|
Iran threatening
|
|
Topic Started: Jan 7 2012, 10:12 AM (386 Views)
|
|
Mr Gray
|
Jan 9 2012, 10:49 AM
Post #16
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 16,503
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #26
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Jan 9 2012, 10:39 AM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 8 2012, 10:25 PM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 8 2012, 07:31 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 8 2012, 05:32 PM
:facepalm: Lars, do you believe that the U.S. forces currently and publicly performing missle testing and deploying a huge showing of nave force is in any way antagonizing the Iranians or trying to provoke anything that could be looked at as some exaggerated threat on their part? If for some reason Russia and China teamed up and decided to do missle testing in the International waters just outside of the Gulf of Mexico, do you think our government/military would have something to say about it. We'd probably mobilize a fleet or two just in case something did happen, right? If we had/have evidence that Iran is an eminent threat than a few surgical strikes would do the trick, why the huge show of naval force? Maybe to provoke something to justify the strike or "seal the deal" so to speak?
Yes, I would think our actions might antagonize the Iranians. No disagreement from me. And it's possible that our intent is to start a war with them.
So you are in favor of starting yet another war?
I think that we should do what it takes to keep Iran from obtaining a nuke. Preferably that can be achieved by other means, e.g. covert operations, computer viruses, etc. don't you think that the people who Iran would likely use the Nuke on should be primarily responsible for preventing them from having one?
|
 The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
|
| |
|
eelbor
|
Jan 9 2012, 11:09 AM
Post #17
|
Zen Master
- Posts:
- 10,606
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
It is Pandora's box. Nukes are out. Nukes will proliferate. You can not shove them back in the box.
|

"Liberal, shmiberal. That should be a new word. Shmiberal: one who is assumed liberal, just because he's a professional whiner in the newspaper. If you'll read the subtext for many of those old strips, you'll find the heart of an old-fashioned Libertarian. And I'd be a Libertarian, if they weren't all a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners." - Berkeley Breathed
Meat is Murder. Sweet, delicious murder.
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Jan 9 2012, 11:22 AM
Post #18
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- Mr Gray
- Jan 9 2012, 10:49 AM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 9 2012, 10:39 AM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 8 2012, 10:25 PM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 8 2012, 07:31 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 8 2012, 05:32 PM
:facepalm: Lars, do you believe that the U.S. forces currently and publicly performing missle testing and deploying a huge showing of nave force is in any way antagonizing the Iranians or trying to provoke anything that could be looked at as some exaggerated threat on their part? If for some reason Russia and China teamed up and decided to do missle testing in the International waters just outside of the Gulf of Mexico, do you think our government/military would have something to say about it. We'd probably mobilize a fleet or two just in case something did happen, right? If we had/have evidence that Iran is an eminent threat than a few surgical strikes would do the trick, why the huge show of naval force? Maybe to provoke something to justify the strike or "seal the deal" so to speak?
Yes, I would think our actions might antagonize the Iranians. No disagreement from me. And it's possible that our intent is to start a war with them.
So you are in favor of starting yet another war?
I think that we should do what it takes to keep Iran from obtaining a nuke. Preferably that can be achieved by other means, e.g. covert operations, computer viruses, etc.
don't you think that the people who Iran would likely use the Nuke on should be primarily responsible for preventing them from having one? Avoiding a nuclear holocaust is the responsibility of the global community. No sane individuals want to see a nuclear event. The problem is the Iranian leadership is arguably insane.
Earlier I posed the question, "If the crusaders had access to nuclear weapons, would they have used them on the Muslims during the middle ages?" I think it's likely they would have. The radical, modern day Muslims behave like Christians did 200-300 years ago.
|
|
| |
|
Mr Gray
|
Jan 9 2012, 11:31 AM
Post #19
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 16,503
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #26
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Jan 9 2012, 11:22 AM
- Mr Gray
- Jan 9 2012, 10:49 AM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 9 2012, 10:39 AM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 8 2012, 10:25 PM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 8 2012, 07:31 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 8 2012, 05:32 PM
:facepalm: Lars, do you believe that the U.S. forces currently and publicly performing missle testing and deploying a huge showing of nave force is in any way antagonizing the Iranians or trying to provoke anything that could be looked at as some exaggerated threat on their part? If for some reason Russia and China teamed up and decided to do missle testing in the International waters just outside of the Gulf of Mexico, do you think our government/military would have something to say about it. We'd probably mobilize a fleet or two just in case something did happen, right? If we had/have evidence that Iran is an eminent threat than a few surgical strikes would do the trick, why the huge show of naval force? Maybe to provoke something to justify the strike or "seal the deal" so to speak?
Yes, I would think our actions might antagonize the Iranians. No disagreement from me. And it's possible that our intent is to start a war with them.
So you are in favor of starting yet another war?
I think that we should do what it takes to keep Iran from obtaining a nuke. Preferably that can be achieved by other means, e.g. covert operations, computer viruses, etc.
don't you think that the people who Iran would likely use the Nuke on should be primarily responsible for preventing them from having one?
Avoiding a nuclear holocaust is the responsibility of the global community. No sane individuals want to see a nuclear event. The problem is the Iranian leadership is arguably insane. Earlier I posed the question, "If the crusaders had access to nuclear weapons, would they have used them on the Muslims during the middle ages?" I think it's likely they would have. The radical, modern day Muslims behave like Christians did 200-300 years ago. the "global community" is going to sit back and let us take care of everything at the peril of our own finances and future generations of Americans.....because you and millions of others continue to not just let it happen, but encourage it. If we leave the Middle East, why the hell would Iran nuke us Lars?
|
 The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Jan 9 2012, 11:35 AM
Post #20
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- Mr Gray
- Jan 9 2012, 11:31 AM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 9 2012, 11:22 AM
- Mr Gray
- Jan 9 2012, 10:49 AM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 9 2012, 10:39 AM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 8 2012, 10:25 PM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 8 2012, 07:31 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 8 2012, 05:32 PM
:facepalm: Lars, do you believe that the U.S. forces currently and publicly performing missle testing and deploying a huge showing of nave force is in any way antagonizing the Iranians or trying to provoke anything that could be looked at as some exaggerated threat on their part? If for some reason Russia and China teamed up and decided to do missle testing in the International waters just outside of the Gulf of Mexico, do you think our government/military would have something to say about it. We'd probably mobilize a fleet or two just in case something did happen, right? If we had/have evidence that Iran is an eminent threat than a few surgical strikes would do the trick, why the huge show of naval force? Maybe to provoke something to justify the strike or "seal the deal" so to speak?
Yes, I would think our actions might antagonize the Iranians. No disagreement from me. And it's possible that our intent is to start a war with them.
So you are in favor of starting yet another war?
I think that we should do what it takes to keep Iran from obtaining a nuke. Preferably that can be achieved by other means, e.g. covert operations, computer viruses, etc.
don't you think that the people who Iran would likely use the Nuke on should be primarily responsible for preventing them from having one?
Avoiding a nuclear holocaust is the responsibility of the global community. No sane individuals want to see a nuclear event. The problem is the Iranian leadership is arguably insane. Earlier I posed the question, "If the crusaders had access to nuclear weapons, would they have used them on the Muslims during the middle ages?" I think it's likely they would have. The radical, modern day Muslims behave like Christians did 200-300 years ago.
the "global community" is going to sit back and let us take care of everything at the peril of our own finances and future generations of Americans.....because you and millions of others continue to not just let it happen, but encourage it. If we leave the Middle East, why the hell would Iran nuke us Lars? You don't want to live in this world, post middle-east nuclear holocaust.
|
|
| |
|
brumdog44
|
Jan 9 2012, 05:32 PM
Post #21
|
The guy picked last in gym class
- Posts:
- 43,823
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #181
- Joined:
- February 20, 2008
|
If occupying the middle east kept unstable regimes from gaining nuclear weapons, then why does Pakistan have them?
|
|
| |
|
Bobobinc
|
Jan 9 2012, 07:46 PM
Post #22
|
Scrimshanker
- Posts:
- 8,742
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #73
- Joined:
- February 6, 2008
|
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 8 2012, 11:28 AM
- brumdog44
- Jan 8 2012, 01:31 AM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 7 2012, 08:28 PM
Given that you are cruising your yacht over in that part of the world, who would you rather be picked up by, Somali pirates or the Iranian navy? You would probably be equally screwed either way.
When was it a given that you would be 'cruising your yacht' in that part of the world?
+1 Ridiculous comparison Bobo - I agree that we need a presence in the area but having an entire carrier group parked in Irans backyard with everything that is currently going on politically may be intimidating enough to provoke something out of Iran.......seems to me we may be setting up a confrontation so we will have an easier time justifying another war to the world. I'm pretty sure Iran is quite sure how powerful our military is, do we really need to be flaunting it in any sort of antagonizing manner that may provoke something? We can strike them from anywhere if needed and I'm quite sure thay know that. It's not really that hard to see how we may come off as bullies in certain parts of the world. I don't necessarily disagree.
I also think we give hope to some who live under these oppressive regimes. Lots of their citizens still want to come here. They want to earn a living, raise a family, and live in peace.
I think it's hard to remain a beacon of freedom while, at the same time, maintaining our national interests and security. We definitely don't do a good job of projecting the right image.
Minding our own business more would seem to be in order, I just don't believe in abandoning our military presence abroad.
|
|
| |
|
brumdog44
|
Jan 9 2012, 09:36 PM
Post #23
|
The guy picked last in gym class
- Posts:
- 43,823
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #181
- Joined:
- February 20, 2008
|
Bobo --
Which do you think we consider most important when our government decides to intervene -- how oppressive the regime is OR our national interests?
I think the answer is easy considering we have actively supported more oppressive regimes in many cases than the ones we have invaded.
|
|
| |
|
Bobobinc
|
Jan 9 2012, 11:59 PM
Post #24
|
Scrimshanker
- Posts:
- 8,742
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #73
- Joined:
- February 6, 2008
|
- brumdog44
- Jan 9 2012, 09:36 PM
Bobo --
Which do you think we consider most important when our government decides to intervene -- how oppressive the regime is OR our national interests?
I think the answer is easy considering we have actively supported more oppressive regimes in many cases than the ones we have invaded. Oh, I agree. There's no doubt. I wasn't arguing that we're more interested in freeing people in these countries than we are in advancing our national interests.....be it economic or security.
But not even the most ardent supporter of the military or or individual rights would argue that Americans should die because we invade say.....Afghanistan....and remove the Taliban because they are murdering innocent civilians. Regime change is always going to be about many factors.
As I implied in another thread, we have to remember that fighting Communism has been the dominant foreign policy factor for 40+ years. We supported some pretty brutal leaders and governments to keep them from falling into the Communist sphere. It wasn't right, but there weren't many alternatives at the time. And I think we are much better now than we were during the cold war.
|
|
| |
|
brumdog44
|
Jan 10 2012, 12:30 AM
Post #25
|
The guy picked last in gym class
- Posts:
- 43,823
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #181
- Joined:
- February 20, 2008
|
In the process, though, we sold our country to a communist one.
|
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Jan 10 2012, 01:05 AM
Post #26
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- brumdog44
- Jan 10 2012, 12:30 AM
In the process, though, we sold our country to a communist one. yernuts
|
|
| |
|
IUCOLTFAN
|
Jan 10 2012, 05:45 PM
Post #27
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 10,098
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #131
- Joined:
- February 9, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Jan 10 2012, 01:05 AM
- brumdog44
- Jan 10 2012, 12:30 AM
In the process, though, we sold our country to a communist one. yernuts He probably should have said "are in the process of selling" but the general idea is correct and there is really nothing yernuts about it. I'll tell you what I think is crazy tho. A guy who would be indifferent about the cutting of some social services (things he has paid into and will probably need someday) while at the same time is willing to jump into yet another war AND, to top it off, is willing to borrow more money from China to do it. If you really believe that this huge debt we are under is not going to come crashing down in a bad way, you are the one who is fucking yernuts
|

|
| |
|
boilergrad01
|
Jan 10 2012, 06:23 PM
Post #28
|
Working on the last 5
- Posts:
- 10,098
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #135
- Joined:
- February 9, 2008
|
No one on here has called for "another war"
|
|
Nothing beats an Astronaut
|
| |
|
IUCOLTFAN
|
Jan 10 2012, 08:36 PM
Post #29
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 10,098
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #131
- Joined:
- February 9, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Jan 9 2012, 10:39 AM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 8 2012, 10:25 PM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 8 2012, 07:31 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 8 2012, 05:32 PM
:facepalm: Lars, do you believe that the U.S. forces currently and publicly performing missle testing and deploying a huge showing of nave force is in any way antagonizing the Iranians or trying to provoke anything that could be looked at as some exaggerated threat on their part? If for some reason Russia and China teamed up and decided to do missle testing in the International waters just outside of the Gulf of Mexico, do you think our government/military would have something to say about it. We'd probably mobilize a fleet or two just in case something did happen, right? If we had/have evidence that Iran is an eminent threat than a few surgical strikes would do the trick, why the huge show of naval force? Maybe to provoke something to justify the strike or "seal the deal" so to speak?
Yes, I would think our actions might antagonize the Iranians. No disagreement from me. And it's possible that our intent is to start a war with them.
So you are in favor of starting yet another war?
I think that we should do what it takes to keep Iran from obtaining a nuke. Preferably that can be achieved by other means, e.g. covert operations, computer viruses, etc. do what it takes
Seems to me that as long as our government tells us that dropping bombs is what needs to be done then Lars is fine with it
|

|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Jan 11 2012, 12:49 AM
Post #30
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 10 2012, 08:36 PM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 9 2012, 10:39 AM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 8 2012, 10:25 PM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 8 2012, 07:31 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 8 2012, 05:32 PM
:facepalm: Lars, do you believe that the U.S. forces currently and publicly performing missle testing and deploying a huge showing of nave force is in any way antagonizing the Iranians or trying to provoke anything that could be looked at as some exaggerated threat on their part? If for some reason Russia and China teamed up and decided to do missle testing in the International waters just outside of the Gulf of Mexico, do you think our government/military would have something to say about it. We'd probably mobilize a fleet or two just in case something did happen, right? If we had/have evidence that Iran is an eminent threat than a few surgical strikes would do the trick, why the huge show of naval force? Maybe to provoke something to justify the strike or "seal the deal" so to speak?
Yes, I would think our actions might antagonize the Iranians. No disagreement from me. And it's possible that our intent is to start a war with them.
So you are in favor of starting yet another war?
I think that we should do what it takes to keep Iran from obtaining a nuke. Preferably that can be achieved by other means, e.g. covert operations, computer viruses, etc.
do what it takes Seems to me that as long as our government tells us that dropping bombs is what needs to be done then Lars is fine with it If necessary, a few of those bunker busters built for Iraq should do the trick. Hopefully the CIA can get 'er done with covert ops.
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|