Iran: time for America to face baseless fears

anatta

100% recycled karma
In the fall of 1956, Nikita Khrushchev threatened to rain rockets down on London for the British invasion of Suez and sent his tanks into Budapest to drown the Hungarian Revolution in blood.

He blew up the Paris summit in 1960, banged his shoe at the U.N., and warned Americans, “We will bury you!”

He insulted John F. Kennedy in Vienna, built the Berlin Wall, and began secretly to place missiles in Cuba capable of annihilating every city in the Southeast, including Washington.

Those were sobering times and serious enemies.

Yet in the Eisenhower-Kennedy years, living under a nuclear Sword of Damocles unlike any the world had ever known, we Americans were on balance a cool, calm and collected crowd.

How then explain the semi-hysteria and near panic in circles of this city over the possibility President Obama might meet with President Hassan Rouhani and hold negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program?

We hear talk of Hitler in the Rhineland, of a new Munich, of America failing to act as Britain failed to act, until, back to the wall, it had no choice but to fight. The old Churchill quotes are heard once again.

But is the Ayatollah Hitler? Is Rouhani von Ribbentrop? Is Iran the Fourth Reich? Should we be very very afraid?

Iran, we are told, is the most dangerous enemy America faces.

But is this true?

Depending on one’s source, Iran’s economy is 2 to 4 percent of ours. After oil and gas, its big exports appear to be caviar, carpets and pistachio nuts. Inflation is unbridled and Iran’s currency is plummeting.

Here is the New York Times last month:

“Rouhani’s aides describe Iran’s economic situation as the worst in decades. … The signs of woe abound.

“Lacking money, Iran’s national soccer team scrapped a training trip to Portugal. Teachers in Tehran nervously awaited their wages, which were inexplicably delayed by more than a week. Officials warned recently that food and medicine imports have stalled for three weeks because of a lack of foreign currency.”

Should Iran start a war, the sinking of its coastal navy would be a few days’ work for the Fifth Fleet. Its air force of U.S. Phantoms dating to the Shah and few dozen MiGs dating to the early 1990s would provide a turkey shoot for Top Gun applicants.

In 30 days, the United States could destroy its airfields, missile sites and nuclear facilities, and impose an air and naval blockade that would reduce Iran to destitution.

And Iran is not only isolated economically.

She is a Shia nation in a Muslim world 90 percent Sunni, a Persian nation on the edge of a sea of 320 million Arabs. Kurds, Azeris, Arabs and Baluch make up close to half of Iran’s population. War with America could tear Iran apart.

Why then would Tehran want a war – and with a superpower?

Answer: It doesn’t. Since the 1979 revolution, Iran has attacked no nation and gone to war once – to defend herself against Saddam Hussein’s aggression that had the backing of the United States.

In that war, the Iranians suffered the worst poison gas attacks since Gamal Abdel Nasser used gas in Yemen and Benito Mussolini used it in Abyssinia. Iran has thus condemned the use of gas in Syria and offered to help get rid of it.

Last year, Iran’s departing president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who frightened so many, made a simple logical point about Iran’s supposed bomb program:

“Let’s even imagine that we have an atomic weapon, a nuclear weapon. What would we do with it? What intelligent person would fight 5,000 American bombs with one bomb?”

Yet, still, the beat goes on. “There is no more time to hold negotiations,” says Israel’s Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz, Iran is only six months from developing an atom bomb.

Yet the New York Times reports Monday, “American intelligence experts believe Iran is still many months if not years away from having such a weapon.” Time to clear this up.

Congress should call James Clapper, head of national intelligence, and pin him down publicly on these questions:

Has Iran made the decision to build an atom bomb? Does Iran even have all the ingredients for a bomb? If Iran made a decision to build a bomb would we know about it? And how long would it take for Iran to build and test a nuclear device?

Americans were misled, deceived and lied into one war. Let’s not follow the same crowd into another.

Obama is being urged not to meet with Rouhani, as the man has a checkered past. Yet U.S. presidents met three times with Stalin, three with the Butcher of Budapest, once with Chairman Mao.

Compared to these fellows, Hussein Rouhani looks like Ramsey Clark.

Query: If Iran has the scientific and industrial capacity to build a bomb – and all agree it has – what could conceivably be the reason Iran has not yet done so?

Perhaps, just perhaps, Iran doesn’t want the bomb.

Talk to the man, Mr. President
http://original.antiwar.com/buchanan/2013/09/23/is-iran-the-fourth-reich/
 
Check out how much money "Defense Industry" pays our politicians to become persuaded to go to war if possible instead of when necessary.

Iran may be a threat. I'm not writing this off. But there are nations near them that have nukes already but we seem to be focused on 1 nuke that isn't proven.

The Defense Industry only thrives when idiot Americans act like we are acting today. We don't even know we are spending over $33 Million a day on practically nothing. Or more accurately, on a subject we created.

America is more interested in Football than politics and politicians prey on that.
 
Ummm, even if they did get a nuke, it's not a big deal. NK has them, and they're far less rational than Iran. Besides, with the war mongering of nuclear Israel, and their nuclear neighbors of China, India, and Pakistan, I think it's in their best national security interests.
 
Ummm, even if they did get a nuke, it's not a big deal. NK has them, and they're far less rational than Iran. Besides, with the war mongering of nuclear Israel, and their nuclear neighbors of China, India, and Pakistan, I think it's in their best national security interests.

First brainy thing you have ever stated on this forum! Good job kid. You are learning.
 
Ummm, even if they did get a nuke, it's not a big deal. NK has them, and they're far less rational than Iran. Besides, with the war mongering of nuclear Israel, and their nuclear neighbors of China, India, and Pakistan, I think it's in their best national security interests.
exactly. well said.

Besides it's time to stop putting all our interests in the Sunni's/Israel.
 
Yeah, right.

We're supposed to get whipped up into a war frenzy because Assad allegedly gassed 1000 of his own people with weapons that were in use 100 years.

But we're supposed to just shrug our shoulders when a bunch of loonies threatening to obliterate other countries off of the map get the nuclear capacity to do so.

All this is, is a feeble attempt to set the table to get America to accept what will be Obama's biggest and most lingering foreign affairs failure.
 
Yeah, right.

We're supposed to get whipped up into a war frenzy because Assad allegedly gassed 1000 of his own people with weapons that were in use 100 years.
No, we're not. We're supposed to stay the hell out of it, because it's none of our business.

But we're supposed to just shrug our shoulders when a bunch of loonies threatening to obliterate other countries off of the map get the nuclear capacity to do so.

All this is, is a feeble attempt to set the table to get America to accept what will be Obama's biggest and most lingering foreign affairs failure.
So, you want one of the largest oil producing countries, which neighbors the two fastest growing (and most populace) nations, who are armed with nuclear weapons already, to be at a strategic disadvantage? Iran as a nuclear nation HELPS us, it doesn't hurt us.
 
You're missing my point. I'm not saying we should be riled up about Syria, I'm saying that's what the Obama Administration wants us to do.

Like they want us to shrug our shoulders about Iran getting nuclear weapons. Because they know their failure to do so is imminent.

Nobody is going to nuke Iran for the same reason nobody is going to nuke North Korea; they're both border nuclear super powers. One bomb will virtually eradicate Israel, which is as narrow as 12 miles wide in some places. A nuclear retaliation from them is basically revenge from beyond the grave.

I've seen the video of I'm-A-Dinner-Jacket in front of a mural of an atomic bomb, like it was a deity like in the Planet of the Apes movies. If you think they're developing it for purely defensive motives, I can't prove otherwise at this point. Although you're obviously deluding yourself.
 
Rouhani hasfull power to negotiate ( per Kamenei statement?) over the nukes. Iran's economy is a mess, a lot due to sanctions.

So what does the US want? No nukes? is it really that important?

will prolly make some noise about Syria, although the way the Islamists are controlling the rebels, having Hez being supplied isn't all that bad.

Anything in terms of movement with Iran is a plus ; so we get some kind of "no nukes" pledge, and maybe some curtailingof Syrian figher training supplies

In return we agree to phase out the sanctions - a path towards some type of normalization -that's all good.
 
here is another reason Iran is coming around.

A HUGE population of young people who want to be much more secular.


You see kids all over the world are NOT buying the full diaper load of hate you right wing nutters all over the world are trying to pass down to the next generation
 
You're missing my point. I'm not saying we should be riled up about Syria, I'm saying that's what the Obama Administration wants us to do.

Like they want us to shrug our shoulders about Iran getting nuclear weapons. Because they know their failure to do so is imminent.

Nobody is going to nuke Iran for the same reason nobody is going to nuke North Korea; they're both border nuclear super powers. One bomb will virtually eradicate Israel, which is as narrow as 12 miles wide in some places. A nuclear retaliation from them is basically revenge from beyond the grave.

I've seen the video of I'm-A-Dinner-Jacket in front of a mural of an atomic bomb, like it was a deity like in the Planet of the Apes movies. If you think they're developing it for purely defensive motives, I can't prove otherwise at this point. Although you're obviously deluding yourself.




If you don't get riled up all on your own by civilans being gassed in their beds at night then you are a sociopath
 
here is another reason Iran is coming around.

A HUGE population of young people who want to be much more secular.


You see kids all over the world are NOT buying the full diaper load of hate you right wing nutters all over the world are trying to pass down to the next generation

We heard the same moronic drone about Tunisia, Lybia, Syria and Egypt.
 
Earth to brain dead Libruls; Iran is not an "American" problem. It is a UN problem. Korea is not an "American" problem, it is a UN problem.

If you think that nations run by despotic regimes having nukes is a good idea; you're an idiot.
 
Lebanese scholar: Muslim World Needs to Follow Imam Khamenei’s Anti-arrogance Stance

Confronting the arrogant powers is quite obvious in the stances and viewpoints of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei, a Lebanese scholar said.

Sayyed Hussein Sharafeddin added that the Supreme Leader on every occasion underlines the importance of fighting the hegemonic powers.

“Today, Muslims must answer his call and adopt a serious stance against the hegemonic powers.”

Sharafeddin pointed to the characteristics of the Islamic Revolution of Iran and the role of its leadership, saying that the revolution of Iran was Islamic, inspired by the Holy Quran, and took lessons from the uprising of Imam Hussein (AS).

He referred to being popular, having a popular leader, and fighting oppression and arrogance as other characteristics of Iran’s Islamic Revolution.

The Lebanese researcher highlighted the important role of Imam Khamenei’s leadership in keeping the revolution strong and said Imam Khamenei was trained in the school of Imam Khomeini and stood up for Islamic values since his youth days.

“When Imam Khomeini (RA) passed away, a famous journalist of the time asked me about the Imam’s successor. I said the Ulama that are in Iran now are all Mujahids (those who struggle on the path of God) and have the qualifications to become the leader, but I believe Ayatollah Khamenei is the one that everyone approves of as Iran’s leader.”

Asked about Imam Khamenei’s endeavors for Islamic unity, Sharafeddin said the basis of Iran’s revolution is Islam and naturally Iran’s leader and officials emphasize Islamic values such as proximity among Islamic schools of thought.

He said as long as attempts by the enemy for fomenting discord among Muslims continue, the Islamic Revolution of Iran and its leader in particular will take steps to foil these attempts and put an end to the slogan of ‘divide and rule’.

The Lebanese scholar said confronting the arrogant powers is clear in Imam Khamenei’s stances and viewpoints. “On every occasion, His Eminence underscores the need for confronting the world arrogance and has stood up firmly against hegemonic powers.”

Sharafeddin stressed that Muslims must put Imam Khamenei’s statements on top of their agenda and follow the path of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution in fighting global arrogance.

He further pointed to Imam Khamenei’s attention to the issue of Palestine and referring to verse 1 of Surah Al-Isra, underlined the need for all Muslims not to neglect their duty to defend the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy city of Quds.

He said when Imam Khamenei calls for defending Palestine, every Muslim should act accordingly and support Palestine, because it is against Islamic teachings to remain indifferent toward desecration of this land.

Sharafeddin noted that the issue of Palestine was emphasized by the late founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran since early days after the victory of the Islamic Revolution.

He further highlighted the Islamic Republic of Iran’s assistance to the resistance movement and said Iran’s support for resistance has been one of the accomplishments of the Islamic Revolution.
http://www.abna.ir/data.asp?lang=3&id=466095

came across this - a good look at the internal ideology behind the Revolution - not to be dismissed, assuming the Lebanese scholor here is Shi'a
 
We heard the same moronic drone about Tunisia, Lybia, Syria and Egypt.

then why did you cheer the taking of the shit cork out of the bottle of bees you fucking dolt?


Yeah Sadam was a shit wad but he kept the bottle of bees from escaping.


You and your assholes shook up the fucking bottle of bees and then took the shit cork out.

WHY the fuck did you do that?
 
“An enigmatic and cunning man, Ayatollah Khamenei, 74, is the one who gave Mr. Rouhani the authority to pursue a deal with the United States, top aides to Mr. Rouhani and outside experts say, and could just as easily cut off support — as he has done to some Iranian leaders before, including Mr. Rouhani.

Ayatollah Khamenei sees himself as a sort of referee of Iran’s complex political system, sitting in judgment of the politicians he anoints to lead the country in what are often sharply different directions. In 1997, for example, he blessed the reformist candidacy of Mohammad Khatami, who relaxed some social restrictions and allowed more press freedom.

But he allowed the hard-liners to undermine Mr. Khatami’s presidency, and in 2005 he pinwheeled to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the strident nationalist hard-liner, who denied the Holocaust and antagonized the West for much of his eight years in office.

This is not the first go-round for Ayatollah Khamenei and Mr. Rouhani, himself something of a prodigy who was once the darling of the clerics who founded the Islamic republic. In 2003 Mr. Rouhani, then the chief nuclear negotiator, persuaded Ayatollah Khamenei to suspend uranium enrichment for several months in hopes of reaching a nuclear deal. But the negotiations broke down, and Mr. Rouhani was banished from the circles of power before being resurrected this spring.

“Everybody understands that Supreme Leader Khamenei is in a win-win situation,” said Mojtaba Mousavi, an Iranian political commentator who is often briefed by officials close to the leader. He explained that if talks lead to the reduction or elimination of the economic sanctions that have damaged Iran’s economy, Ayatollah Khamenei will get the credit for approving the new negotiating strategy.

But Ayatollah Khamenei can also take the credit if the talks should collapse. “If talks fail to reach any results, he will be praised for having proved his warnings over the dishonesty by the West towards Iran,” said Mr. Mousavi. “In that case his doubts will be proved once again.”

For all the attention paid to Iran’s new tone of moderation, insiders here say the supreme leader will never compromise his basic positions. “We have no intention to change,” said Mr. Taraghi. “Our ideology will remain the same. Iran will remain the same even after possible talks.”

By this he meant that Iran would never recognize the state of Israel or stop supporting Palestinian groups fighting what it calls “the Zionist entity.” In nuclear matters, it means accepting nothing less than full recognition of what Iran says is its “right” to a nuclear program under its own control. Support for the Syrian government will continue, as will Iran’s overall confrontational stance toward the West.

The change in Iran’s diplomatic language is a new tactic to be explored, Mr. Taraghi and others said. Iran’s supreme leader is mainly interested to see whether the United States has shifted its position and is ready to recognize Iran as a main power in the Middle East.

This is not to say that the hard-liners are out of power, nor are they excluded from deciding Mr. Rouhani’s mandate for negotiations. “We have coordinated our policies in order to talk with a single voice, which for now is the government’s voice,” Mr. Mousavi said.

“Whatever happens,” Mr. Taraghi said, “don’t expect a U.S. embassy to open up in Tehran any time soon.”
http://margaretkatheryn.newsvine.co...igmatic-leader-of-iran-backs-overture-for-now
 
then why did you cheer the taking of the shit cork out of the bottle of bees you fucking dolt?


Yeah Sadam was a shit wad but he kept the bottle of bees from escaping.


You and your assholes shook up the fucking bottle of bees and then took the shit cork out.

WHY the fuck did you do that?

Because you incredibly dense asshat; I believed that if you are going to eject a megolamaniacical despot from Kuwait and force him to agree to sanctions, you actually have to enforce them.

In addition you incredibly dense asshat with zero historical knowledge; I believed that the lesson of 911 was that you cannot fight terrorism from within your own country and the best deterrent to terrorism was Democracy, prosperity and education. After five decades of failure trying to negotiate and buy off terrorists and despots, I figured this was a better tactic.

But again, you are an incredibly dense uninformed asshat who couldn't begin to comprehend the wisdom in that. You're more inclined to empty headedly parrotting of terrorist propaganda and moronic DNC talking points.

Carry on asshat.
 
“An enigmatic and cunning man, Ayatollah Khamenei, 74, is the one who gave Mr. Rouhani the authority to pursue a deal with the United States, top aides to Mr. Rouhani and outside experts say, and could just as easily cut off support — as he has done to some Iranian leaders before, including Mr. Rouhani.

Ayatollah Khamenei sees himself as a sort of referee of Iran’s complex political system, sitting in judgment of the politicians he anoints to lead the country in what are often sharply different directions. In 1997, for example, he blessed the reformist candidacy of Mohammad Khatami, who relaxed some social restrictions and allowed more press freedom.

But he allowed the hard-liners to undermine Mr. Khatami’s presidency, and in 2005 he pinwheeled to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the strident nationalist hard-liner, who denied the Holocaust and antagonized the West for much of his eight years in office.

This is not the first go-round for Ayatollah Khamenei and Mr. Rouhani, himself something of a prodigy who was once the darling of the clerics who founded the Islamic republic. In 2003 Mr. Rouhani, then the chief nuclear negotiator, persuaded Ayatollah Khamenei to suspend uranium enrichment for several months in hopes of reaching a nuclear deal. But the negotiations broke down, and Mr. Rouhani was banished from the circles of power before being resurrected this spring.

“Everybody understands that Supreme Leader Khamenei is in a win-win situation,” said Mojtaba Mousavi, an Iranian political commentator who is often briefed by officials close to the leader. He explained that if talks lead to the reduction or elimination of the economic sanctions that have damaged Iran’s economy, Ayatollah Khamenei will get the credit for approving the new negotiating strategy.

But Ayatollah Khamenei can also take the credit if the talks should collapse. “If talks fail to reach any results, he will be praised for having proved his warnings over the dishonesty by the West towards Iran,” said Mr. Mousavi. “In that case his doubts will be proved once again.”

For all the attention paid to Iran’s new tone of moderation, insiders here say the supreme leader will never compromise his basic positions. “We have no intention to change,” said Mr. Taraghi. “Our ideology will remain the same. Iran will remain the same even after possible talks.”

By this he meant that Iran would never recognize the state of Israel or stop supporting Palestinian groups fighting what it calls “the Zionist entity.” In nuclear matters, it means accepting nothing less than full recognition of what Iran says is its “right” to a nuclear program under its own control. Support for the Syrian government will continue, as will Iran’s overall confrontational stance toward the West.

The change in Iran’s diplomatic language is a new tactic to be explored, Mr. Taraghi and others said. Iran’s supreme leader is mainly interested to see whether the United States has shifted its position and is ready to recognize Iran as a main power in the Middle East.

This is not to say that the hard-liners are out of power, nor are they excluded from deciding Mr. Rouhani’s mandate for negotiations. “We have coordinated our policies in order to talk with a single voice, which for now is the government’s voice,” Mr. Mousavi said.

“Whatever happens,” Mr. Taraghi said, “don’t expect a U.S. embassy to open up in Tehran any time soon.”
http://margaretkatheryn.newsvine.co...igmatic-leader-of-iran-backs-overture-for-now

Nice terrorist propaganda piece. Are you Muslim?
 
Because you incredibly dense asshat; I believed that if you are going to eject a megolamaniacical despot from Kuwait and force him to agree to sanctions, you actually have to enforce them.

In addition you incredibly dense asshat with zero historical knowledge; I believed that the lesson of 911 was that you cannot fight terrorism from within your own country and the best deterrent to terrorism was Democracy, prosperity and education. After five decades of failure trying to negotiate and buy off terrorists and despots, I figured this was a better tactic.

But again, you are an incredibly dense uninformed asshat who couldn't begin to comprehend the wisdom in that. You're more inclined to empty headedly parrotting of terrorist propaganda and moronic DNC talking points.

Carry on asshat.



poor dick lips forgot his memes are bumping into each other again.

Hey you brain dead troll....You don't like Democracy remember
 
Back
Top