• 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!

Trump to call for 'stamping out extremism' in speech to Muslim leaders

beerftw said:
There is no middle eastern arms race, Iran has long bought soviet equipment ever since the shah was overthrown, and saudi arabia has bought our equipment.
Click to expand...

All true.

Middle East Arms Race Will Continue After Iran Nuke Deal: Experts ...
The Middle East Nuclear Race Is Already Under Way | Time.com
The $18bn arms race helping to fuel Middle East conflict | World news ...
Nuclear arms race under way in Middle East, Israeli official warns | Fox ...

I guess you better tell all these publications how wrong they are.

This is a proxy war between saudi arabia and iran, and yemen where saudi is committing war crimes daily is one of the two proxy wars, the other being syria.

Houthi rebels are fighting saudi arabia, the country is divided three ways between saudi supporters, houthi rebels who are majority shia but a large number of their backers are not, and al quaeda. Saudi refuses to attack al quaeda in yemen, and instead uses all of their attacks to focus on houthi rebels.

The war in yemen broke out because saudi arabia installed a puppet leader for yemen. The other proxy war being syria, with the arab states and turkey funding and supporting the overthrow of assad, and iran russia and lebanon supporting assad as well as the majority of the people of syria.

It is a sunni vs shia conflict, that escalated with the invasion of iraq, as saddam was a buffer zone between them, and was friends of neither, with his fall started a proxy war between iran and saudi to control the middle east sunni vs shia.
Click to expand...

May or may not be true, and it doesn't matter if it is or isn't true.

The points which you raise has nothing to do with the fact that there is a Middle East arms race, one that will probably will end up as a Nuclear Arms race, in one of the most unstable geo-political areas on the planet. Not a comforting thought.
 
NIMBY said:
Why do you think chickenhawk trump was too afraid to use one of his favorite attack lines, 'radical Islamic terrorists'?

And how about a fuming Bibi having to order his cabinet to show up for trump ?
Click to expand...

You should actually read a transcript of the speech before making silly remarks.

One of many statements regarding Islamic terrorism in Trump's speech:

That means honestly confronting the crisis of Islamist extremism and the Islamist terror groups it inspires. And it means standing together against the murder of innocent Muslims, the oppression of women, the persecution of Jews, and the slaughter of Christians.
Click to expand...
 
NIMBY said:
Who are you to question a poster's lean when your's is undisclosed? At least he's honest enough to say who he is. When will you tell us you're a conservative ?
Click to expand...

I'm not a concervative. I suppose. Could list it as centrist, though I've gotten pretty heated with some of those folks, as well. I can't be concervative, though. I'm pro choice, pro social safety nets, pro progressive taxation, anti Corp, pro legalization of pot.

I can't be a liberal, either, though. I'm pro gun, pro states rights (except to extremes), pro smart deregulation, pro civil rights, etc.


So how would YOU list my lean, lol?
 
Explosion in Manchester UK at Ariana Grande concert. Breaking
 
eohrnberger said:
All true.

Middle East Arms Race Will Continue After Iran Nuke Deal: Experts ...
The Middle East Nuclear Race Is Already Under Way | Time.com
The $18bn arms race helping to fuel Middle East conflict | World news ...
Nuclear arms race under way in Middle East, Israeli official warns | Fox ...

I guess you better tell all these publications how wrong they are.



May or may not be true, and it doesn't matter if it is or isn't true.

The points which you raise has nothing to do with the fact that there is a Middle East arms race, one that will probably will end up as a Nuclear Arms race, in one of the most unstable geo-political areas on the planet. Not a comforting thought.
Click to expand...

It is not an arms race though, an arms race is a race to aquire the biggest and best equipment, saudi is only buying so much because they used a metric **** ton of it in yemen, an ongoing war of that scale requires constant re armament. Iran is doing nothing different from what they have always done, they bought weapons from america under the shah, and weapons from russia after the shah was overthrown.

Iran though is way behind if there ever was an arms race, as iran is much more organized at using proxies than saudi arabia, which is their preferred method over groundbreaking tech.
 
beerftw said:
It is not an arms race though, an arms race is a race to aquire the biggest and best equipment, saudi is only buying so much because they used a metric **** ton of it in yemen, an ongoing war of that scale requires constant re armament. Iran is doing nothing different from what they have always done, they bought weapons from america under the shah, and weapons from russia after the shah was overthrown.

Iran though is way behind if there ever was an arms race, as iran is much more organized at using proxies than saudi arabia, which is their preferred method over groundbreaking tech.
Click to expand...

Iran is going to buy more, then the Saudi's are going to buy a bit more, then the Emeratis are going to buy more . . . . Rinse, lather, repeat.
No one is going to want to be the one that's caught short, that doesn't have enough, so they are going to buy more.

Yeah. It's an arms race.

I suspect that this is also why the Saudi's are being what appears to be almost overly gracious to Trump. The biggest thing is to have the US, and it's military, on your side.
 
eohrnberger said:
Iran is going to buy more, then the Saudi's are going to buy a bit more, then the Emeratis are going to buy more . . . . Rinse, lather, repeat.
No one is going to want to be the one that's caught short, that doesn't have enough, so they are going to buy more.

Yeah. It's an arms race.

I suspect that this is also why the Saudi's are being what appears to be almost overly gracious to Trump. The biggest thing is to have the US, and it's military, on your side.
Click to expand...

IT is still not an arms race, as saudi and iran make no efforts to match eachother, and saudi has held m superior arms since the fall of the shah.

An arms race is more like what the soviet union vs america was, in constant aquisition of better tech and supply, or even ww2 where every nation tried to supply as well as engineer better than the other guy.

Iran has no need to get the latest or even more equipment, Iran and saudi fight through proxy, and in proxy fighting iran has the upper hand. Neither country will ever fight eachother head to head anytime soon. Iran has hezbollah, hamas, which they support to pressure israel to keep israel away from them, thev back houthis in yemen, which they use to prevent saudi expansion, and the have numerous shia militias they support which have been fighting isis and al quaeda/

Saudi has an almost non existent military reliant on us protection, and fights through proxy through isis and al quaeda, which is a risky idea, as both want to overthrow the saudi kingdom to install their own caliphate. Saudi though has american backing, so if isis and al quaeda ever win their fronts, and go back for saudi america would step in to protect them.
 
beerftw said:
IT is still not an arms race, as saudi and iran make no efforts to match eachother, and saudi has held m superior arms since the fall of the shah.

An arms race is more like what the soviet union vs america was, in constant aquisition of better tech and supply, or even ww2 where every nation tried to supply as well as engineer better than the other guy.

Iran has no need to get the latest or even more equipment, Iran and saudi fight through proxy, and in proxy fighting iran has the upper hand. Neither country will ever fight eachother head to head anytime soon. Iran has hezbollah, hamas, which they support to pressure israel to keep israel away from them, thev back houthis in yemen, which they use to prevent saudi expansion, and the have numerous shia militias they support which have been fighting isis and al quaeda/

Saudi has an almost non existent military reliant on us protection, and fights through proxy through isis and al quaeda, which is a risky idea, as both want to overthrow the saudi kingdom to install their own caliphate. Saudi though has american backing, so if isis and al quaeda ever win their fronts, and go back for saudi america would step in to protect them.
Click to expand...

The moment that any other of the nations in the region even suspect Iran of having a nuke, you don't think they aren't all going to buy some for themselves?

Each nation spending more and more on more and more arms is not an arms race according to you? Oh. OK. Guess I'm not familiar with your definition of what an arms race is and isn't.
 
eohrnberger said:
The moment that any other of the nations in the region even suspect Iran of having a nuke, you don't think they aren't all going to buy some for themselves?

Each nation spending more and more on more and more arms is not an arms race according to you? Oh. OK. Guess I'm not familiar with your definition of what an arms race is and isn't.
Click to expand...

Where are they going to buy them? Last I checked their was no nuke market they could run to. If iran got a nuke the proxy war would pretty much end, as saudi could no longer jack with iran, and saudi does not need nukes, they have america for that.

It basically becomes mutual assured destruction, which is bad for saudi, since they could not wipe out shia islam then, while iran would benefit deterring sunni agression, and israel will so what they do, israel already has nukes, and has had them for a long time. Pakistan has nukes as well as does india.

The whole region would realize quickly their expansionist wars would end or they face their own demise.
 
beerftw said:
Where are they going to buy them? Last I checked their was no nuke market they could run to. If iran got a nuke the proxy war would pretty much end, as saudi could no longer jack with iran, and saudi does not need nukes, they have america for that.
Click to expand...

Historically, it's already happened.

In January 2004, the Pakistani government summoned Khan for a debriefing on his active role in nuclear weapons technology proliferation in other countries after the United States provided evidence of it to the Pakistanis. Khan formally admitted his responsibility for these activities a month later.[SUP][3][/SUP][SUP][4][/SUP] The Pakistani government dismisses allegations that Pakistani authorities sanctioned Khan's activities.[SUP][5][/SUP][SUP][6][/SUP]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Qadeer_Khan
Click to expand...

True, not a finished weapon, but technologies that enabled and hastened achievement to that end. Also, do you really think that North Korea would give such an arrangement a moments thought when they could gain much needed hard currency?

Don't some of the former Russian states have some of their left over nuclear weapons? Aren't some of them suffering from bad economies and could use a windfall?

Do you really think that the US would nuke a Middle East country for the Saudis? I think not. More so the danger of any theocratic extremist regime having possession of such a weapon, and giving it to a terrorist organization such as Hezbollah, for clandestine placement and detonation in some target nation's port or land, all justified by some obscure interpretation of a religion.

It basically becomes mutual assured destruction, which is bad for saudi, since they could not wipe out shia islam then, while iran would benefit deterring sunni agression, and israel will so what they do, israel already has nukes, and has had them for a long time. Pakistan has nukes as well as does india.

The whole region would realize quickly their expansionist wars would end or they face their own demise.
Click to expand...

It took the USSR and the US quite sometime to get to the point where they realized the same sort of thing. Why do you think that the competing M.E. countries wouldn't need to go through the same 'learning curve' before arriving at the same conclusions?

I don't quite understand why you don't perceive a nuclear capable M.E. region as being a threat not only to Europe, themselves, as well as the US. Hell, Iran already has the missile technologies to loft the payload a great distance.
 
Last edited:
eohrnberger said:
Historically, it's already happened.



True, not a finished weapon, but technologies that enabled and hastened achievement to that end. Also, do you really think that North Korea would give such an arrangement a moments thought when they could gain much needed hard currency?

Don't some of the former Russian states have some of their left over nuclear weapons? Aren't some of them suffering from bad economies and could use a windfall?

Do you really think that the US would nuke a Middle East country for the Saudis? I think not. More so the danger of any theocratic extremist regime having possession of such a weapon, and giving it to a terrorist organization such as Hezbollah, for clandestine placement and detonation in some target nation's port or land, all justified by some obscure interpretation of a religion.



It took the USSR and the US quite sometime to get to the point where they realized the same sort of thing. Why do you think that the competing M.E. countries wouldn't need to go through the same 'learning curve' before arriving at the same conclusions?

I don't quite understand why you don't perceive a nuclear capable M.E. region as being a threat not only to Europe, themselves, as well as the US. Hell, Iran already has the missile technologies to loft the payload a great distance.
Click to expand...

For one the us will not nuke another me country just for saudi, but they would act as a deterrent and retaliate if another country used nukes on them.

For north korea They could probably sell equipment to iran for enrichment, but in terms of secrets, Yeah no. North korea is barely nuclear, they are over 50 years behind china on that, and their nuclear technology is no more advanced than someone who spent a few hours on google or read a book. The knowledge to make it is not hard, it is the equipment and supplies to make it, which is why the world puts strict controls on such stuff.

In terms of me turmoil, saudi arabia is light years ahead of iran in weapons, how far they can lob missiles does nothing when saudi can lob them twice as far with greater accuracy. Iran focuses on proxies and ground forces, and they do it because for them it works. Heck for israel the greatest threat was saddam, who actually shot missiles at israel during the gulf war. As far as europe, no real threat unless they want to be eradicated off the face of the earth.

You have to realize, iran does a lot of chest thumping, that is pretty much all they do. Unlike north korea where the leader is bat**** crazy and threatening to nuke even his own allies.
 
beerftw said:
For one the us will not nuke another me country just for saudi, but they would act as a deterrent and retaliate if another country used nukes on them.

For north korea They could probably sell equipment to iran for enrichment, but in terms of secrets, Yeah no. North korea is barely nuclear, they are over 50 years behind china on that, and their nuclear technology is no more advanced than someone who spent a few hours on google or read a book. The knowledge to make it is not hard, it is the equipment and supplies to make it, which is why the world puts strict controls on such stuff.

In terms of me turmoil, saudi arabia is light years ahead of iran in weapons, how far they can lob missiles does nothing when saudi can lob them twice as far with greater accuracy. Iran focuses on proxies and ground forces, and they do it because for them it works. Heck for israel the greatest threat was saddam, who actually shot missiles at israel during the gulf war. As far as europe, no real threat unless they want to be eradicated off the face of the earth.

You have to realize, iran does a lot of chest thumping, that is pretty much all they do. Unlike north korea where the leader is bat**** crazy and threatening to nuke even his own allies.
Click to expand...

I have to admit that you are bringing a lot of good points on this, and reading and thinking about what you've posted are well worth considering.

But I am still ill at ease with the ME situation, and especially an enabled Iran, the premier supporter of extremist terrorists across the globe, now unleashed and well funded.

I still don't any good coming from that. I see a future of greater instability. Isn't it historically the case with regional instability the regional countries arm up? Why would this case be any different?

The Saudi's buy US weapons. Iran buys Russian. Why would there be 'light years' difference? Hasn't Russia has been a close weapons capabilities competitor to the US for a great many years?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom