• 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: War Option on the Table

YKW:

I just realized that you may not have seen these reports:

Christian Science Monitory - 08/04/2010
Jerusalem
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was reportedly targeted by a grenade today on one of his provincial tours that have endeared him to many Iranians.

.The president’s office and official Iranian media sites quickly denied reports of the attack, which came just days after Mr. Ahmadinejad warned that "stupid Zionists" had hired mercenaries to assassinate him.

The conservative Iranian website Khabar first reported an assassination attempt, in the Iranian city of Hamadan, where Ahmadinejad later addressed huge crowds. BBC correspondent Jon Leyne says it’s the first assassination attempt against Ahmadinejad that he is aware of since the president rose to power in 2005.

(Leyne was the BBC’s chief TV reporter in Iran until he was expelled amid election protests last year. The government accused him of "false news and reports, ignoring impartiality, supporting the insurgents, trampling the rights of the Iranian nation, fanning the unrest and also provoking public opinion.")

"If confirmed as an assassination attempt, it would be the first one I have heard of during his presidency, although the president claimed the Americans had a plot to kidnap him when he traveled to Iraq a couple of years ago," he said on the BBC.

Press TV, Iran's state-run broadcaster, dismissed reports such as Khabar's:

Speaking to Press TV, an informed source in Iran's presidential office has rejected as false the reports of grenade attack on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

… The source denied the reports, saying no such attack took place.

Khabar removed the article from its website.

The semi-official Fars news agency, which had also initially reported that Ahmadinejad had been targeted by a grenade, later changed its report as well – saying the source of the explosion was actually a firecracker, reported the BBC. The firecracker was meant to welcome Ahmadinejad, according to the Iranian TV station Al-Alam.

The British newspaper the Guardian has posted a photo it claims depicts Ahmadinejad’s bodyguards searching for the source of an explosion.

However, Al Jazeera correspondent Alireza Ronaghi, reporting from Iran, said that reporters traveling with Ahmadinejad at the time of the alleged incident were unaware of an attack:

"I also gathered information from some journalists who were part of Ahmadinejad's convoy and they said they haven't heard or seen anything.
I think it must have been something so insignificant or so small that nobody noticed anything."

Ahamdinejad continued on to a sports stadium, where he denounced Western sanctions on Iran but said he would be willing to meet President Obama when he came to New York next month for the annual United Nations General Assembly, according to the state-run IRNA news agency.

Fars reported that later this week, Ahmadinejad is scheduled to host President Hamid Karzai of neighboring Afghanistan, whose country has become the primary focus of US military might and a huge recipient of US aid.

Ahmadinejad, by contrast, has heavily criticized America’s strong sway on the international scene. He routinely casts himself as a man of the people, often passing through throngs on the provincial visits that have become a staple of his presidency, which is now in its second term.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/terr...dinejad-just-survive-an-assassination-attempt
 
youknowwho said:
there's no other way for them. the embarassment from being attacked and not being able to counterattack, would fire up another wave of revolution in Iran. it's a lose - lose scenario for Iranian government and I don't think they're gonna go down without hitting others.
Click to expand...

This is entirely possible, but I hope you are wrong. The people who will pay the highest price in such a case are those who have nothing to do with such a decision.

see joergan's reply.
Click to expand...

All those troops he listed are not really available except in an all out emergency. Our military looks large(and is), but it has an incredible number of jobs it has to do. It's not as simple as you might think to dig up the half million or so troops we would need.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
I feel you've misunderstood this conversation. I sent you a PM.
Click to expand...

I did, and I apologize here and now to YNW. I misunderstood your stance, and hope that you don't hold it against me.
 
youknowwho said:
it technically isn't a full scale war, since US haven't attacked Iranian soil yet.



7 years ago the situation was different. reformists were in the government, and everything seemed to be going well. that's no longer the case.



one more reason which I think there is a likeliness of a war.


I admire your courage and bravery, also the fact that you're ready to act based on your beliefs. I just can't agree with you that war is going to make the Iranian's lives better. I strongly believe that Iranians should find a way themselves to bring justice and freedom to their country.
Click to expand...

I admire the courage and bravery of the Iranian people as well.

Stay strong, my friend.
 
Last edited:
Catz Part Deux said:
Classy. *smooch*
Click to expand...

No, it is I whom must thank you. I'm a big boy and can admit my mistakes.\

So that's what? 2 now? This and the Avatar thread?

