• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

MaggieD said:
Blather? I was ready to give Risky a round of applause.
Click to expand...

I am well aware that you were. I answered your question and he responds with a tangent. Clap away!!!
 
Hare said:
When multiple countries are threatening to blow you off the face of the map, you play the only cards you have, which in the case of Iran, is the possible disruption in oil supply and guerilla warfare against our "interests" abroad. It's simply a defense mechanism, saber rattling, whatever you would like to label it as, they are acting in terms of self preservation.
Click to expand...


Well this threat was based on Economic Sanctions not "threatening to blow you off the face of the map" as the article states. "Iranian ambassador to Moscow, Seyed Mahmoud-Reza Sajjadi declared that Iran has the capabilities to carry out military strikes on US interests around the globe.This comes after President Obama announced the United States would freeze all Iranian assets held in the US."
 
Risky Thicket said:
Thanks. It is correct. Do you not agree?
Click to expand...
Like I said, respond to my position or not as you may wish. Again, the US issued Economic sanctions Iran responded with declaring they have "the capabilities to carry out military strikes on US interests around the globe"

That makes their actions our business.
 
Helix said:
someday we'll figure out that replacing oil is important enough to make it a top-level national priority.

i hope we figure it out before the next war.
Click to expand...

Until that day we should do what is necessary to assure that we have the oil that we need without depending on oil from the middle east. Things like approving the Keystone pipeline from Canada, allowing offshore drilling and developing our own crude oil sources. This will not happen till we the people replace the anti oil anti business jack wagon that currently occupies the white house.
 
Last edited:
Connery said:
Well this threat was based on Economic Sanctions not "threatening to blow you off the face of the map" as the article states. "Iranian ambassador to Moscow, Seyed Mahmoud-Reza Sajjadi declared that Iran has the capabilities to carry out military strikes on US interests around the globe.This comes after President Obama announced the United States would freeze all Iranian assets held in the US."
Click to expand...
Well seeing as we are attempting to shut down their economy with both heavy economic and trade sanctions, attacking our interests is indeed a defense mechanism. I'm not arguing that the threat isn't valid, simply saying that when you back a country into a corner with very few options to remove itself from potential threats, they will most likely turn to guerrilla warfare and sabotage in lieu of diplomacy.
 
Last edited:
Connery said:
That is not answer. I mean specific data.
Click to expand...

That is an answer. It's been done in this country since General Henry Knox. And it's been done by civilizations since ancient Rome.

Now you can ignore history if you want to, but that doesn't mean it isn't happening.
 
Hare said:
Well seeing as we are attempting to shut down their economy with both heavy economic and trade sanctions, attacking our interests is indeed a defense mechanism.
Click to expand...
No this is more like an OWS tactic.
 
samsmart said:
That is an answer. It's been done in this country since General Henry Knox. And it's been done by civilizations since ancient Rome.

Now you can ignore history if you want to, but that doesn't mean it isn't happening.
Click to expand...

I took your answer as a statement of fact regarding the current situation which should be backed up with sources. If you are simply discussing theory I agree.
 
War will happen if:

1)Tehran even thinks of closing the Strait of Hormuz
'
and/or

2) Iran fabricates an atomic bomb


the sanctions don't seem to be working with Tehran, so take your own conclusions .... we can argue about war against the Iraniam Regime till we are black and blue, that is our right and pleasure of course .... but the dice has been cast and no amount of semantics on our part will change the course of events if these two conditions eventuate.
 
SgtRock said:
Until that day we should do what is necessary to assure that we have the oil that we need without depending on oil from the middle east. Things like approving the Keystone pipeline from Canada, allowing offshore drilling and developing our own crude oil sources.

This will not happen till we the people replace the anti oil anti business jack wagon that currently occupies the white house.
Click to expand...
The keystone pipeline was for exporting purposes mainly between Canada and China, it would do little to boost our production if anything at all.

US oil production has risen sharply since Obama took office, not by his doing or policies but the myth that production alone means lower prices needs to die, the issue is far too complex to view in that simplistic of terms.
 
Last edited:
Connery said:
No this is more like an OWS tactic.
Click to expand...
Not sure what the parallel is between Occupy Wall Street and anything contained in my post, but I'd love to hear it.
 
Hare said:
Not sure what the parallel is between Occupy Wall Street and anything contained in my post, but I'd love to hear it.
Click to expand...

Don't expect an actual response.
 
I think a lot of folks didn't read the article in OP. The US has made it clear that it does NOT wish to attack Iran. To review, here are some quotes from the article(my bold):

The president has made clear in public, and in private to Israel, that he is determined to give sufficient time for recent measures [sanctions]
[...]
"The White House wants to see sanctions work. This is not the Bush White House. It does not need another conflict,"
[...]
...but that for now the emphasis is firmly on diplomacy and sanctions
[...]
Scepticism about Iranian intent is rooted in Iran's repeated spurning of overtures from successive US presidents from Bill Clinton to Barack Obama, who appealed within weeks of coming to office for "constructive ties" and "mutual respect" .
[...]
The White House is working hard to keep alive the prospect that sanctions will deliver a diplomatic solution. It has pressed the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, to quieten the belligerent chatter from his own cabinet
[...]
Some US and European officials say those same sanctions have also become a means for Washington to pressure Israel not to act precipitously in attacking Iran.
Click to expand...

Not only is the US trying to avoid conflict with Iran. It is pressuring Israel to stay out of it.

So for those who like to characterize the US as a vicious, slobbering monster, I ask that they take note that the US has taken steps to avoid war. The US would like Iran to invite the IAEA to conduct FULL inspections of their nuclear program. If there is no sign of a weapons program, the sanctions can be lifted, and people can stop constantly claiming the other side is beating war drums. It's all very simple and all very peaceful. Folks are making this all far more complicated that it is.

Lastly, at no point has the US denied that Iran can have nuclear power. They can. It is their right. So long as their nuclear power program is strictly for civilian energy, there is no problem at all. All anyone is asking of Iran is to demonstrate that is the case. If Iran has purely peaceful intent, it would be incredibly easy for them to resolve this whole issue in mere weeks. Why is this so much to ask?
 
Hare said:
Not sure what the parallel is between Occupy Wall Street and anything contained in my post, but I'd love to hear it.
Click to expand...

Rather than deal with the situation in diplomatic or other recognized and appropriate channels you support "attacking our interests is indeed a defense mechanism", that is as outlandish OWS demanding whatever it was they wanted with ridiculous and costly. I am concerned about tactics it would never work for any positive goal on any side.
 
Last edited:
EagleAye said:
I think a lot of folks didn't read the article in OP. The US has made it clear that it does NOT wish to attack Iran. To review, here are some quotes from the article(my bold):



Not only is the US trying to avoid conflict with Iran. It is pressuring Israel to stay out of it.

So for those who like to characterize the US as a vicious, slobbering monster, I ask that they take note that the US has taken steps to avoid war. The US would like Iran to invite the IAEA to conduct FULL inspections of their nuclear program. If there is no sign of a weapons program, the sanctions can be lifted, and people can stop constantly claiming the other side is beating war drums. It's all very simple and all very peaceful. Folks are making this all far more complicated that it is.

Lastly, at no point has the US denied that Iran can have nuclear power. They can. It is their right. So long as their nuclear power program is strictly for civilian energy, there is no problem at all. All anyone is asking of Iran is to demonstrate that is the case. If Iran has purely peaceful intent, it would be incredibly easy for them to resolve this whole issue in mere weeks. Why is this so much to ask?
Click to expand...


:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:
 
This appears to be the next step with Congress making the move:

Congress began crafting legislation that would essentially cut Iran out of the global clearinghouse for international financial transactions known as SWIFT, or the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication. The far-reaching step could inflict severe damage to Iran's economy by restricting the ability of banks and other institutions to move funds in or out of the country.
Click to expand...

Obama administration takes back seat on Iran sanctions - Los Angeles Times
 
Connery said:
Rather than deal with the situation in diplomatic or other recognized and appropriate channels you support "attacking our interests is indeed a defense mechanism", that is as outlandish OWS demanding whatever it was they wanted with ridiculous and costly. I am concerned about tactics it would never work for any positive goal on any side.
Click to expand...
I'm not "supporting" Iran attacking our interests, I'm simply stating that it is indeed a defense mechanism, an act born out of desperation in reaction to the heavy sanctions levied by the US against their economy, when you attempt to hamper a country's way of life and endanger it's people, especially one such as Iran, they are prone to act irrationally by lashing out at the aggressors. The comparison between Occupy Wall Street and the Iranian situation at hand is ludicrous and far fetched.
 
Hare said:
I'm not "supporting" Iran attacking our interests, I'm simply stating that it is indeed a defense mechanism, an act born out of desperation in reaction to the heavy sanctions levied by the US against their economy, when you attempt to hamper a country's way of life and endanger it's people, especially one such as Iran, they are prone to act irrationally by lashing out at the aggressors.
Click to expand...
It is not a defense mechanism. This country wants to be a part of the world community "on their terms". That is very unlikely. This "defense mechanism" is a threat, no one is attacking them. This is no more complex than getting along in any community. All parties must follow the rules or face unpleasant results, in this case it is economic sanctions.


The comparison between Occupy Wall Street and the Iranian situation at hand is ludicrous and far fetched.
Click to expand...

This is a matter of opinion and outside the OP so I apologize for even mentioning it.
 
Connery said:
This appears to be the next step with Congress making the move:

Obama administration takes back seat on Iran sanctions - Los Angeles Times
Click to expand...

While Congress is saying, paraphrased, "Now that we know our sanctions are having an effect, it's time to pile them on," I wonder.

Higher fuel prices...military action in Iran...both of these things could impact Obama's chances for re-election. Maybe I'm just too suspicious, but something about this whole scenerio doesn't make sense.
 
MaggieD said:
While Congress is saying, paraphrased, "Now that we know our sanctions are having an effect, it's time to pile them on," I wonder.

Higher fuel prices...military action in Iran...both of these things could impact Obama's chances for re-election. Maybe I'm just too suspicious, but something about this whole scenerio doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

So you want to sit around and do nothing while the Iranian Army makes plans to attack America?
 
johnny_rebson said:
So you want to sit around and do nothing while the Iranian Army makes plans to attack America?
Click to expand...

OMG. Now Iran has plans to attack America? I don't even know how to answer your post. Try again.
 
SgtRock said:
Until that day we should do what is necessary to assure that we have the oil that we need without depending on oil from the middle east. Things like approving the Keystone pipeline from Canada, allowing offshore drilling and developing our own crude oil sources. This will not happen till we the people replace the anti oil anti business jack wagon that currently occupies the white house.
Click to expand...

currently? you want pro oil presidents? like GWB?
If we had listened to President Carter, we might be able to exist without ME oil by now......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom