in this case peace is going to come at the price of war.

[Destroyer822]

Caligula101 yes civilians were killed in those bombings but you have to realize the Japanese defence plan involved civilians fighting to the death to protect the motherland. If you feel you must say something again heres the hypothetical situation for you. You are in command of the Japanese invasion how do you plan to go through with it without civilian losses?

 

 

 

Chris They themselves are not going to use the nukes they are going to give them to the terrorists who will then go out to bomb us. Yes i expect them to be irrational what have they done that leads you to believe they are rational or interested in peace?

 

... glassed??

 

 

 

Darkmage your arguement makes perfect sence just one problem they have already commited the crime Hezbollah is a wing of Iran it is funded by Iran it is armed by Iran.

 

 

 

I had no intention of saying its war anything goes. but nice try trying to read my mind please dont attempt to in the future...

 

 

 

Im done for now ill check back as this has been interesting

 

 

 

Darkmage the policy is made by the UN and as i said it is not enforced they are meaningless

[malo2]

negotiating with iran is hopeless, just nuke a town.

[darkmage099]

Ok i was wrong about hitler targeting only the jews but i do believe they were more heavily targeted if we get somone who knows more about the holocaust u can talk to them about that. i NEVER said we should nuke them, conventional bombs dropped on nuclear targets. Yes we supplied Israel but think to yourself if Israel put down their arms they would be slaughtered if Hezbollah put down their arms there would be peace. I have repeatedly explained why Iran cannot have nuclear weapons why do u not respond to that rather than restate the question?

 

 

 

"Hehe this never ends thats fine im getting more enjoyment out of this than the game itself....

 

Did we start that war? ... No

 

Were Japan and Germany trying to develop nukes? .... yes

 

Would they have readily used them on us? ..... yes

 

We actually cut down the number of casualties that would have resulted from the final invasion into Japan saving many more than the lives lost in the two nuclear weapons dropped in japan killed.... Yes even the Japanese casualties that would have resulted.

 

Have we used the nukes since then? .... no

 

At that point in time it was them or us. A concept blurred by the spread of nuclear weapons which could be a good thing but certainly not if the weapons fall into the hands of terrorists and why should we expect nothing less than Iran to give them to the terrorists? They did supply hezbollah long range rockets to fire at israel even a few soldiers to show them how to use them."

 

 

 

As for Iran being a target Iran is painting the target onto themselves by continuing down this road. Sit down and negotiate for peace ie stop funding terrorist groups.

 

 

 

I admitedly dont know enough to talk specifics on north korea but they are a nation they have a normal army. They dont act through terrorists.

 

Flame me on this one i dont know crap about them.

 

 

 

North Korea doesnt have a missle capable of reaching the US. and even if it did as it is a normal country the assured destruction of korea is a deterant. it would be mutual assured destruction but i know they dont have big enough nuclear capacity as russia and china had during the cold war. In Iraq and Afganastand we are trying to establish a stable goverment this is a completly different set of goals than a war.

 

 

 

Of course war is expencive but we can wage it of course. My suggestion is meant to cause as few casualties as possible to civilians and to disable their nuclear program. Now may i ask why would this war be unwinable?

 

It would be quite a problem but i dont see all of the middle east uniting to the cause of Iran.

 

 

 

the goal is not to start a war its to preserve peace and in this case peace is going to come at the price of war.

 

 

 

Okay...Ill start from the top. This argument was not entirely directed at you (only most of it). You say that if Lebanon put down their arms they there would be peace?! The only reason Lebanon captured those two soldiers is because Israel was kidnapping innocent civilians! I suggest we dont argue about the Lebanon-Israel war because it would belong in a different thread.

 

 

 

I doubt we could wage a war. We have already used billions of dollars (if not trillions) in Iraq. Iran is much bigger and we simply do not have the funds. The American people would never support that. The war is unwinable because it is not worth doing it.

 

 

 

You never know. The middle east just got one of their countries overthrown and if yuo do it to another some other countires might feel threatened. It is possible that they might. In my opinion, the only reason Iran wants nukes is to feel safe. THey dont want to be another Iraq. I dont know enough about them and the terrorists though. I dont see why some people assume that everyone in the middle east is a terrorist (not that I'm saying you think that).

 

 

 

Lebanon is also supported by Russia. Why dont we go bomb them huh? They have nuclear weapons, they fund "terrorists"? Oh, back to my old point, America will only go to war where they know they will win. You even said it yourself.

 

 

 

 

Russia funded Iran which funds "terrorists" which is why we should go to war with them.

 

 

 

THen why dont we destroy the root of the problem? Russia. (all this according to your logic)

 

 

 

 

 

negotiating with iran is hopeless, just nuke a town.

I HOPE you arent serious...

[malo2]

negotiating with iran is hopeless, just nuke a town.

I HOPE you arent serious...

no im not. The point is that they should do more than just give a slap on the wrist. Its WW2 all over again.

[1_man_army]

There is no way that USA is going to be able to strongarm Iran into doing excactly what they want. The way forward has to be at the negotiation table otherwise they risk alienating Iran and the wider region even further which is going to effect the West for years.

 

 

 

The best solution would be for Iran to have a third party to inspect their nuclear facilities to ensure that they are being used to create power and not for weapons making. I say a third party as there is no way Iran would trust the US or any other western country to inspect them however, they might be more likely to trust one of the more moderate Islamic states (such as Suadi Arabia).

 

 

 

However, I have listened to some of the Iranian Prime Minister's speaches in the last fortnight and they have been a lot more positive and promising than before. I think it was last week he claimed that "Iran has no enemies, not even Israel."

[Destroyer822]

Dark maybe this will clear something up for you Hezbollah is not part of Lebonon its part of Iran. These innocent civilians that Israel was kidnapping were part of hezbollah which has been massing stockpiles of missles inside of lebonon since Syria pulled out of lebonon. That war has everything to do with Iran as Hezbollah is part of Iran it is controlled by iran. I could be wrong in this but i dont believe any lebonon soldiers were involved in the Israel Hezbollah conflict... saying war makes it seem like its over would be nice if it was but i doubt it.

 

 

 

Iraq has cost us 320 billion

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/26/AR2006042601601.html

 

 

 

As i pointed out Lebonon and Hezbollah are not one in the same so your spoof quote isnt true although i am wondering how you did that?

 

 

 

Also is it a bad thing America will only go to war when it can win? it defies logic to expect otherwise. What i am saying is that we can win. My idea for dealing with iran would effectively limit Irans military capability, the goal wouldnt be to overthrow their goverment it would be to force negotiations in which their nuke program is dropped

[Destroyer822]

How could you buy those speaches he said them just before they voted to demand Iran stop nuclear testing in the UN theyre not going to scream death to Israel right there and then and if they soley want the nuclear technology for power why would they refuse russias offer to enrich the uranium for the Iranians? Weapons inspecters arnt that conclusive that is what started Iraq why not let russia enrich the uranium outside of Iran.

 

 

 

PLEASE STOP QUOTING SUCH LARGE SECTIONS THIS TOPIC IS VERY VERY VERY LAGGY BECAUSE OF THAT!

[Barihawk]

The UK has nuclear weapons, so does the USA, China, Russia and several other countries I can't be bothered to mention. Why can't Iran have them?

 

 

 

Because we are trying to disarm the world. It's a process that has been going on for decades. All the powers are gradually reducing and dismantling thier nuclear fleets (especially Russia and the US, who have millions of unnecessary warheads).

 

 

 

We feel that allowing a nation to develop nuclear weapons of it's own is counteractive to the world disarmament. And ESPECIALLY if it's a country like Iran that might "lose" a nuclear weapon that might be found by a terrorist organization like Al Queda or Hezzbolah.

 

 

 

My bets however is that Israel will be the first hammer to fire.

[darkmage099]

Okay to start with. that quote thing. You press the quite button then type the quote then unquote it by clicking the quote button once again.

 

 

 

Thank you for supporting me in that the cost of war is in the 100s of billions. And that was only Iraq. Imagine how much that would be if US TRIED to wage war with Iran. So that enough is reason not to try and wage war.

 

 

 

You still havent answered a lot of my questions about Russia and what I said about the Middle East (I learnt in debate class that if the opponent or person you are debating with drops an argument you brought up that you should bang on it until you win because if they cant answer it...well yeah but I wont do that). Can I ask you...what is your full stance on the situation in Iraq? What is your solution, I've stated mine. Obviously we cant go with the ultimatum.

 

 

 

 

 

Ill finish this later, I have to go eat

[Destroyer822]

YOUR IN BOSTON DO I GET A COOKIE?

 

 

 

Im not going to deny the facts of course i admit it has cost alot. I dont think you understand my idea completly WE WOULD NOT ACTUALLY BE GOING INTO IRAN WITH GROUND FORCES it would be a series of ariel attacks designed to stop Irans nuclear weapons development. After that was simply what our responce should be if Iran attacks us in responce. We would simply defend our current positions and bomb Iran buildings giving them and hour to evacuate or so. in order to devestate their military ability and force them to negotiate. Of course we could do this its not like we would be sending an invasion force we got the planes right next door in Iraq right now besides these planes can fly anywhere in the world in hours.

 

 

 

Now i think thats rather clear what i mean i thought it was clear at the start but maybe that wording helps everybody understand.

 

 

 

Now about Lebonan and Russia as i said above.... LEBONAN AND HEZBOLLAH ARE NOT THE SAME THING! Hezbollah was a state within a state that is funded and armed by Iran.

 

 

 

If you still think that we should bomb russia to solve all of these problems as you say "according to my logic" it may interest you to know that israel supports lebonan the problem was that hezbollah was to big the lebonan goverment was never strong enough to control hezbollah within its borders. If that doesnt answer your questions perhaps you should more clearly state them.

 

 

 

My full stance on Iraq is that it was a war started by false intellegence but it wasnt an illegal war. I choose not to believe the conspiracy theorys bush created this intellegence to invade Iraq and those that do have no more proof than I do for my stance on that. The notion that it is an illegal war is based purely on UN international law something about permission from the UN as i have said many times UN laws are meaningless they accomplish nothing. Theres internal fighting in the country.

 

 

 

The solution to Iraq is to strengthen and remove the corruption from the police and army.

 

 

 

Now as i get to the end of your questions u mention the ultimatum that started this which suggests to me that you are now talking about iran and not iraq. I think they are developing nuclear weapons which would be given to hezbollah or al-Quiada and we would see our cities blowing up. They claim to be using it for power plants only but refused an offer that would have ended this whole situation a long time ago when russia offered to enrich uranium for Iran outside of their country so that it could not be used to create nuclear weapons. ie Nuclear Bombs take a significantly larger supply of uranium than needed to run a nuclear power plant. They are delaying for time with the UN and offering negotiations with terms the US said it wouldnt accept prior to Irans offer. Heres the solution We can negotiate for a bit but i dont expect anything to come from them but Iran's new nuclear weapons. If no deal is reached then we go forward with the ultimatum to stop nuclear testing or we bomb all of their research facilities. Also i dont recall seeing your solution.

 

 

 

Whats with the ammount of posts on one page it seems to me that this should be on page 5 buy now : / ?

[Bmw]

I've been debating for a bit whether to post on this topic or not. It just hurts me so bad to see you aimlessly talking about the US, Iran and Iraq.

 

 

 

I really don't know where to start, but by simply reading your last reply, you make it sound so easy. "Oh, we'll just bomb their main buildings via our Air Force." :wall: Are you kidding me?

 

 

 

Do you not know anything about...anything?! Ask ANYONE in an administrative position in this ENTIRE WORLD if they supported the US attacking Iran. Every one of them will say "What are you, stupid?!" :roll:

 

 

 

A war against Iran is a religious war, whether you want to believe that or not. It becomes a Christian/Jewish war against Islam, plain and simple. Do you know how many Islamists are living in the US? Do you have any idea what kind of damage a war with Iran will do to the global economy, cost of oil, as well as the number of lives lost?

 

 

 

To sum it up with 1 word:

 

 

 

Stupid.

[Destroyer822]

How nice of you to contribute to the conversation i suppose i could call that constructive criticism but i dont think i will. The key thing you dont understand is the word being thrown around is not war its a way to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. If the plan was just to invade and go to ** war ** with them of course you would need a more complex plan but then again they generally do start with bombing runs. The idea of bombing their buildings slowly would be to pressure them to halt their retalitory attacks spacing these attacks 1 per so many time would apply ** pressure ** to them. Now if that doesnt get them to the negotiating table again then the word ** war ** comes into play. Now that you have come out and displayed your criticism why not offer an alternative solution? :-k

 

Just because this is a possibility a slim one that the of the jihad movement embraced by muslim "extremists" will spread throughout all of the world against us you still cannot let them develop nuclear weapons. If the pope decided to declare war on somone do you think the world would follow? maybe some but not all.

[hasnol143]

I've been debating for a bit whether to post on this topic or not. It just hurts me so bad to see you aimlessly talking about the US, Iran and Iraq.

 

 

 

I really don't know where to start, but by simply reading your last reply, you make it sound so easy. "Oh, we'll just bomb their main buildings via our Air Force." :wall: Are you kidding me?

 

 

 

Do you not know anything about...anything?! Ask ANYONE in an administrative position in this ENTIRE WORLD if they supported the US attacking Iran. Every one of them will say "What are you, stupid?!" :roll:

 

 

 

A war against Iran is a religious war, whether you want to believe that or not. It becomes a Christian/Jewish war against Islam, plain and simple. Do you know how many Islamists are living in the US? Do you have any idea what kind of damage a war with Iran will do to the global economy, cost of oil, as well as the number of lives lost?

 

 

 

To sum it up with 1 word:

 

 

 

Stupid.

 

you're actualy right do you guys remember when demorak drew the prophet mohammed (he's a very respected man for muslims and me) in the paper all the muslims around the world got mad, burned stuff and boycotted all there prodoucts which made there economy go down... and i say that they shouldn't even try to mess with Iran if there with russia cus it could get bloody and by bloody i mean alot of americans and muslims might die which will make all the familys mad and the gouverment is going to be in deep [cabbage]... We all know that the war in Iraq is pointless first the president said that the war is to find the missles that might be a threat to the US and then he said it's to make Iraq a diplomatic country. No1 in that country is actualy complaining about the lack of freedom there. I used to live in Saudia Arabia which is rules but a king...but i love that country more then Canada and I never complained I'd rather live in a non-democratic country than in country filled with blood and wars. I know that peps should have rights and all nothing had ever been solved by killing inocent peps.

[hasnol143]

How nice of you to contribute to the conversation i suppose i could call that constructive criticism but i dont think i will. The key thing you dont understand is the word being thrown around is not war its a way to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. If the plan was just to invade and go to ** war ** with them of course you would need a more complex plan but then again they generally do start with bombing runs. The idea of bombing their buildings slowly would be to pressure them to halt their retalitory attacks spacing these attacks 1 per so many time would apply ** pressure ** to them. Now if that doesnt get them to the negotiating table again then the word ** war ** comes into play. Now that you have come out and displayed your criticism why not offer an alternative solution? :-k

 

Just because this is a possibility a slim one that the of the jihad movement embraced by muslim "extremists" will spread throughout all of the world against us you still cannot let them develop nuclear weapons. If the pope decided to declare war on somone do you think the world would follow? maybe some but not all.

 

Even if they started blowing up every building it's just not right! no1 deserves to die! :x U can't just say that and even tho I don't think Iran will stop untill they reach there goals...

[Destroyer822]

I just like argueing with people but where did this Iran is allied with Russia come from? Also that drawing was in insult to the whole islamic religion portraying all of islam to be extremists which actually supports my theory that the islamic religion will not unite to protect the Irans "right" to nuclear weapons. The Shia and Sunni fight amongst each other the last thing the sunni want is to see Iran supply a nuke to the shiite

 

 

 

Responce to above as this wouldnt be an attack aimed at killing people an evacuation notice would be send a head of time.

 

Also I think its rather clear this is all aimless but let me expand that a bit further isnt runescape rather aimless? it is just a game after all?

[hasnol143]

I just like argueing with people but where did this Iran is allied with Russia come from? Also that drawing was in insult to the whole islamic religion portraying all of islam to be extremists which actually supports my theory that the islamic religion will not unite to protect the Irans "right" to nuclear weapons. The Shia and Sunni fight amongst each other the last thing the sunni want is to see Iran supply a nuke to the shiite

 

 

 

Responce to above as this wouldnt be an attack aimed at killing people an evacuation notice would be send a head of time.

 

 

 

We can all agree that wars are stupid and pointless but the nuclear boms are freacking dangerous and the sunnis are right beside the shia so if they start attcking them it migh infect iran too.

[Destroyer822]

Ill agree with that but u have to agree with this war is better than nuclear war

[hasnol143]

agree. :P

[Giordano]

negotiating with iran is hopeless, just nuke a town.

I HOPE you arent serious...

no im not. The point is that they should do more than just give a slap on the wrist. Its WW2 all over again.

 

You would of done one of the stupidiest things ever. Why didn't US 'just nuke' Russia during the Cold War? Because Russia would of sent 10x more nukes and nuke USA. It might not be the next day, but Iran will eventully nuke us back more than we nuked them. We can't nuke them constantly, you might know or not nuclear weapons release raditation into the air. US already screwed our air on hundreds of tests in Marshall Islands and Nevada Test Site. The earth can't hold any more nuclear explosions. It will speed global warming by immense ammounts. The sun is nuclear explosions over and over again, imagene that heat in the earth.

 

And If we cant nuke them constantly they'll just nuke us back...you would'nt want that Malo?

[hasnol143]

negotiating with iran is hopeless, just nuke a town.

I HOPE you arent serious...

no im not. The point is that they should do more than just give a slap on the wrist. Its WW2 all over again.

 

You would of done one of the stupidiest things ever. Why didn't US 'just nuke' Russia during the Cold War? Because Russia would of sent 10x more nukes and nuke USA. It might not be the next day, but Iran will eventully nuke us back more than we nuked them. We can't nuke them constantly, you might know or not nuclear weapons release raditation into the air. US already screwed our air on hundreds of tests in Marshall Islands and Nevada Test Site. The earth can't hold any more nuclear explosions. It will speed global warming by immense ammounts. The sun is nuclear explosions over and over again, imagene that heat in the earth.

 

And If we cant nuke them constantly they'll just nuke us back...you would'nt want that Malo?

 

No1 wants that.....

[darkmage099]

Okay, I was gone for a bit (went to work teh abs) and I'm back and it's apparant that discussion has been continued. Ill start from where you said I'm from Boston. I am not. My avatar should give it away.

 

 

 

Btw planes cost money too so you cant exactly make it seem like it is free. Ever head of a thing called AA guns or missles? We cant just go there with planes and hope not to get shot down.

 

 

 

I totally agree on your view on Iraq, however, I dont think that your solution is good because thats what we've been doing and it obviously hasn't helped a great deal.

 

 

 

You automatically cant assumet they'll give it to Hezbolla and Al-Queda. Even if they do give it to Hezbolla, I highly doubt he would use it. If he uses it on Israel, there goes Lebanon. I dont think anyone will use nuclear weapons. There will be no nuclear war. Becase the other person is probably scared [cabbage]less of your nukes and you are scared [cabbage]less of theirs. Ill bring this up later.

 

 

 

I AGREE WITH BMW...sort of

 

 

 

Not all Muslims are extremists and support war. Just keep that in mind. Hasnol, I agree that drawing Prophet Muhammad was WRONG!

 

 

 

Since when did Russia ally with Iran?

he Iranian president has repeatedly said that he will not stop his nuclear technology. He blased Kofi Annan's request that he disarm, and since Russia and China are on his side (against the USA of course),

 

since that statement was made.

 

 

 

I think that the Sunni and Shia Muslims are fighting among eachother, but they will stop fighting if they have something worth fighting for more. IMO I think they are just bored :-w .

 

 

 

Nuclear war will never come unless it is war between a country that does have a nuke and one that doesn't. Nick brought up a good point. If they nuke us we nuke them and vise-versa.

 

 

 

Nuclear weapons = PEACE! THink about it for a second. Who wants to go to war with a country that has nuclear weapons even when they do? Dont say Iran because they do care for their people...somewhat. India and Pakistan are prime examples. They used to fight constantly and now they have nuclear weapons so they are willing to discuss matters. This has brought a fragile peace between them but nonetheless it is peace. Nuclear weapons actually stops people and makes them think about the consequences. India and Pakistan have actually opened their borders!

 

 

 

I'll add more later but I need to sleep now

[hasnol143]

GOOD NIGHT!!!

[Kryptic]

All I hear is that the US wont let anyone else have the big toys. Maybe it's about time they share...?

 

 

 

IMO it'd be better for America to be un-opposed so that we don't get into another Cold War situation.

 

 

 

If you dont want any threats from someone else, maybe you shouldnt make something to threat them with. The mistake isn't Iran making Nukes, it is that the US started the whole nuclear project. Its just unforutnate that everyone else wants them too, just to feel safe.

 

 

 

Yes it would be better if there was no nuclear bombs, but they exist and I don't think that America will want to get rid of them. So the best thing to do is to let America keep its weapons and not provoke her into unleashing them. I'd rather live in a world where America dominates than a world where we could have a Nuclear war at any time.

 

 

 

 

 

I would rather live in a world with no nukes, but since America decided they wanted them we all have to suffer knowing other countries will want and get them aswell. Dont blame Iran for wanting Nukes, blame America for setting up the threat first.

 

 

 

Why doesn't America just abolish their Nuke programs? That would be a huge step into International agreement where everyone will disable and remove the Nuke threat. Maybe to start the solution, you need to fix where the problem started - America.