TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Iran joins nuclear technology club
Pages (5): « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »

quote:

Originally posted by extacy_bomb Oh c'mon everybody knows that Shah was fake. Even though there was more individuale freedom but people had less political parcipitation than now. At shah's time the persian army was the 3rd army of the world. And if it wasn't so now there wouldn't be any Iran left after Iraq attacked us. That's one thing i really respect. After the revolution Iran could reach to democracy ,but the Islamic leaders took over the power and screwed things up. But still i believe on standing on ourselves than any outer help. that's why i choose the islamic regime over shah's

Also alot of people seem to forget that it was the Americans that wanted shah out of power and sent khomaini to take over.
People of Iran dont want anything to do with the American government ever again.Thats why they will fight them with all they have.

quote:

People of Iran dont want anything to do with the American government ever again.

thats how i see it. IF iran is making some nuclear weapons its not to attack israel or states. they just wanna protect themselves from from what happened to iraq, making sure nobody's gonna have balls to bomb and kill their children, steal whats theirs and force something onto them.

all them new missles, torpedoes and now this is a warning. but its not "we'll fuck you up" kinda warning, its "IF you fuck with us, we'll fuck you up" warning.

thats my 2 cents

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Also alot of people seem to forget that it was the Americans that wanted shah out of power and sent khomaini to take over. People of Iran dont want anything to do with the American government ever again.Thats why they will fight them with all they have.

period

>>>>>>Lets Bomb Iran <<<<<<


funny and so true.

^^^

Even as a joke it's totally disturbing.


did you notice the picture of the tehranian girls in teh video?
I think it was one of bi2.com's hidden cam pictures.
was one of these

quote:

Originally posted by extacy_bomb did you notice the picture of the tehranian girls in teh video? I think it was one of bi2.com's hidden cam pictures. was one of these

was it?Iam not sure.Bottom line is that things arent looking good in that region.

quote:

Originally posted by Shade That may be true, however it's far from the primary reason for all of it. Israel is quite far ahead in technology (just as an example), and there are some areas that Israelies have reached which other countries haven't dreamed of touching. Israel is currently creating the next generation Intel processors for example as they're the only ones with technology capable enough. Their tanks are also the most technlogically advanced (Look up the Merkavah), and their intelligence agency is perhaps not as resourceful as the CIA, but is up there in the ranks. Israel also has quite a powerful and well trained army compared to the size of the country. Outside of technological and militaristic issues, economically, while they might not rely on eachother (though Israel is strongly influenced by American support), the two countries have trades going on regularly, and thus creates an enhancement for both economies. Israel also stands as the States' strongest connection to the Middle East, and is probably the least threatening (though it has the capabilities), compared to other Middle Eastern countries. It also goes without saying that were the U.S. in some sort of trouble, Israel would go out of its' way to help.

The above are all good points and very valid, however, you have a causation problem. The US has been supportive of Isreal even prior to it actually being a country. Certainly none of the reasons you have raised for the US's support of Isreal existed in the early 50s. Moreover, it is almost certain that without US support Isreal would not have acheived the technological, military and economic advantages that it presently enjoys. What you have raised is causally related to US support, however, that relationship is the inverse of what you have suggested.... The US does not support Isreal because they are the regional powerhouse, Isreal is the regional power BECAUSE of US support.

quote:

Originally posted by extacy_bomb Even if you've had some education in these cases, I believe that you are wrong. People in Iran have no reason and no intrest to go on a war. I can tell you that more than 75% won't go on a war. But it's the crazy guvernment that makes the world think Iran is a big threat and iranian people have dangerous ideologies.

You may very well be correct, although I doubt there are many public opinion polls to which we could look for corroboration, the people may not want to be involved in any sort of conflict. Unfortunately, what the people of Iran want means very little. We're talking about an theocracy here, the religious elite run the government and the government controls the military, which in turn controls the people. In order for there to be war only the top brass of the religious oligarchy, government and military need to be on board. The people's will to war is not important in a top down system controled by few people such as this. Moreover, in the case of a nuclear strike the only people who really need to be on board are the inner most circle amongst the elite.... so long as the men giving the orders and the men with control of the launch system are onboard that missle is airborn.

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard The above are all good points and very valid, however, you have a causation problem. The US has been supportive of Isreal even prior to it actually being a country. Certainly none of the reasons you have raised for the US's support of Isreal existed in the early 50s. Moreover, it is almost certain that without US support Isreal would not have acheived the technological, military and economic advantages that it presently enjoys. What you have raised is causally related to US support, however, that relationship is the inverse of what you have suggested.... The US does not support Isreal because they are the regional powerhouse, Isreal is the regional power BECAUSE of US support.

Israel wasn't brought where it was because of American support to begin with -- I'm not sure where you're getting that from. Large amounts of the Jewish population went to Israel because they were aiming to escape the Nazi regime in the early 40s, many were denied however because Britain still was trying to keep the area under control which consequentially was labelled Palestine (This included Jordan), though it never became an official country. In 1948 the Jews who were settled in Israel (after the Trans-Jordan area was split into two different territories, one for Arabs and one for Jews) fought for themselves and stood up in a war against the surrounding arab nations. This prompted the creation of Israel, finally settled on its own.

The States were not involved in the creation of Israel, and they succeeded in acheiving independence on their own after Britain had split the land. Perhaps they received assistance from the U.S. in later years, but they certainly were settled on their own, and did not require American aid. Israel developed as a counry on its own, and the technology that is made there frequently stays there (no involvement from The States). They certainly would have managed on their own, but the support helped, no doubt about it. To say that Israel is only where it is now BECAUSE of the States is a bit far fetched though. There's been enough funding for other countries as well as the Palestinians settled in the Gaza Strip and other such areas from the U.S. (until a few weeks ago when Hamas was granted that government and support was revoked). You may as well say that all the other countries in the area reached where they are now because of Britain and the States -- but that wouldn't be valid; and in this case, neither is your point.

Sidenote: I'm glad we're actually capable of some level of intelligible argument/discussion rather than saying "OMG LETS BOMB THEIR ASSES" or something of the sort -- props to you for that Moral Hazard

quote:

Originally posted by Shade Israel wasn't brought where it was because of American support to begin with -- I'm not sure where you're getting that from. Large amounts of the Jewish population went to Israel because they were aiming to escape the Nazi regime in the early 40s, many were denied however because Britain still was trying to keep the area under control which consequentially was labelled Palestine (This included Jordan), though it never became an official country. In 1948 the Jews who were settled in Israel (after the Trans-Jordan area was split into two different territories, one for Arabs and one for Jews) fought for themselves and stood up in a war against the surrounding arab nations. This prompted the creation of Israel, finally settled on its own. The States were not involved in the creation of Israel, and they succeeded in acheiving independence on their own after Britain had split the land. Perhaps they received assistance from the U.S. in later years, but they certainly were settled on their own, and did not require American aid. Israel developed as a counry on its own, and the technology that is made there frequently stays there (no involvement from The States). They certainly would have managed on their own, but the support helped, no doubt about it. To say that Israel is only where it is now BECAUSE of the States is a bit far fetched though. There's been enough funding for other countries as well as the Palestinians settled in the Gaza Strip and other such areas from the U.S. (until a few weeks ago when Hamas was granted that government and support was revoked). You may as well say that all the other countries in the area reached where they are now because of Britain and the States -- but that wouldn't be valid; and in this case, neither is your point. Sidenote: I'm glad we're actually capable of some level of intelligible argument/discussion rather than saying "OMG LETS BOMB THEIR ASSES" or something of the sort -- props to you for that Moral Hazard

I wasn't stating that the US was instrumental in the formation of Isreal, I stated the US has supported them since prior to their formation. This cannot be disputed, the US and Isreal have had friendly relations since it's begining. The US has always had a role in providing military equipment and training to Isreal as well as financial assistance in the early years. Certainly you must agree that if not for the US and UK backing Isreal Egypt would have wiped them out in the 1950s. My point is this, Isreal's current power and prosperity was possible only through favourable conditions granted to them via their strong relationship with the US.

quote:

Originally posted by 7-4-7 american thought process dicates as only they think, if you own nukes then you MUST have a target in using them....the reality is that the entire rest of the world does not suffer from the same paranoia as the american admisitration does. To own a nuke, does not indicate the desire to use them, maybe the potential, but not the desire. america is fucked, and if Isreal continues to align themselves with them then they will perish as the americans will. american society, their economy, their mentality, and now their sanity is all treading on a thin line.

And the sad thing is that because of their sheer stupidity, our future looks VERY dim since we rely on these idiots way too much. Thats why Im not having kids lol

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard I wasn't stating that the US was instrumental in the formation of Isreal, I stated the US has supported them since prior to their formation. This cannot be disputed, the US and Isreal have had friendly relations since it's begining. The US has always had a role in providing military equipment and training to Isreal as well as financial assistance in the early years. Certainly you must agree that if not for the US and UK backing Isreal Egypt would have wiped them out in the 1950s. My point is this, Isreal's current power and prosperity was possible only through favourable conditions granted to them via their strong relationship with the US.

While I agree that they were useful in many things, I don't think you know what you're talking about with regards to the training. Israel's military training is COMPLETELY different and un-influenced by the American military. And my point with the reference to Israel's birth was that they managed on their own rather than with any aid, showing they can stand for themselves and didn't/don't require anyone. Israel might not be where they are now without U.S. support, but they definitely wouldn't be far. In my opinion, you have a very bad misconception about what the States have given Israel.

You know, this whole Iran nuke crisis would be completely avoided if the whole development operation is supervised and observed by the UN to assure the development would be for making electricity, and the supply manufactured is closely monitored to ensure it's going where it's supposed to. Work with the UN, and Iran will have their energy, and the rest of the world would worry less.

quote:

Originally posted by Abercrombie You know, this whole Iran nuke crisis would be completely avoided if the whole development operation is supervised and observed by the UN to assure the development would be for making electricity, and the supply manufactured is closely monitored to ensure it's going where it's supposed to. Work with the UN, and Iran will have their energy, and the rest of the world would worry less.

But what about other countries that dont comply then? israel STILL denies that they have nukes while everyone knows that they do. Why doesnt the UN go after them? Iran isnt even close to being at their level yet. Like every professor tells us, these problems have to be solved from the ROOT of the cause, these "short term" preemptive fixes are not going to do anyone any good in the future.

quote:

Originally posted by mikester69 But what about other countries that dont comply then? israel STILL denies that they have nukes while everyone knows that they do. Why doesnt the UN go after them? Iran isnt even close to being at their level yet. Like every professor tells us, these problems have to be solved from the ROOT of the cause, these "short term" preemptive fixes are not going to do anyone any good in the future.

Because other countries aren't pledging to destroy other countries, we've been through that already. It's too high a price for Iran to pay just to proove your point.

its a fucked up world we live in.

If Iran does make a nuclear weapon and they do use it against any country. The thing they have to understand, that will destroy any more trust people have even with the kindest muslim people on this planet.

One thing I can say, if Iran does start a war. No one will win. I mean no one.

quote:

Originally posted by Abercrombie Because other countries aren't pledging to destroy other countries, we've been through that already. It's too high a price for Iran to pay just to proove your point.

when was the last time Iran attacked another country?when was the last time Iran invaded a country?
They have no intentions of attacking anyone.The U.S however has distabilized the region and dont forget who was the first country that has used nukes in the past.

If Iran is getting nukes I say good for them.since this is all for self defence and by having nukes it will make it less likely for the U.S to attack them.They have been getting pushed around by the U.S many times and now they are saying enough is enough.

quote:

Originally posted by jesteraver its a fucked up world we live in.

why because Iran has nukes?
I think we live in a fucked world with the U.S in charge and all those nukes sitting in their backyard.

quote:

If Iran does make a nuclear weapon and they do use it against any country. The thing they have to understand, that will destroy any more trust people have even with the kindest muslim people on this planet.

stop listening to the media please.This is all another bush admin propaganda.They are playing the whole fear game once again and it is working unfortunatly.

quote:

One thing I can say, if Iran does start a war. No one will win. I mean no one.

show me some proof that Iran is going to war.and dont tell me Isreal because I guarantee you that it is all talk and they will not attack them unless they get attacked first.


Bottom line is that this is all about Isreal an they are not the innocent ones.They are the ones with nukes and they are the ones that are denying of having them.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer why because Iran has nukes? I think we live in a fucked world with the U.S in charge and all those nukes sitting in their backyard. stop listening to the media please.This is all another bush admin propaganda.They are playing the whole fear game once again and it is working unfortunatly. show me some proof that Iran is going to war.and dont tell me Isreal because I guarantee you that it is all talk and they will not attack them unless they get attacked first. Bottom line is that this is all about Isreal an they are not the innocent ones.They are the ones with nukes and they are the ones that are denying of having them.

It doesn't matter if it's all talk or not; the moment something of that sort has been said then a country shouldn't be granted the opportunity to even CONSIDER doing anything with the nukes. The issue at hand isn't with Israel either -- the topic of them having nukes is completely different. If you'd like I'll write things your way, "Prove to me that they have them or that they'll use them". That's just as valid as your point, perhaps moreso because no threats were made. You have to understand that whether someone means it or not, a threat like that on behalf of anyone in any developed country can potentially get the person a huge law suit/arrested etc. etc. "The bottom line" is that threats are not tolerated by international law, and Iran is no exception to it though they constantly seem to be stepping around it without any worry.

From what I know USA is the only country who has used nuclear atomic bomb in a real war, so what are they bitching about? Just look what�s between Afghanistan and Iraq, something I'm sure Bush and his administration (read family and friends) are interested in.

Hey guys, im Iran. I noticed in the last little while that both my neighbors have been suddenly occupied by that guy across the other side of the city. Im going to protect myself, becuase these new guys seem to REALLY love what my neighbors posses.

.... and it becomes a reality.

quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King Hey guys, im Iran. I noticed in the last little while that both my neighbors have been suddenly occupied by that guy across the other side of the city. Im going to protect myself, becuase these new guys seem to REALLY love what my neighbors posses.

What? Dirt?

Don't say 'oil' because you know damn well that the oil fields were immediately given to the Iraqi people after Saddam was ousted...

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r Don't say 'oil' because you know damn well that the oil fields were immediately given to the Iraqi people after Saddam was ousted...

It amazes me how blind some people are.The oil and the money is going straight to Halliburton if you didnt know.

If they money was going to the Iraqi people then why are these people living in shitholes with no water and electricity?why are the living conditions so poor?WHERE IS THE MONEY GOING?

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer It amazes me how blind some people are.The oil and the money is going straight to Halliburton if you didnt know. If they money was going to the Iraqi people then why are these people living in shitholes with no water and electricity?why are the living conditions so poor?WHERE IS THE MONEY GOING?

Some facts:
KBR (Kellogg, Brown and Root), a subsidiary of Halliburton, was awarded the contract.

quote:

Activities in Iraq The United States army hired Kellogg, Brown and Root to provide housing for approximately 100,000 soldiers in Iraq in a contract worth $200 million, based on a long-term contract signed in December 2001 under the Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP). Other LOGCAP orders have included a pre-invasion order to repair oil facilities in Iraq; $28.2 million to build prisoner-of-war camps; and $40.8 million to accommodate the Iraqi Survey Group, which was deployed after the war to find hidden weapons of mass destruction. In the competition for the current LOGCAP contract, the Army Corps of Engineers asked competitors to develop a contingency plan for extinguishing oil well fires in Iraq. The Army chose KBR's plan in November 2001, though it remains classified. On March 24, 2003, the Army announced publicly that KBR had been awarded five task orders in Iraq potentially worth $7 billion to implement the plan. One of the task orders, obtained by the Center for Public Integrity, required KBR to "procure, import and deliver" fuels to Iraq. In fact, the contract was awarded more than two weeks earlier, without submission for public bids or congressional notification. In their response to Congressional inquiries, Army officials said they determined that extinguishing oil fires fell under the range of services provided under LOGCAP, meaning that KBR could deploy quickly and without additional security clearances. They also said that the contract's classified status prevented open bidding. The Army's actions came under fire from Congressman Henry Waxman, who, along with John Dingell, asked the General Accounting Office - the investigative arm of Congress to investigate whether the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Pentagon were circumventing government contracting procedures and favoring companies with ties to the Bush administration. They also accused KBR of inflating prices for importing gasoline into Iraq. In June 2003, the Army announced that it would replace KBR's oil-infrastructure contract with two public-bid contracts worth a maximum total of $1 billion to be awarded in October. However, the Army announced in October it would expand the contract ceiling to $2 billion and the solicitation period to December. As of Oct. 16, KBR had performed nearly $1.6 billion worth of work. In the meantime, KBR has subcontracted with two companies to work on the project: Boots & Coots, an oil field emergency-response firm that Halliburton works in partnership with (CEO Jerry L. Winchester was a former Halliburton manager) and Wild Well Control, both of Texas.

Other than the contracts being under dispute, who else would they hire to fix Iraq's dilapidated oil fields after 30 years of neglect?
We can't expect them to work for free and was obvious the Iraqis didn't have the experience.
Speaking of neglect, after 30 years under Saddam's thumb you'd think they'd have SOME sort of infrastructure to fix.
We can't blame the coalition for it's entire destruction, that's just a ludicrious arguement...

On the flip-side there were a lot of shady paperwork (or none to speak of) in the dealings of awarding of contracts.
There's a lot of clean up and still a lot of questions that the auditing is bringing to light of this whole situation.
No doubt that some is/was funding the insurgents...

It'll take time my friend, time.
Things aren't going to happen overnight and the auditing will catch up eventually as well, it always does...

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.