Iran Really DOES Have A Case For Nukes (weapon, invasion, Saddam)

[pstratt]

"...hangs much upon a misquote of a mistranslation of a misquote by Ahmedinejad of something that the Ayatollah Khomeini had once actually said. That you don't put the statement into any broader context than that of assumed self-evidence does not suggest an immunity to bias on your part. Pointing out this shortcoming does not suggest the presence of any on mine."

"...the misquote of a mistranslation of a misquote..."

What is your source? You really believe they would not like to blow Israel off the face of the earth? Israel is 90% of the problem in the Middle East, but we are not going to let that happen, maybe to our own detriment.

[bily4]

An interesting article on this a few years old from of all places, the Jewish Review on this topic.

The Iranian people and even now the higher levels of governemnt are thinking of the future of Iran first. Ahmadinejad is becoming increasingly isolated.


In fact, though the West still thinks of Iran as a cauldron of anti-Israel passion, a new generation of pro-democracy Iranians increasingly speaks out against the government's seeming obsession with the Palestinians. And these youths are finding cohorts in an unlikely quarter: a group of senior conservative officials who are beginning to question the utility of Iran's close ties to anti-Israel groups.

Conservatives are realizing that Iran's sinking economy, which will need to find hundreds of thousands of jobs for its young people, desperately needs foreign investment. As a result, despite claims of Islamic and revolutionary solidarity, Tehran quietly favors pragmatism above ideology in its foreign policies.

Is Iran rethinking its position on Israel?

[golfgod]

Great post KevK. Cripes these are the only people in that part of the world that actually LIKE America and Americans. Forget the blabbering of Ahmadinajad. His right wing rants no more represent the majority of Iranian's thoughts than do the rantings of GW Bush and Limbaugh represent the majority of Americans.

Look, they are the biggest, most modern country in that neighborhood. Just like any other "big kid on the block" they demand respect.

I wish everyone would read Thomas C.P. Barnett's; "The Pentagon's New Map of the World". Or at least the excert that was in Esquire, or watch the (PBC or TLC) special of his power point presentation. If Barnett hadn't had the annoying habit of being right so much maybe Rumsfeld wouldn't have fired him!

golfgod

[Huckleberry3911948]

iran has no history of aggression towards other countries? does the open public threat of the extinction of israel on public TV by Iran's president count for anything? does human wave attacks on iraqi count?
how bout the kurdish people and how they were treated. sacking of the US embassy and hostages taken. no aggression. did i miss something?

[Luiso]

Iran saw how we toppled Saddam though the Iran army would fight way way more we would still topple it.

We have a base/s now next door to them we are not leaving . I dont care if Obama wins we are going to keep "some" troops there just incase.
Saudis hate Iran as Iran is Persian not Arab and the Saudis have input in our GVMT.

Iran is terrified they are against the wall and feel if no nukes we will in time be knocking on their door but in the process of getting nukes we might be knocking on their door.

It looks like they have opted to risk it

[Luiso]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948

iran has no history of aggression towards other countries? does the open public threat of the extinction of israel on public TV count for anything?

I think Israel will hit Iran with missles/jets before Bush leaves office ESP if it looks like Mccain wont win unless some drastic change in Iran.

Do you agree ?

[k350]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948

iran has no history of aggression towards other countries? does the open public threat of the extinction of israel on public TV by Iran's president count for anything? does human wave attacks on iraqi count?
how bout the kurdish people and how they were treated. sacking of the US embassy and hostages taken. no aggression. did i miss something?

No, threats do not count, only action.

The kurds? Turkey, Iraq, Armenia and probably others have harshly treated the kurds, rightfully so I might add.

The Kurds took up the side of Iran during the Iran-Iraq war, hence the reason why Sadaam used chemical weapons to put them down as the Iraq army was devasted and to ill to fight an insurgency inside its borders.

Embassy hostages? While it was a violation of international laws and in my opinion normal diplomatic courtesy, do not forget the embassy was representing a country (USA) who propped up a very cruel dictactor responsible for tens of thousands of deaths of Iran's own people.

[saganista]

Originally Posted by pstratt

What is your source?

The internet. Feel free to google it.

Originally Posted by pstratt

You really believe they would not like to blow Israel off the face of the earth?

I have no reason to believe that they have any such intention at all. What -- beyond the hyped ad nauseum by the disinformation media supposed quote from Ahmedinejad -- makes you think that they do?

Quite aside from the fact that no one has any indication of there having been any Iranian weapons program for years, why should a country such as Iran feel content or comfortable in having a nuclear Israel on one side and a nuclear Pakistan on another?

Originally Posted by pstratt

Israel is 90% of the problem in the Middle East, but we are not going to let that happen, maybe to our own detriment.

Israel and everybody else in the area would have been less of a problem had Bush not originally walked away from any sort of US diplomatic role in the region at all. Despite its frustrations and persistent lack of material success, an on-going "peace process" provided an extra level of order and conversation, the lack of which has cost thousands of lives.

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by KevK

The more I read and hear, the more I am coming around to Iran's point of view on several levels:

1. The EU and the USA, while being all bent out of shape about Iran's program never said a peep about Israel's secret program nor did they "harshly" punish India and Pakistan for theirs.

The US punished India through trade actions and bans on military sales.

Originally Posted by KevK

2. Iran want to become a first world nation and has the absolute right to do so. The biggest thing that separates first world from third world nations is the development and enrichment of nukes.

There's no evidence Iran ever had a nuclear weapons program.

Iran has had a test reactor at Tehran University since 1974.

A German company, Siemens, built the dual-reactors at Bushwer, but they were damage during the Iraq-Iran War. A contract was awarded to a Russian company around 2002 or so to repair them.

The Iranians experimented with gas centrifuges for separation/enrichment during the 1980s.

They switched to magnetic separation in in the early 1990s, then began experimenting with laser separation techniques in 1997 before switching back to an improved method of gas centrifuge separation developed by Pakistan.

Iran suffers from many problems, the most important of which is that like all Middle Eastern countries, they have a shortage of water resources. One of the dual-reactors at Bushwer is designed to power desalinization plants.

A new supply of fresh water will allow Iran to develop the interior of the country for agriculture. Certain petro-chemical processes are also water intensive, and desalinization plants will allow Iran to further develop their chemical and petro-chemical industries.

Iran is currently maxed out on hydro power and its electrical generation is powered using oil and natural gas. As the US knows, Iran is projected to l become a net-importer of oil by 2015, which will severely tax oil supplies and drive the price up (just like the UK, Malaysia, Singapore, and Indonesia have done recently).

Switching to nuclear power will allow Iran to divert more oil to world supply.

Originally Posted by KevK

3. Iran has no history of aggression against other countries. In fact they have been victimized by other nations attacking them or causing them trouble- including the UK and USA.

The US attempted to murder Prime Minister Massadeq in cold blood 3 times but failed. They ended up capturing him and trying him in a kangaroo court for "treason."

[unseengundam]

It simply isn't in best of interest of current US for Iran to have Nukes. US is doing trying stop / slow them down. Wouldn't surprise me if some kind of attack against Iran takes place. US IS treating Iran and Iran knows it, Iran is just trying "talk" it way out of it right now since it doesn't have nukes ready.

Another, reason you keep on hearing about missile defense. I am guessing US is really trying to get it working so that when Iran does Nukes and missiles they won't be as much of treat as they could be. Would be kind of disastrous for US foreign policy if Iran had nukes + missiles and US had no way to stop them.