• 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 accused over Washington terror plot

This is breaking news, and Eric Holder will be holding a news conference shortly. Seems that the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington were about to be bombed.

Article is here.

If the plotters have direct ties to the Iranian Government then it should be considered an act of war and some retaliation should be in order....or at least mobilize some military assets to their border and see how they take responsibility for their actions and take it from there
 
Last edited:
Iran is going to deny, deny, deny, just as they did with Bin Laden. If we learned NOTHING form Bill Clinton, it is that.

If you want to figure this out, the method is simple. Who stands to gain, in the event that this were successful? Who would stand to gain in the event that this were never MEANT to be successful in the first place? What does Iran, as a government and a people, have to gain by killing a diplomat, ANY diplomat, or ANYONE, for that matter, on US soil? Nothing. They stand only to lose. Lives, property, prosperity. Even if it succeeded, it would drive no wedge. It would bring the US and Saudi Arabia closer together, as we launch a joint strike against the Iranians. We, however, would gain a lot. We get to make more weapons of war, a major driver of our economy, and we get to bring "peace and democracy" to yet another oil producing middle eastern country. What would the Saudis gain from this, successful or not? One could say, quite a lot...they lose a competitor for a good while in the oil business. That's worth something. In fact, that's worth a LOT of somethings.

This is all conspiratorial speculation, as there is not enough information about it out yet. Like, just how many were involved, how much time and planning went into it, how sophisticated was it, etc. The likely solution is, it was perpetrated by some racist Iranian without the graces or backing of his government, but...if it turns out this was something big, I think we can rule that out. Who knows.
 
If the plotters have direct ties to the Iranian Government then it should be considered an act of war and some retaliation should be in order....or at least mobilize some military assets to their border and see how they take responsibility for their actions and take it from there

Not going to happen.
 
If the plotters have direct ties to the Iranian Government then it should be considered an act of war and some retaliation should be in order....or at least mobilize some military assets to their border and see how they take responsibility for their actions and take it from there
Not going to happen.
Seriously. Tangling with Iran is a waste of our time. We've got more important problems to take care of.
 
If the plotters have direct ties to the Iranian Government then it should be considered an act of war and some retaliation should be in order....or at least mobilize some military assets to their border and see how they take responsibility for their actions and take it from there
Uh...no. We don't need anymore wars.
 
Fox News is reporting that Achmadinajad (sp?) says the U.S. is good at coming up with "movie plots" (just as I was thinking that Tom Clancy couldn't even make this up) and that Holder said that Iran needs to be held responsible. I will switch over to aljazeera in a few minutes to see what they are saying...
 
Seriously. Tangling with Iran is a waste of our time. We've got more important problems to take care of.

Are you kidding? This would jump start the north east economy. Weapons manufacturing has been down a bit lately, which is why states like CT are getting down in the dumps, actually starting to FEEL the recession a little bit. Another war will result in calling back all the laid off high paid union workers, so they can start making money again, and spending it again.

(I am being HUGELY cynical about this, I don't actually think it would be a good thing)
 
Are you kidding? This would jump start the north east economy. Weapons manufacturing has been down a bit lately, which is why states like CT are getting down in the dumps, actually starting to FEEL the recession a little bit. Another war will result in calling back all the laid off high paid union workers, so they can start making money again, and spending it again.

(I am being HUGELY cynical about this, I don't actually think it would be a good thing)

you had me going there, brother. :peace (where do I find the beer smiley?)
 
Seriously. Tangling with Iran is a waste of our time. We've got more important problems to take care of.

That's what everyone thought of Afghanistan on 9/10 despite at least two confirmed attempted terror attacks on us soil...
 
Fox News is reporting that Achmadinajad (sp?) says the U.S. is good at coming up with "movie plots" (just as I was thinking that Tom Clancy couldn't even make this up) and that Holder said that Iran needs to be held responsible. I will switch over to aljazeera in a few minutes to see what they are saying...

Funny, there was a just some journalist turned spy novel writer on CNN that said the same thing...the plot is too far-fetched. Regardless, did you expect Iran to admit it?
 
At first glance the headline would seem a counterproductive/nuts move by Iran.
But where else could they get the Saudi Ambassador but the USA.

And In light of this:
Saudi king ‘repeatedly requested’ US attack Iran: WikiLeaks
http://www.debatepolitics.com/middl...tedly-requested-us-attack-iran-Wikileaks.html
Included in 250,000 documents being released by WikiLeaks this week was a secret diplomatic cable that indicated Saudi King Abdullah had urged the US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, to use force to stop Iran's nuclear program.

According to the document, Abdullah repeatedly requested that the US attack Iran. Other leaked documents also described how other Arab countries pushed for military action.

One cable said the Saudi king "frequently exhorted the US to attack Iran to put an end to its nuclear weapons program," the British newspaper Guardian reported.

The Saudi Ambassador to the US, Adel al-Jubeir, recalled in April 2008, "[Abdullah] told you [Americans] to Cut off the head of the Snake."

Al-Jubeir added "that working with the US to roll back Iranian influence in Iraq is a strategic priority for the King and his government."

[......]
It makes Alot of sense.
 
Last edited:
Funny, there was a just some journalist turned spy novel writer on CNN that said the same thing...the plot is too far-fetched. Regardless, did you expect Iran to admit it?

Of course i didn't expect them to admit it... and after watching aljazeera for an hour and saw no more mention of it than a single sentence on the news scroll on the bottom of the screen, I changed the channel...
 
Funny, there was a just some journalist turned spy novel writer on CNN that said the same thing...the plot is too far-fetched. Regardless, did you expect Iran to admit it?

That makes me think of the novels where the bad guy is accused, and he scoffs, claiming such a far-fetched plot would only happen in a bad movie.
 
why would Iran risk a US military strike?

it doesn't cost that much to drop a few bunker-busters.

Apparently you know next to nothing about war.

It wouldn't stop at a few bunker busters. First of all, we'd have to penetrate Iranian airspace with fighters. If they get in our way, we'd have to shoot them down. Then if the bombs are delivered successfully, expect an immediate full on invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan. We would be at full war within hours.
 
Apparently you know next to nothing about war.

It wouldn't stop at a few bunker busters. First of all, we'd have to penetrate Iranian airspace with fighters. If they get in our way, we'd have to shoot them down. Then if the bombs are delivered successfully, expect an immediate full on invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan. We would be at full war within hours.

And I think you overestimate Irans ability to move troops from place to place. What good would invading Iraq and Afghanistan do if they have absolutely no air cover... they'd be absolutely ****ed and be scrambling to defend their own country rather then invading any other and facing the American army, militants not aligned to them and the Afghan and Iraqi National armies...

There's a slight flaw in your logic.
 
And I think you overestimate Irans ability to move troops from place to place. What good would invading Iraq and Afghanistan do if they have absolutely no air cover... they'd be absolutely ****ed and be scrambling to defend their own country rather then invading any other and facing the American army, militants not aligned to them and the Afghan and Iraqi National armies...

There's a slight flaw in your logic.

Who said anything about no air cover? Of course they'd provide air support. We don't have the assets to take on an entire air force, at least not to my knowledge, at the ready in Afghanistan. What good would it do? The quickest way to kill American troops. They also would probably immediately launch missiles at our troops and at Israel. On second thought, they might not do a ground invasion, but would launch immediately. If they have any nukes ready, they would probably be used.

The Obama administrations pansy-ass response to this will confirm that he doesn't have the balls to protect this nation and will ensure that the GOP will win, or at least HELP ensure that, no matter who they run.

And that scares the **** out of me. Am I the only libertarian that wishes Obama were a lot better so the GOP would have to put out a real effort to find someone to beat him? It seems that Obama is so bad that the right could run a box of rocks against him and win. When a gov't is caught plotting an act of war against your country, you retaliate with force. Not forceful rhetoric from those purple lips of our dumbass-n-chief.
 
Last edited:
the proof of iranian government involvement in this is as solid as the presence of WMDs in iraq



mossad false flag? probably too clumsy
saudi false flag. more likely. at least as likely as this actually being an iranian enterprise
 
in order to provoke an Israeli/American strike on Iranian nuclear facilities?

I'm curious what the official Iranian reaction to this will be.
ImOnAJihad, will say this is the Great Satan lying to provoke a confrontation among OPEC members.
 
the proof of iranian government involvement in this is as solid as the presence of WMDs in iraq



mossad false flag? probably too clumsy
saudi false flag. more likely. at least as likely as this actually being an iranian enterprise

Do you have any proof that disproves this story?
Anyways, the Iranians are not this stupid or clumsy. There's probably something mroe to this that the media is either too unwilling/stupid to reveal
 
Anyways, the Iranians are not this stupid or clumsy. There's probably something mroe to this that the media is either too unwilling/stupid to reveal

Do you mean "clumsy" like, shipping artillery shells to Iraqi militants (to make IEDs with) with Iranian manufacturing info printed on them?

"What? How did THAT get there? They must have Stolen those things!...yeah, that's the ticket..."
 
why would Iran risk a US military strike?

it doesn't cost that much to drop a few bunker-busters.

Because they perceive Obama as being to weak to actually launch a strike on Iranian soil and they're probably right in their assessment.
 
Because they perceive Obama as being to weak to actually launch a strike on Iranian soil and they're probably right in their assessment.
It's not "weak" to show restraint.
 
And I think you overestimate Irans ability to move troops from place to place. What good would invading Iraq and Afghanistan do if they have absolutely no air cover... they'd be absolutely ****ed and be scrambling to defend their own country rather then invading any other and facing the American army, militants not aligned to them and the Afghan and Iraqi National armies...

There's a slight flaw in your logic.

If they devised a plan, like the one the IDF used in the 6-Day War, they could hit our air assets, while they're still on the ground and do a lot to even the playing field.

Unlikely? Possibly. Impossible? Nothing is impossible.
 
Back
Top Bottom