• 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!

Massive cyber attack on Iran came from U.S., report says

So what you are saying is this just another instance of the US policy, do as I say, not as I do? Nothing hypocritical about that eh?

If hypocrisy were the biggest concerns for international actors, you would have completely redesigned the face of politics itself.
 
OK duly noted...

Well, there are profits to be sure just as there are threats. For example, "with the May 23 negotiations in Iraq failing to persuade Iran to give up its illicit nuclear program, Iranian leaders have returned to threats of war — including the provocative statement that their missiles can reach every U.S. military base in the Middle East, and a call to halt all nuclear negotiations with the West."

Iran leaders hint at missile attacks against US bases | The Daily Caller

Provocative statements from those that are not even close to the military might of the US don't frighten me. In the South we call that running your mouth with nothing to back it up.

Preparedness is the key, not waiting till people die.

That's the same ploy they used to sell the war against Iraq (one of the weakest countries on the planet at the time).

I'm sure you have heard the expression, sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never harm me.

That is why I was not afraid of a fat old man with a shotgun in Iraq. And it is why I do not fear Iran.
 
Last edited:
If hypocrisy were the biggest concerns for international actors, you would have completely redesigned the face of politics itself.

Call me old fashioned but I do not see hypocrisy as something to embrace.
 
I said "us", "Iranian leaders have returned to threats of war — including the provocative statement that their missiles can reach every U.S. military base in the Middle East, and a call to halt all nuclear negotiations with the West."
Iran leaders hint at missile attacks against US bases | The Daily Caller

let's take another look at YOUR exact words:
the virus was a very useful weapon against an entity that wants to blow us up.
now you want to dance
it is "us", not USA, you insist without sharing with us just who "us" is, since it now appears that you insist iran is refereing to others and not just the USA

and when you said "an entity" that wants to blow us up, i am assuming you mean iran. correct me if i have it wrong
and no where have you shown us the cite which proves the iranians want "to blow us up"

there is no need to embellish the truth in these discussions
 
If Iran had launched a similar virus against the US, we would consider it an act of war.

Let's face reality -- we've been been in a covert war with Iran since the Shah was deposed and they took over our embassy.
 
Let's face reality -- we've been been in a covert war with Iran since the Shah was deposed and they took over our embassy.

well, except for the part where they helped us take out saddam
 
We supply more weapons to more people around the world.

We sell weapons to countries and exercise some control over who gets them and what they do with them. You aren't seriously comparing the selling of arms to soverign nations with selling weapons to terrorists and gangsters, are you?
 
We sell weapons to countries and exercise some control over who gets them and what they do with them. You aren't seriously comparing the selling of arms to soverign nations with selling weapons to terrorists and gangsters, are you?

when they are one in the same, certainly
 
Espionage and cyber "attacks" are a great gray area. China hacked Obama and McCain's campaign servers to gain information on both's plans.
 
Pales in comparison to what we did to civilians in Iraq, Vietnam, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Oh come on! You're comparing what happens in a war with a barbaric legal system carried out in cold blood by religious fanatics.

And the Nagasaki and Hiroshima comparisons are especially vile. Those bombings, while horrific, saved hundreds of thousands of American lives and probably millions of Japanese. Of course, since you didn't face the likelihood of invading Japan, I can see why you would find the bombings so terrible. Read a book on the combat in Okinawa and the number of military and civilian deaths that ensued in an operation that would have been increased by 50 fold in an invasion of the Japanese mainland.
 
when they are one in the same, certainly

How are they one in the same? Would you, for example, compare the selling of weapons to Canada or the UK or Australia with Iran providing weapons to Hezbollah?

Oh wait a minute, you probably would.

Never mind.
 
How are they one in the same? Would you, for example, compare the selling of weapons to Canada or the UK or Australia with Iran providing weapons to Hezbollah?

Oh wait a minute, you probably would.

Never mind.


given its actions i would equate the provision of weapons to israel the equivalent of providing weapons to a terrorist organization
 
Well, of course you would. Because to you the Israelis are terrorists and the terrorists are really the good guys. It's why nobody takes you guys on the Far Left seriously.
 
We sell weapons to countries and exercise some control over who gets them and what they do with them. You aren't seriously comparing the selling of arms to soverign nations with selling weapons to terrorists and gangsters, are you?

We supplied weapons to Saddam who used them against Iran and his own people, and to Israel who bombed Iraq and the Palestinians, just to name a couple.
 
Oh come on! You're comparing what happens in a war with a barbaric legal system carried out in cold blood by religious fanatics.

The fact is we have been responsible for far more deaths of innocent civilians than have the Iranians, regardless of how you wish to dress it up.

And the Nagasaki and Hiroshima comparisons are especially vile. Those bombings, while horrific, saved hundreds of thousands of American lives and probably millions of Japanese. Of course, since you didn't face the likelihood of invading Japan, I can see why you would find the bombings so terrible. Read a book on the combat in Okinawa and the number of military and civilian deaths that ensued in an operation that would have been increased by 50 fold in an invasion of the Japanese mainland.

I have read up on it, and found that the Japanese were already prepared to surrender when we bombed the civilians of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. We are in fact the only country to ever use nuclear weapons on civilian populations.
 
Provocative statements from those that are not even close to the military might of the US don't frighten me. In the South we call that running your mouth with nothing to back it up.
Of which you are so adept.


That's the same ploy they used to sell the war against Iraq (one of the weakest countries on the planet at the time).

I'm sure you have heard the expression, sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never harm me.

That is why I was not afraid of a fat old man with a shotgun in Iraq. And it is why I do not fear Iran.

Again you are not charged with the protection of the US. Again stick to the issue: Cyberwar.
 
let's take another look at YOUR exact words:

now you want to dance
it is "us", not USA, you insist without sharing with us just who "us" is, since it now appears that you insist iran is refereing to others and not just the USA

and when you said "an entity" that wants to blow us up, i am assuming you mean iran. correct me if i have it wrong
and no where have you shown us the cite which proves the iranians want "to blow us up"

there is no need to embellish the truth in these discussions

I provided what you asked. There is no "dancing" or "embellishment".
 
I don't care about moral high ground. What I do care about is the Mad Mullahs possessing nuclear weapons and who they decide to share those weapons with. To hell with the moral high ground.

That argument is ridiculous - why would Iran produce nuclear weapons from their own facilities, which would label the bomb, and then give it away to someone else? So when the terrorists used the bomb, everyone would know it came from an Iranian site. Okay...

Quit being mislead by the media, man.

This War with Iran is not about nuclear weapons.

Think about that.

The United States has nuclear weapons.

Israel does too.

Even if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, they would not pose much of a threat to Israel, their defense, or their revamped (pending Senate passing - H.R. 4133) aid packages from the United States.

The CIA and Mossad have already said the Iranian regime ain't building a bomb.


To hell with the moral high ground...

Good grief.
 
"It reads like a riveting sci-fi novel, but it's stunningly real: A super-sophisticated malicious computer virus burrowed its way into Iran's nuclear facilities and took down several parts of the operation. Oh, and it apparently came from us.

In 2010, it was the U.S. who launched Stuxnet, a seek-and-destroy cyber missile so sophisticated that some briefly thought it might have an other-than-earthly origin, against Iran's nuclear infrastructure, according to a New York Times report. The virus was, in fact, created jointly by the U.S. and Israel.

In his first months in office, President Obama covertly ordered sophisticated attacks on the computers that ran Iran's nuclear facilities, upping U.S. use of cyber weaponry in a sustained attack, the newspaper said.

Early on, a programming error allowed the worm to escape Iran's Natanz plant and whoosh around the world on the Internet.

"Should we shut this thing down?" Obama asked, members of his national security team who were in the room told the paper.

Ultimately, the super worm was left to wreak its havoc, and it took out 1,000 of 5,000 centrifuges Iran was using to enhance uranium, according to the report. It was as effective as a bomb or agents infiltrating country's nuclear facilities to plant explosives, the report said."

Massive cyber attack on Iran came from U.S., report says - latimes.com

Could this be considered an overt act of cyber... war....

What other implications....

We are really putting it to Iran. ... and now this cyberattack.

Half their tanker fleet is parked at Kharg and is being used as storage.

Saudi is going to drive the price per barrel down to about $75.. and Iran needs $117 to break even.

And some sanctions aren't even in affect yet.
 
well, except for the part where they helped us take out saddam

I guess I missed that, but I do recall them supplying IEDs that were used to blow up our troops.
 
We supplied weapons to Saddam who used them against Iran and his own people, and to Israel who bombed Iraq and the Palestinians, just to name a couple.

Which weapons did we supply to Iran? His air power was French and Russian, his armor was almost exclusivey Russian, his artlillery was French, and his small arms were Eastern European and Russian.

Iraqi Ground Forces Equipment


And of course we know where the Scud missiles came from. And the Israelis, thank God, bombed his nuclear facility at Osiris. I know how much in favor you are of middle eastern despots having nuclear weapons, so I can see how that would have disappointed you.

This is another one of your Far Left fantasies, isn't it?
 
The fact is we have been responsible for far more deaths of innocent civilians than have the Iranians, regardless of how you wish to dress it up.



I have read up on it, and found that the Japanese were already prepared to surrender when we bombed the civilians of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. We are in fact the only country to ever use nuclear weapons on civilian populations.


And you would be wrong. The Japanese fought to the last man on every single island we invaded, and you believe that they would have surrendered the sacred homeland without a fight. You are seriously deluded. In fact, they came very close to not surrendering even after the bombs were dropped. I've had this argument so many times with America-haters that it's hardly worth my time any more. So you believe what you want, regardless of history or facts.
 
Back
Top Bottom