U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-18-2007, 06:32 PM
 
Location: Sitting on a bar stool. Guinness in hand.
4,429 posts, read 5,660,610 times
Reputation: 1698

Advertisements

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flieger View Post
I agree with you. However, if a bloody terrorist attack, which leaves behind almost the same amount of victims as in the 9/11-attacks, in U.S. or Iraq does happen, and it gets blamed on Iran (or an Iranian "sponsored" terror-group), I'm not sure if that many Americans will protest the use of force to respond. Just like the American people almost cheered as U.S. went after Saddam Hussein some time after 9/11, while most people still suffered with open wounds. I do believe they also interconnected Saddam Hussein with Osama bin Laden. The mass media is probably the one to blame for this misunderstanding.
I would say yes to this. But after the intelligence fiasco for the Iraq war. Even if it was true that Iran had links to it. I think Americans in general are Rather weary of what our government says about terrorists and terrorist attacks. I'm not sure if we will believe them this time (boy who cried wolf). We in America were fooled once into going to war. I don't think we will go for it again. Plus by then I think America's economy is going to be in the tank. So I'm not sure where we are going to get the money this time around.
Granted I'm saying these things, if there is a conventional terrorist attack now if there is a small nuclear terrorist attack. Oh boy! Yeah we probably go hog wild on the whole of the middle east if that happens. And to be honest. I think I rather be caught in the nuclear blast than to see what happens in this world after a terrorist attack like that.



Quote:
Well, Israel has no solid proof of an existing nuclear-weapons program that'll justify the preemptive use of force against Iran. Nor has the U.S. We don't know very much so far, except what IAEA and the Iranians themselves reports. And to my knowledge, they've not reported the existence of any nuclear-weapons program. Not any intelligence service either. While it may, just may, be so that the Iranians do intend to in future acquire nuclear-weapons, I don't see very much proof to suggest that's what they're doing now.

While Iran is an Islamic state with laws, rules, cultural norms and values I do not endorse, I'm trying to be as objective as possible when it comes to my understanding of their intentions with their nuclear activity. And no country, whether it be U.S. or Israel, should attack or go to war with Iran over presumptions and misinformation (again), in fact, U.S. should be careful with the threats and sanctions until there are solid proof known to the International community of a nuclear-weapons program. This is a matter of credibility and Bush has none of that right now.

U.S. should instead turn their eyes to Islamic states such as Pakistan and India, which are hostile towards each other, and both have nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons in the hands of Islamic Extremists is the very last thing I would want to see, and this is not an impossibility in these countries, especially in Pakistan which has been unstable lately. But U.S. are turning a blind eye to all of this and instead issue threats towards Iran. Could it be because of the President of Iran's anti-Israeli remarks? We all know about the extremely close relationship between Israel and U.S.

Could not agree more with you on all your points above. Very good
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-18-2007, 07:57 PM
 
Location: Northglenn, Colorado
3,689 posts, read 9,439,270 times
Reputation: 946
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArizonaBear View Post
For some reason: China does not dare 'rock the boat' too much--------in the long run; they would lose big time.

As I have commented on in the past: out of China's 1+ Billion people; maybe 100 million of them are relatively affluent-------can someone say another 'Cultural Revolution'?

Side note: apparently the lead in the toys debacle is starting to cause China some $$$ pain------more and more Americans are buying US/Euro sourced playthings for their kids as of late.
What happens when the people in China realize that they are being paid extremely slave like wages, and the government is prosperous? you end up with a revolt. and overthrowing of the country, and a free democratic republic replacing it. China even though it is prospering now, its only a matter of time before the oppressed will fight for freedom. It might take a while, but it will happen, and has happened in our history.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2007, 05:37 PM
 
33 posts, read 70,191 times
Reputation: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by baystater View Post
I would say yes to this. But after the intelligence fiasco for the Iraq war. Even if it was true that Iran had links to it. I think Americans in general are Rather weary of what our government says about terrorists and terrorist attacks. I'm not sure if we will believe them this time (boy who cried wolf). We in America were fooled once into going to war. I don't think we will go for it again. Plus by then I think America's economy is going to be in the tank. So I'm not sure where we are going to get the money this time around.
Granted I'm saying these things, if there is a conventional terrorist attack now if there is a small nuclear terrorist attack. Oh boy! Yeah we probably go hog wild on the whole of the middle east if that happens. And to be honest. I think I rather be caught in the nuclear blast than to see what happens in this world after a terrorist attack like that.

Good points, indeed. And I agree - the aftermath of an [Iranian] attack on U.S., triggering an immediate military response towards Iran, especially if it involved nuclear technology, would be one of the very worst things the World has seen in a long time. As Brzezinski predicted, I believe such a conflict could and perhaps will spread across the Middle East and we don't know how the Islamic World, in particular Shia Muslims and radicals, will react. This is one scary future scenario. How will the oil-hungry Chinese and the war-profiteering (sort of) Russians with their nuclear investments in Iran react? They all more or less have economic interests in or with Iran. Also, how will the European Union, which in fact is Iran's largest trading partner, react?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:03 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top