• 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: US will "suffer" if it leads strike on Syria

Snappo said:
It's easy for him to act regretful as he professes to be a statesman decades after letting it happen. Coulda, shoulda, woulda.
Click to expand...
It's probably not an easy decision to live with. He made a public apology while he was still president, not decades later.

 
Moot said:
The US was motivated to intervene in the genocide in Kosovo and Bosnia through NATO. Clinton regretted not intervening in Rwanda genocide.

I wonder why NATO isn't more involved in Syria?
Click to expand...

This makes no sense.. Kosovo was a result of the US and NATO sticking their heads into the Bosnia. Bosnia was like Syria now. Once Jihad was called it became a **** storm in which Orthodox Christians (Serbs) were being slaughtered by the Muslims (Bosnian). Srebrenica was a central point to Bosnian forces in that area. For 3 years Bosnian and foreign fighters would go an attack villages around the area. Hundreds (maybe thousands) of Serb civilians were slaughtered even though Sreberenica was considered a safe zone (no weapons or military).. for 3 years Serbian forces and civilians complained about the attacks, for 3 years the UN, US and NATO ignored it.. so the end result was not surprising.. It was a genocide on both sides but US and NATO chose sides.

Of course Clinton could regret Rwanda.. he was busy sticking his nose in Irish politics and Balkans politics while holding a position in which his Admin refused to use the word Genocide and lobbied the UN for removal of UNAMIR forces despite it being known what was planned. US Government hedged it's bets during Rwanda. US started backing the RPF (Tutsi) with training in the US in the late 1980s (obviously before Clinton) but still recognized the Hutu regime.
 
Last edited:
Moot said:
The US was motivated to intervene in the genocide in Kosovo and Bosnia through NATO. Clinton regretted not intervening in Rwanda genocide.

I wonder why NATO isn't more involved in Syria?
Click to expand...

Probably because NATO acknowledges that a majority of Syrians support their president, A and B, because they don't want to interfere with Assad's war on terror.
 
Snappo said:
I read recently that Israel has 400 strategic nuclear weapons and neutron bombs. I'm thinking if Iran makes the mistake of bombing Tel Aviv that they might have to instantly forget about even having citizens and a government.
Click to expand...


Yeah yeah, that's it kill every last citizen in Iran if the Iranian government attacks Israel, that would be Yahweh's approach. Men, women, children, goats, even those two trees over there!!
 
Montecresto said:
Yeah yeah, that's it kill every last citizen in Iran if the Iranian government attacks Israel, that would be Yahweh's approach. Men, women, children, goats, even those two trees over there!!
Click to expand...

At this point...are we supposed to care about who lives and dies in the Mid East? It took 2 massive world wars to quell Europeans of their bloodlust.
 
iacardsfan said:
Iran: U.S. will 'definitely suffer' if it leads strike on Syria - CNN.com



Honestly, I am surprised we have not heard more arguments like the one above. The U.S has no standing on humanitarian issues when it comes to using force because we have lost our credibility. I do have to doubt the Iranian rhetoric that the United States will suffer if military actions occurs. We have heard it before from other countries, namely North Korea, and nothing ever comes of it. Either way it is an interesting statement and it is an interesting situation that President Obama has gotten the United States into.
Click to expand...

That and a fart from a fat man really stinks up the place....Yawn.
 
If America can't call out Syria on humanitarian claims because of our track record, why on earth is Iran pointing fingers?

That aside, I hope we don't get into that mess.
 
iacardsfan said:
Iran: U.S. will 'definitely suffer' if it leads strike on Syria - CNN.com

Honestly, I am surprised we have not heard more arguments like the one above. The U.S has no standing on humanitarian issues when it comes to using force because we have lost our credibility. I do have to doubt the Iranian rhetoric that the United States will suffer if military actions occurs. We have heard it before from other countries, namely North Korea, and nothing ever comes of it. Either way it is an interesting statement and it is an interesting situation that President Obama has gotten the United States into.
Click to expand...

Its amazing you don't realize the ridiculolus irony of you suggesting the U.S. has no standing on humanitarian issues based off you giving standing to Iran's opinions regarding whether or not someone should have standing on Humanitarian issues.
 
American said:
Iran threatens brutal attacks on Americans, Obama family | The Daily Caller

This is incredible, I'd like to know if this is a hoax or if he really made the threat.
Click to expand...

The WSJ is saying it a little different. They say that the US "claims" to have intercepted communications between the Iranians and militants instructing them to do so!!! When the US gets god damn good and ready to bomb a country, Katy bar the door. There's no telling the distance we can go in fixing intelligence neatly around the policy.
 
"a former Iranian official has warned of mass abductions and brutal killings of American citizens around the world and the rape and killing of one of Obama’s daughters should the United States attack Syria.
Alireza Forghani, the former governor of southern Iran’s Kish Province, threw down the gauntlet last week. Forghani is an analyst and strategy specialist in the supreme leader’s camp and closely aligned with Mehdi Taeb, who heads the regime’s Ammar Strategic Base, a radical think thank, and thus speaks with the blessing of the Islamic regime.
“Hopefully Obama will be pigheaded enough to attack Syria, and then we will see the … loss of U.S. interests [through terrorist attacks],” he threatened. “In just 21 hours [after the attack on Syria], a family member of every U.S. minister [department secretary], U.S. ambassadors, U.S. military commanders around the world will be abducted. And then 18 hours later, videos of their amputation will be spread [around the world].”

Read more: Iran threatens brutal attacks on Americans, Obama family | The Daily Caller

See...now this is the kind of **** that tends to unify us. Talk all you want about your All Akbar bull**** and your impotent threats. But threaten our kids? **** you, bitches...its on. And isnt it laughingly pathetic that these 'holy' warriors turn to rape and attacking children as the pinnacle of their manhood.

Yeah...that thing you think it is doing? It aint. You think it will make people stop...become fearful...retreat. Nope. just the opposite. I dont want there to be a war. I dont want us to engage Syria unless there is real actually proof as to WHO is using chemical weapons and if there IS, we need to eliminate them, whether it is the Syrian government or the rebels. But...if Iran wants to get all froggy? No 'targeted strikes'. Level that entire ****ing country. Good riddance. You like 'messages'? Ive got one for you.
 
Yes, American already gave us the daily Caller link, see post 35.
 
There is no way to reason with a culturally inferior people. You simply pound them into submission, mercilessly without pause or remorse.

But not yet. Not over this. Unless there's a whole mess of things that we, as citizens, are not aware of yet.

The recent measures now being taken at all NFL games - you pretty much can't take anything inside a stadium bigger than a wallet anymore - hints of some unusually serious threats out there. I don't know, but something seems brewing. Boston Marathon times 10.

I think the reality of this world is hitting Obama squarely between the eyes. He knows things now he probably never wanted to know. He preferred that liberal bubble of group hugs and support groups and puppet role playing. Communication doesn't solve everything, as he once thought.

I honestly can't figure out why he's so bent on this. Sure, distracting from his ongoing failures, trying to jumpstart employment, etc; we know the canned reasons for going to war. But this is odd, even for and especially for Obama.
 
ecofarm said:
It's no jingo. You employ the same "logic" as Truthers.


All evidence is fake! It's a massive conspiracy! :scared:
Click to expand...


"Claims" aren't evidence, how could you possibly not know that?
 
Erod said:
There is no way to reason with a culturally inferior people. You simply pound them into submission, mercilessly without pause or remorse.

But not yet. Not over this. Unless there's a whole mess of things that we, as citizens, are not aware of yet.

The recent measures now being taken at all NFL games - you pretty much can't take anything inside a stadium bigger than a wallet anymore - hints of some unusually serious threats out there. I don't know, but something seems brewing. Boston Marathon times 10.

I think the reality of this world is hitting Obama squarely between the eyes. He knows things now he probably never wanted to know. He preferred that liberal bubble of group hugs and support groups and puppet role playing. Communication doesn't solve everything, as he once thought.

I honestly can't figure out why he's so bent on this. Sure, distracting from his ongoing failures, trying to jumpstart employment, etc; we know the canned reasons for going to war. But this is odd, even for and especially for Obama.
Click to expand...


I love the candid admission of "canned reasons for going to war"
 
ecofarm said:
Claims are evidence. Ever heard of sociological research?
Click to expand...

