• 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!

Iran is heating up . . . [W:259]

Yes they are our mortal enemies.

You libs just don't understand foreign policy.

You want to talk with the other nations. That's the wrong way to do things. We have bombs to do our talking.

America is starting to miss George W. Bush.

wtf are you talking about? did you read the previous conversation or just jump in because you wanted to attack my statement cause I'm a "lib" which i'm not.
 
I do disagree. I think if we would have invaded Iran first. Saddam would have sat on his ass watching. I would agree that saddam probably would have loved to go in right after we left, however, I still think he wouldn't have been that stupid. If the US just defeated Iran and set up a democratic style gov't there, do you really think Saddam would be so foolish to run in there guns blazing? He'd be committing suicide, because right thereafter the US would have bitchslapped him too..

Ask Kuwait and I imagine they'd laugh at the idea that Saddam wouldn't be that stupid.
 
Ask Kuwait and I imagine they'd laugh at the idea that Saddam wouldn't be that stupid.

Saddam invaded Kuwait, then the US intervened... you are talking about the US invading Iran, then Iraq running in after we had left to take over. Two totally different scenarios.
 
I figure the Iranian regime would have at least a couple Warhol minutes......

Now that you mention it, Ahmadinejad DOES look a bit like Holly Woodlawn......
 
maggie,i dont like the iranian regime and the other islamist ones,but the new arabian spring has been supported by usa government and now we see they are turning into an islamic spring .i mean ,i cant believe america's aim is just to bring here a democracy.it was the same america which gave a great support to our radical morons..........

1. Do not attribute to American evil what can be equally explained with American bumbling. We are really, really, really good at not understanding foreign mindsets.

2. America's goals are to promote democracy and protect her interests - and we think those things are mutually reinforcing.






3. The notion that having to reopen the straits in the face of full, kinetic Iranian opposition would be a simple or quick operation is uneducated.

....The Rumsfeld-era Pentagon held a top-secret war game to test a Persian Gulf scenario. A maverick Marine Corps general, Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper, led the "Red Team," the fictional Iranian adversary. Gen. Van Riper relayed orders to his front-line troops by motorcycle messenger, so the U.S. could not hack into his networks; he sent out speedboats armed with missiles and explosives to swarm U.S. warships. After the fictional smoke cleared, more than a dozen U.S. warships were at the bottom of the Persian Gulf....

He knocked out two (2) carrier groups. They had to stop the exercise and revive the fleet from the bottom of the sea, just so that we wouldn't lose our own wargame.




Don't get me wrong. We win any kinetic operation against Iran. We can win limited kinetic operations against Iran. But we are not so overwhelmingly omnipotent in the Persian Gulf as people seem to be suggesting.
 
1. Do not attribute to American evil what can be equally explained with American bumbling. We are really, really, really good at not understanding foreign mindsets.

2. America's goals are to promote democracy and protect her interests - and we think those things are mutually reinforcing.






3. The notion that having to reopen the straits in the face of full, kinetic Iranian opposition would be a simple or quick operation is uneducated.



He knocked out two (2) carrier groups. They had to stop the exercise and revive the fleet from the bottom of the sea, just so that we wouldn't lose our own wargame.




Don't get me wrong. We win any kinetic operation against Iran. We can win limited kinetic operations against Iran. But we are not so overwhelmingly omnipotent in the Persian Gulf as people seem to be suggesting.

,whoever wins is not the issue,the issue is what will happen after that war ,i just want real democracy ..


you read my post cpwill .what about the arabian spring ?is it more democratic than the previous ones ?
 
The Arab Spring is absolutely democratic in it's thrust. What people kept missing (and I don't know why) is that that does not mean they were in favor of liberal democracy of the western style, which Turkey to a large extent imported under Attaturk. Egyptians want an Islamist government.


After a limited war between the US and Iran? The mullah's will be in a stronger position internally. Even the Green Movement is pro-nuclear, people screw up when they fail to realize the power of Iranian nationalism. The Mullah's will use their position as leading the stand against the US' restriction of Iran's regional hegemonic goals to consolidate internal power and tamp down on democratizing elements.
 
Last edited:
The Arab Spring is absolutely democratic in it's thrust. What people kept missing (and I don't know why) is that that does not mean they were in favor of liberal democracy of the western style, which Turkey to a large extent imported under Attaturk. Egyptians want an Islamist government.

and usa helped them have one....yes you want democracy..:shock:


you admit teh great middle east project's aim ,moderate islamism having close friendship with usa ,no worries for those people who really want teh democracy,thxx..
imported?


you have to learn about our history!

soryy ,our people cant leave the democracy ,even fake mullah erdoğan.......we are not like arabians.........

democracy is democracy ,it hasnt any type of western or eastern ,stop this orientalism please.
 
Last edited:
Have you thought this through? Have you looked at a map? There are NO winners in the bomb Iran scenario.

Those of us who own defense industry stock will be winners.
 
and usa helped them have one....yes you want democracy..:shock:


you admit taht teh great middle east project's aim ,moderate islamism haveing close friendship with usa ,no worries for those people who really want teh democracy,thxx..
imported?


you have to learn about our history!

soryy ,our people cant leave the democracy ,even fake mullah erdoğan.......we are not like arabians.........

democracy is democracy ,it hasnt any type of western or eastern ,stop this orientalism please.

Yes, imported. Attaturk was pretty open about the fact that he was orienting Turkey westwards and importing Western approaches to governance. And Liberal Democracy is indeed a Western invention. What Egypt et. al. seem to be moving towards is Illiberal Democracy.

I don't know about current actual US Foreign Policy Goals. I would bet they are more ambiguous than this. But broadly speaking, we would argue that representative government has self-correcting abilities that dictatorships do not, which make them long term more stable. Let Islamism be as thoroughly discredited as Arab National Socialism has been.
 
C-802's are truck launchable, one was used by Lebanon in 2006. Targets in the strait can be acquired visually, the fire control radar only needs to be turned on for a few seconds to get a lock. There isn't enough time to eliminate the launcher with an HARM before it can fire.

Lets not imagine this is a pickup truck, okay? A very specific and very large launch vehicle is required.

Now to be clear, are you considering launching on civilian ships or USN ships? It's important because, yes, the C-802 would be a significant threat to civilian ships. USN ships need only stand outside the straight where visual targeting (if this actually works) would be useless and let naval strike aircraft eliminate SSMs and patrol boats. The USN need not be in the Strait to eliminate targets within it. Civilian ships may be targeted and Iran could claim they closed the Strait for some hours. Some hours afterward, Iran would not have a navy nor anti-ship batteries with which to oppose USN presence with the Strait.
 
Yes, imported. Attaturk was pretty open about the fact that he was orienting Turkey westwards and importing Western approaches to governance. And Liberal Democracy is indeed a Western invention. What Egypt et. al. seem to be moving towards is Illiberal Democracy.

I don't know about current actual US Foreign Policy Goals. I would bet they are more ambiguous than this. But broadly speaking, we would argue that representative government has self-correcting abilities that dictatorships do not, which make them long term more stable. Let Islamism be as thoroughly discredited as Arab National Socialism has been.

there are lots of turkey experts here.i should stop thinking i know my own history...

yes we see the westerner style democracy ,you said " they want islamisim "

western democracy colonized this world ,****ed this world.

and you prove my point too.........

thx.

i still dont get...

of course you dont know about the great middle east project ,cp ,thats why you usually reject my comments about this issue
 
Last edited:
there are lots of turkey experts here.i should stop thinking i know my own history...

Well, alright, demonstrate please that Turkey's current government structure is not the result of Attaturk's political reforms which were explicitly based on a western model.

yes we see the westerner style democracy ,you said " they want islamisim "

They do, and given the chance, they will vote for it.

western democracy colonized this world ,****ed this world.

that is incorrect - empires who adopted representative government and free market economics became incredibly powerful, enabling them to spread vice their competitors. the liberality of those empires eventually caused them to willingly retract, a historic occurrence heretofore unseen. The rest of the world benefited from this spread of superior forms of governmental and economic organization in much the same way that it benefits from the spread of technological advances - and by and large, the longer a non-western nation was colonized by the Western Democratic powers, the better off it was. Compare (for example) India to Pakistan, or India post-British to India pre-British.

and you prove my point too.........

thx.

i still dont get...

Islamism is popular. Okay. So in a representative government, they will take power. They will take that power and use it to impose shariah at home and be belligerent abroad. Over time the failures of and backlashes against these policies will cause Islamism to lose popularity.
 
Now that you mention it, Ahmadinejad

How could anyone not give that assclown a (w) minute in that shthole regime's 15. Wiggan stands corrected.
 
Last edited:
Medusa said:
of course you dont know about the great middle east project ,cp ,thats why you usually reject my comments about this issue

:lol: medusa, I was a fan of PNAC long before they became the center of everyone's favorite conspiracy theory.
 
Anti-ship missiles are tiny, easily capable of being concealed inside a commerical truck. Keep in the mind that we couldn't stop Iraqi SCUD missiles in the Gulf War, and those are an order of magnitude larger in size and firing signature.

As somebody else pointed out, lobbing scud missiles at a large area is a whole lot easier than firing missiles at ships. You require fire control radar to do that, and once switched on, it would last no more than a few minutes before it was destroyed. The missiles are useless without radar to guide them.
 
there are lots of turkey experts here.i should stop thinking i know my own history...

yes we see the westerner style democracy ,you said " they want islamisim "

western democracy colonized this world ,****ed this world.

and you prove my point too.........

thx.

i still dont get...

of course you dont know about the great middle east project ,cp ,thats why you usually reject my comments about this issue

If you hate the west and 'western style democracy' so much, why do you post here? Other than to turn every post into an opportunity for you to rant about the superiority of Turkey, I mean.
 
my biggest problem right now is why are Israel talking to the UN/ Seeking help! If the threat is as credible as they would have us believe why not make a move against Iran or at least make life hard for them? They have the hardware and we all know they have the backing so what are they waiting for? Eventually Israel has to do some of the heavy lifting rather than waiting to see who will help them!
 
Apparently the news of the day is that Israel wants to stop them shorter of the warhead than the US does, so IDK.
 
my biggest problem right now is why are Israel talking to the UN/ Seeking help! If the threat is as credible as they would have us believe why not make a move against Iran or at least make life hard for them? They have the hardware and we all know they have the backing so what are they waiting for? Eventually Israel has to do some of the heavy lifting rather than waiting to see who will help them!

If Israel does the heavy lifting without at least tacit approval from the UN, then Israel will almost certainly be sanctioned for doing so. The UN historically does not like it when Israel operates independently. The US is undoubtedly an Israeli ally, but the US has made it clear it is unwilling to support an attack, at this time. So Israel does not really have support. It's best option is to hold fast, uncomfortable as that may be for Israel.
 
my biggest problem right now is why are Israel talking to the UN/ Seeking help!

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1696 - passed on 31 July 2006. Demanded that Iran suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities and threatened sanctions.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1737 - passed on 23 December 2006. Made mandatory for Iran to suspend enrichment-related and reprocessing activities and cooperate with the IAEA, imposed sanctions banning the supply of nuclear-related materials and technology, and froze the assets of key individuals and companies related to the program.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1747 - passed on 24 March 2007. Imposed an arms embargo and expanded the freeze on Iranian assets.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1803 - passed on 3 March 2008. Extended the asset freezes and called upon states to monitor the activities of Iranian banks, inspect Iranian ships and aircraft, and to monitor the movement of individuals involved with the program through their territory.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1835 - Passed in 2008.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1929 - passed on 9 June 2010. Banned Iran from participating in any activities related to ballistic missiles, tightened the arms embargo, travel bans on individuals involved with the program, froze the funds and assets of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines, and recommended that states inspect Iranian cargo, prohibit the servicing of Iranian vessels involved in prohibited activities, prevent the provision of financial services used for sensitive nuclear activities, closely watch Iranian individuals and entities when dealing with them, prohibit the opening of Iranian banks on their territory and prevent Iranian banks from entering into relationship with their banks if it might contribute to the nuclear program, and prevent financial institutions operating in their territory from opening offices and accounts in Iran.

Sanctions against Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
If Israel does the heavy lifting without at least tacit approval from the UN, then Israel will almost certainly be sanctioned for doing so. The UN historically does not like it when Israel operates independently. The US is undoubtedly an Israeli ally, but the US has made it clear it is unwilling to support an attack, at this time. So Israel does not really have support. It's best option is to hold fast, uncomfortable as that may be for Israel.

Since when did Isreal give a flying ****about UN sanctions or resloutions?
 
Higgens-
ever since the US vetos any UN sanctions... Israel is even more susceptible to sanctions than Iran, it is the USofA keeping that wolf from the door.
 
Back
Top Bottom