2 posts in 10,000+... I'll take that record ;)
 
MrVicchio said:
No, it is I whom must thank you. I'm a big boy and can admit my mistakes.\

So that's what? 2 now? This and the Avatar thread?

2 posts in 10,000+... I'll take that record ;)
Click to expand...

Glad you are not a heart surgeon. :mrgreen:
 
MrVicchio said:
No, it is I whom must thank you. I'm a big boy and can admit my mistakes.\

So that's what? 2 now? This and the Avatar thread?

2 posts in 10,000+... I'll take that record ;)
Click to expand...

2 mistakes or two classy posts? :giggle:
 
that is some quality which is seen rarely on internet forums, but you're partly right. I still have problems admitting crimes that my country does, since I should take responsibility for them as a citizien, but I can't do anything about it, as I have no part in my government's decisions and I'm sorry for that. believe me, I do try.
 
youknowwho said:
that is some quality which is seen rarely on internet forums, but you're partly right. I still have problems admitting crimes that my country does, since I should take responsibility for them as a citizien, but I can't do anything about it, as I have no part in my government's decisions and I'm sorry for that. believe me, I do try.
Click to expand...

Nothing that the Mullahs are doing is your fault. That you choose not to be part of the supression of the Iranian people is good enough to call you one of the good guys. If you are Muslim, then, by your very presence, you are sending out a very strong message that Islam is one of the world's great religions. :)
 
Last edited:
youknowwho said:
that is some quality which is seen rarely on internet forums, but you're partly right. I still have problems admitting crimes that my country does, since I should take responsibility for them as a citizien, but I can't do anything about it, as I have no part in my government's decisions and I'm sorry for that. believe me, I do try.
Click to expand...

We already know this. No apologies are necessary.
 
When this sort of thing was announced (as 'news' no less) while GWB was CinC, many of his detractors hailed it as proof of his imperialistic warmongering neo-conservative nature.

I wonder what those people think now.
 
Goobieman said:
When this sort of thing was announced (as 'news' no less) while GWB was CinC, many of his detractors hailed it as proof of his imperialistic warmongering neo-conservative nature.

I wonder what those people think now.
Click to expand...

Most of us think it's still a stupid idea. But thanks for asking. I always enjoy opinion polls.
 
Goobieman said:
When this sort of thing was announced (as 'news' no less) while GWB was CinC, many of his detractors hailed it as proof of his imperialistic warmongering neo-conservative nature.

I wonder what those people think now.
Click to expand...

Personally, like most, I thought it was a long shot under Bush, and think it is a long shot now. People who made comments like that are part of a tiny extreme.
 
Goobieman said:
Why is it a stupid idea to have a plan for military action(s) against Iran?
Click to expand...

It's not a stupid idea to have a plan. It's always good to plan in event of a worst case scenario, and I appreciate that there are large numbers of military personnel engaged in that at all times, including my beloved. It would be stupid to IMPLEMENT a plan to invade Iran, as matters stand right now.
 
Goobieman said:
The Obama's plan, like GWB's plan, is not to invade.
Click to expand...

Obama's plan, like The Bush's plan, includes everything from air and missile strikes to total war. Obama will pick the level of the plan needed when it is needed.
 
Redress said:
Obama's plan, like The Bush's plan, includes everything from air and missile strikes to total war. Obama will pick the level of the plan needed when it is needed.
Click to expand...

That's right. There isn't a singular plan. There are dozens of possible responses to dozens of possible scenarios. :roll:
 
Catz Part Deux said:
That's right. There isn't a singular plan. There are dozens of possible responses to dozens of possible scenarios. :roll:
Click to expand...
OK, so.... implementing a plan to invade woudl be stupid.
Given that there are numerous plans that do not include invasion... what's your point?
 
Goobieman said:
OK, so.... implementing a plan to invade woudl be stupid.
Given that there are numerous plans that do not include invasion... what's your point?
Click to expand...

My points have already been enumerated above. Try reading.
 
obama's plan, laid out a thousand times during his beatitude of a campaign, was to TALK to the leaders of iran

he was gonna reachout and change our image abroad, remember?

after that, he had no fallback (ask his defense secty)

sanctions are nowhere, sorry (ask putin and hu, for starters, then you can try to budge brazil and turkey...)
 
Catz Part Deux said:
My points have already been enumerated above. Try reading.
Click to expand...
Well, you said:
It would be stupid to IMPLEMENT a plan to invade Iran,
Click to expand...

You also said that:
There are dozens of possible responses to dozens of possible scenarios
Click to expand...

Do you believe that it would be stupid to implement any of those? Why/why not?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom