Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

1929crash

Iran A Major Threat, Says Ariana Huffington

Recommended Posts

Guest P-Diddly

1850904511_072e891709.jpg

"Once I spoke a word, and the creation came into being. Once again I will speak one word, and all will be over. In between there is only silence and love."

Meher Baba, 1960, Poona, Aw 22:1 p66

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suppose that given the justification for war in Iraq (WMD) there is a faintly humourous aspect to this rush to Obamageddon. :blink:

How come post #5 is timed at 4 minutes BEFORE post #4? Is Mossad active on here again? :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest P-Diddly
Surely you mean HYPOTHETICALLY. There is no way anyone apart from a few nutty Israelis.....in fast US attack jets..... We're F*cked.

_41061128_howerd3_bodybbc.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to be a smartarse . . .

. . . but . . .

this time round I'm going to keep my notebook with me when I'm out and about and in the pub. When people start supporting the idea of attacking Iran, I'm going to note it down and date it.

I am so sick of all the people who said we needed "to do something" about Iraq and Afghanistan telling me now that they never supported either war.

Just like people who now say they "saw the crash coming". Simply reminding them that two years ago they'd laughed at me and called me a fool for saying that a house price crash was coming isn't enough. They just look me in the eye and lie. Some have even said: "No, it was you who said that!" If I had their words on paper, and dated, I might have a chance.

But, having said that, I can't think of anyone I know (even the stupid ones who supported the Iraq war and believed house prices would never come down) who is behind the idea of messing with Iran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when did we go to "Face the music" panellists for foreign policy advice?

Have Nigel Kennedy, Julian Lloyd Webber and Joyce Grenfell also been consulted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All Israel need to do is positively identify the secret enrichment plant(s) and take them out same way as they did in Syria. Job's a goodun.

Iran want the bomb for the war the want to win against Israel in order to bring about the coming of the Hidden Imam. Nations based on medieaval gobbledegook can't be allowed to gain nuclear weapons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest P-Diddly
All Israel need to do is positively identify the secret enrichment plant(s) and take them out same way as they did in Syria. Job's a goodun.

Iran want the bomb for the war the want to win against Israel in order to bring about the coming of the Hidden Imam. Nations based on medieaval gobbledegook can't be allowed to gain nuclear weapons.

8428-2984.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mad old Chairman Mao used to believe that a Nukeelar war with America was absolutely essential for the world. If that mad old bugger can be persuaded otherwise then Ahjmed OhMy DinerJacket! can be similarly swayed. I also think Israel pours oil on the fire when it takes out sites like the one in Syria. They wanted to bomb the Iranian sites in '08 but even little Georgie Bush in one of his few lucid moments thought it was a bad idea and refused them permission to cross Iraqi airspace. If Israel attacks Iran it's the spark that starts something bigger. The Russian's wont like it and I reckon those self same Chinese will have a word or two to say about it. There would also be unrest in the US - I reckon - and you should know, as it's the interweb, which I invented, I'm always right. So don't even think of trying to argue.

It's not Amoudinajad who needs persuading; it's the neo-cons who are still running US foreign policy.

There is absolutely no evidence that the Iranians are trying to manufacture a nuclear weapon, and this so-called facility at Qom is just a hole in the ground. There's no uranium stored there and any pretence on the part of western media and politicians that it's any more than a hole in the ground is lies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a fair point to raise though - what is the evidence of the development of nuclear weapon development in Iran? It's non existent. Paper talk, rumour and speculation. Oh, and don't forget "intelligence". That's how we ended up being told that Iraq could hit us with a missile in 45 minutes.

Will we never learn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a fair point to raise though - what is the evidence of the development of nuclear weapon development in Iran? It's non existent. Paper talk, rumour and speculation. Oh, and don't forget "intelligence". That's how we ended up being told that Iraq could hit us with a missile in 45 minutes.

Will we never learn?

The problem is that Obama is a weak president and can't stand up to the War Party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not Amoudinajad who needs persuading; it's the neo-cons who are still running US foreign policy.

There is absolutely no evidence that the Iranians are trying to manufacture a nuclear weapon, and this so-called facility at Qom is just a hole in the ground. There's no uranium stored there and any pretence on the part of western media and politicians that it's any more than a hole in the ground is lies.

even if they weren't manufacturing the stuff themselves,there are still several hundred active warheads from supposedly decomissioned soviet stockpiles that went missing about a decade ago.

Anyway,there's far more going on than just a couple of nukes here and there,there is a bloody huge power-play going on.

in the red corner,you have the sino-soviet pact(and they are working fairly closely together for a new commie-lite world)

in the blue corner,you have the US and EU......the US isn't naturally communist but has chosen a leader that seeks to make it so

The EU has communist leanings and would like to stitch up the US to gain hegemony

...but both are worried about the emerging threat from sino-russia,but are too

immature to recognise that squabbling is going to cause us problems and none

of the blue states are naturally socialist,apart from maybe italy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

even if they weren't manufacturing the stuff themselves,there are still several hundred active warheads from supposedly decomissioned soviet stockpiles that went missing about a decade ago.

Is this true - several hundred warheads went missing? Link please.

And even if true, why are they more likely to be in Iran than say, India or Israel or the buried caches of the Provisional IRA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RE Soviet warheads. They are/were technically unaccounted for, not missing, but almost all are just lying around in bases, and all of these bases are in the Russian Federation, not the ex-Soviet states. After 1991 all nuclear material was returned to Russia. The problem is the lax inventory, lack of funding for the military, and chaos after 1991 means that the authorities didn't know where the stuff was 'exactly', even if it wasn't really missing. I know this sounds lame, but the truth is usually much more mundane than any conspiracy or fantasy.

I know someone who works on tracking down the missing inventory, and to date they've got hold of most of it. The stuff about suitcase bombs has never been substantiated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a good piece in Mauldin's eletter (subscription only, but free) about Iran basically being in a foreign and domestic policy cul-de-sac.

If Russia decides to support US policy in return for the US giving a nod to the sphere of influence in E Europe, then China will vote with Russia and the Iranians are completely isolated.

They have no gasoline refining capacity due to isolation since 79, and import most of their petrol. So any military action on their part is suicidal. They are in a lose-lose situation.

They have the option of pissing everyone off and setting fire to their own oil wells, and blocking the gulf, that's about it. Big deal.

I think the main thing people have to understand is that the Iranian leadership is terrified of its own people and lots of bluster is for domestic consumption. Whether this has unforeseen consequences is up to the Israelis. An air strike, might in the short term not have any great effect either way. What can the Iranian's do, really?

Oil and gas supplies are getting more and more diversified every year. Even a hot war in the gulf might not be particularly disruptive - just as the Iraq war wasn't (for the average westerner).

I'madinnerjacket has Jewish parentage by the way. Must be true is was on the Today programme this morning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds like a very interesting mate.

Again, truth is so much more boring than fiction:

He sits at a desk going through old flaky Soviet xeroxes - it's a bit like family history - finding missing links - which box was sent to which base and then the paperwork put in the wrong filing cabinet. Chats in person with scientists, military. Writes up reports, boring job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a good piece in Mauldin's eletter (subscription only, but free) about Iran basically being in a foreign and domestic policy cul-de-sac.

If Russia decides to support US policy in return for the US giving a nod to the sphere of influence in E Europe, then China will vote with Russia and the Iranians are completely isolated.

I can see this scenario coming about,but I don't think it will be all plain sailing.

the russians would quite like the islamic problem dealt with,but don't want to do the donkey work,so will give the green light for the US to attack,while supplying arms to the islamists.

Knowing full well that the "crusader" mentality of blair/bush etc is likely to provoke an islamic backlash not just on the US but also the EU it will serve to weaken both,while sino-soviet stays out of the firing line.

..then when both opponents are suitable weakened a combined red assault on the war-weary west and we are all up sh1t creek.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see this scenario coming about,but I don't think it will be all plain sailing.

the russians would quite like the islamic problem dealt with,but don't want to do the donkey work,so will give the green light for the US to attack,while supplying arms to the islamists.

Knowing full well that the "crusader" mentality of blair/bush etc is likely to provoke an islamic backlash not just on the US but also the EU it will serve to weaken both,while sino-soviet stays out of the firing line.

..then when both opponents are suitable weakened a combined red assault on the war-weary west and we are all up sh1t creek.

How would dropping bombs on Iran solve "the Islamic problem"? Wouldn't it just make Muslims angrier?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   291 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.