You must mean only US claims. Iran, Syria, Russia and China all have their claims but of course their claims don't equal evidence. Your a real piece!
 
Paschendale said:
Our military game plan is to drop bombs on them from the sky, and arm and support one faction against the other. Just like the last dozen or so civil wars we've intervened in. What's to give away?



What a weird sentiment. What exactly is it you think Iran is emboldened to do? Obtain nuclear technology? They're doing that already. Make moves against Israel? Fund terrorist organizations? Impose Islamic law on their people and oppress women, murder gays, and execute anyone who wants to stop being Muslim? They're already doing all of that. Maybe Iran's leaders don't spend all day thinking about what the United States may or may not do. Maybe if Iran "pissed on us" (whatever that actually means), then the American people would demand a war. We demanded one in Afghanistan, though we certainly didn't demand the one we ended up getting.

All this paranoia over Iran gets us nowhere. Just like our paranoia over Iraq got us nowhere. Our war mongering only made things worse. We probably will suffer if we attack Syria. We'll keep creating men like Bin Laden. We'll keep putting dictators in power and then tearing them down. We'll help the religious fundamentalists kill the communists and then help the rebels kill the fundamentalists and then we'll help someone else kill the rebels. We keep arming violent people and then acting surprised when they do violent things. We're perpetuating violence and instability.
Click to expand...

Iran is the most strategically placed and capable country to disrupt the world's energy supply. There is no limit to the problems they could cause the US and the entire world.
 
Montecresto said:
The WSJ is saying it a little different. They say that the US "claims" to have intercepted communications between the Iranians and militants instructing them to do so!!! When the US gets god damn good and ready to bomb a country, Katy bar the door. There's no telling the distance we can go in fixing intelligence neatly around the policy.
Click to expand...

If these threats were actually made, the ayatollah is asking for a MOAB to be dropped right next to his office. That's why I'm skeptical. You don't tell the POTUS his daughter is going to be kidnapped and cut-up without the expectation of having a missile stuck up your ass.
 
American said:
If these threats were actually made, the ayatollah is asking for a MOAB to be dropped right next to his office. That's why I'm skeptical. You don't tell the POTUS his daughter is going to be kidnapped and cut-up without the expectation of having a missile stuck up your ass.
Click to expand...

Well I certainly wish no harm to the presidents daughter or himself for that matter. But really, its not likely something Iran could actually do for one and for two who could blame them if they did utter such rhetoric? All that said, there's disinformation, threats and propaganda flying from all sides presently and it's difficult to cut through. But let us see an actual quote of the ayatollah or anyone else in the Iranian government saying such things. In the end, if they are as "crazy" as many on this board like to suggest, supposing their alleged nuclear program is advanced beyond our knowledge, suppose they shoved a nuke up our ass. The whole point is, why let things escalate to this level of rhetoric over "suggestive evidence"?
 
mac said:
Iran is the most strategically placed and capable country to disrupt the world's energy supply. There is no limit to the problems they could cause the US and the entire world.
Click to expand...

Funny how it always keeps coming back to Iran... Tell me, WHY would Iran do this? Why would they sabotage their own source of wealth? Just because they're pricks? Nobody is really like that on a national scale. There's too much at stake. Because of their religion? Ever notice how few rich Jihaddists there are? They prefer to stay rich. To raise prices? Sorry bro, that's capitalism. They have a right to do that under your system.
 
Paschendale said:
Funny how it always keeps coming back to Iran... Tell me, WHY would Iran do this? Why would they sabotage their own source of wealth? Just because they're pricks? Nobody is really like that on a national scale. There's too much at stake. Because of their religion? Ever notice how few rich Jihaddists there are? They prefer to stay rich. To raise prices? Sorry bro, that's capitalism. They have a right to do that under your system.
Click to expand...




they have enough oil to supply themselves and their exports are allready strictly sanctioned, with impending increase in sanctions bringing their oil exports down to zero. So, they have nothing to lose by shutting down the SoH for any length of time. Why would they do this? Excercise of power and hurting their enemies. Shutting down the straights for no more than a few days would drastically impact the world economy and cause greivous harm to every single enemy of Iran.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom