TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Iran: US please invade us

Iran: US please invade us

quote:

Iran Ready to Share Nuclear Technology By EDITH M. LEDERER, Associated Press Writer 50 minutes ago UNITED NATIONS - Iran is willing to provide nuclear technology to other Muslim states, Iran's hard-line president said Thursday, notching up his rhetoric as his regime rejects international pressure to cut back its atomic program. ADVERTISEMENT click here President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made the comment after talking with Turkey's prime minister during a gathering of world leaders at the United Nations, Iran's state-run Islamic Republic News Agency said. Ahmadinejad repeated promises that Iran will not develop nuclear weapons, the report said. Then he added: "Iran is ready to transfer nuclear know-how to the Islamic countries due to their need." Iran has said it is determined to continue processing uranium so its nuclear program can be self-sufficient in meeting its own reactor fuel needs. It insists the program is intended only to generate electricity and denies having any ambition to build atomic weapons. The United States and others have accused Iran of trying to develop atomic arms in violation of its commitments under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Europeans have been uneasy since it was revealed Iran kept parts of its nuclear program secret for years from U.N. inspectors. Ahmadinejad's statement came just four days before the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency, is scheduled to discuss Iran's resumption of uranium conversion � which produces material that can be used either for reactor fuel or for nuclear bombs. His comments were likely raised during a Thursday afternoon meeting of the foreign ministers from the three European countries that have been negotiating with Iran on the nuclear issue � Britain, France and Germany � and Iran's new foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, and its top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani. The European ministers met separately before they were joined about 15 minutes later by the Iranians in an office provided by Deputy Secretary-General Louise Frechette, European diplomats involved in the talks said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. Afterward, officials wouldn't say what was discussed. Germany's U.N. ambassador, Gunter Pleuger, said only that the session was a preparation for a meeting later in the day between Secretary-General Kofi Annan and Ahmadinejad. Pleuger said representatives of the three EU nations also would attend that meeting. The United States and European countries warned last week that Iran was running out of time to freeze uranium processing or face referral to the U.N. Security Council for consideration of punitive sanctions. However, diplomats and government officials in several European capitals said Thursday the U.S.-European push to take Iran before the council was meeting strong opposition and could be postponed. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice hinted at that possibility Wednesday. The officials in Europe, who agreed to discuss the delicate behind-the-scenes negotiations only if granted anonymity, said more than a dozen members of the IAEA's 35-nation board opposed making a decision about referral at their meeting Monday in Vienna, Austria. Ahmadinejad has urged the United Nations not to bend to U.S. pressure to punish Iran. "The raison d'etre of the United Nations is to promote global peace and tranquility," he told the General Assembly on Wednesday. "Therefore, any license for pre-emptive measures which are essentially based on gauging intentions rather than objective facts ... is a blatant contradiction to the very foundation of the United Nations and the letter and the spirit of its charter." The European Union has taken the lead in trying to persuade Iran to halt uranium processing in exchange for economic help and a guaranteed supply of fuel for nuclear reactors. Iran rejected that proposal, arguing the nonproliferation treaty gives it the right to run a peaceful nuclear program. Ahmadinejad is expected to announced new Iranian proposals at the U.N. summit aimed at defusing the faceoff over its atomic operations. From AP http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050915...ea/iran_nuclear

Durkah durak!

Oh wait what's this you say? You will share non-weapon nuclear technology with muslim states? Yes, yes, I am quiet sure you can fool the Europeans again....

Re: Iran: US please invade us

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Durkah durak! Oh wait what's this you say? You will share non-weapon nuclear technology with muslim states? Yes, yes, I am quiet sure you can fool the Europeans again....

Yeah, just like Saddam did!

Seriously, you cant seriously think that the US should invade Iran, doing the same misstake again?

LMAO is all i could say.

Re: Iran: US please invade us

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Durkah durak! Oh wait what's this you say? You will share non-weapon nuclear technology with muslim states? Yes, yes, I am quiet sure you can fool the Europeans again....

There aren't any Muslim states apart from Iran! Maybe Algeria? Anyway, do you mean Arab states? If so, aren't they all allied to America?

Re: Re: Iran: US please invade us

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley There aren't any Muslim states apart from Iran! Maybe Algeria? Anyway, do you mean Arab states? If so, aren't they all allied to America?

I'm confused by this statement? Arabs doesn't mean Muslims and Muslim doesn't include Arabs

yay another unjustified war ....

Re: Re: Re: Iran: US please invade us

quote:

Originally posted by Lepanto I'm confused by this statement? Arabs doesn't mean Muslims and Muslim doesn't include Arabs

Arab does not mean Muslim

quote:

Iran is ready to transfer nuclear know-how to the Islamic countries due to their needs.

Needs? Such as?

I've been told by someone who's kept a watchful eye on the news lately that an invasion of Iran is almost a certainty. Of course, that's his opinion, but basically what he was suggesting is that, just as with Iraq, the U.S. will invade Iran simply for it's oil reserves. But knowing that the general public of the U.S. (and no doubt, the UK) will protest about such an action, the public will need "stirring up a bit".

So, his theory goes, the London bombings of 7/7 occured, but they weren't carried out by Muslim extremists, but were, in fact, completely set up (by the government) to perpuate the general public's hate for Islam in general. This means that should the U.S./UK governments decide to invade Iran, they'll have a legitimate "reason", and the majority of the public will then support them in their actions.

Like I say, that's just his theory, and he is Muslim himself, so he may be a little biased. But if 9/11 was a set up to perpetuate the hatred of Islam, and gain the public's support for an invasion of Iraq, who's to say that they won't pull the same stunt again?

it wouldnt surprise me that Iran is next in the list of the countries to invade, but i doubt it if we invade them all hell is going to brake lose. in my opinion were freakin losing the war in Iraq, i dont see that much progress in the sense we are stopping the resistance(insurgency). well clearly many muslims think that London planned those bombings, and i know because i have many muslim friends that say that they even say that Al Qaeda dosent exist and that it was made up by the U.S and that OBL was not responsible for the 9/11 attacks the problem is that this people use their own sources and just dont follow some news that the media says and come up with their own conclusion/theories, sometimes they say shiet that makes sense and maked you think but in the other hand is not that credible( its like wtf are you saying)

quote:

Originally posted by Streakfury Needs? Such as?

Energy, Defense

Re: Re: Re: Re: Iran: US please invade us

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Arab does not mean Muslim

really? I didn't know that...psych..what was your post refering to though?

lol they gonna invade Iran with what army exactly?

ok on the serious part now,I hope they try to invade Iran because this time they will get fuck in the ass like never before oops wait thats already happening in Iraq.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Iran: US please invade us

quote:

Originally posted by Lepanto really? I didn't know that...psych..what was your post refering to though?

Seriously?!

You thought Arab meant Muslim?!

Jeez!

No Arab is a race, the one that originates from the Middle East. Arabs are Jews, Christians and Muslims of the Middle East. Another word for Arab is Semite (which is where the phrase 'anti-Semitic' comes from and why some people argue over it on here saying it doesn't just apply to Jewish people but prejudice against Arabs as well) On a side note, pan Arab-nationalism (the dominant ideology of the Middle East prior to this new era where Islamism is a serious challanger) has its origins with Christian Arabs

As for what I meant in my post...

quote:

There aren't any Muslim states apart from Iran! Maybe Algeria? Anyway, do you mean Arab states? If so, aren't they all allied to America?

A Muslim state would be like Iran (or Afghanistan under the Taliban) ie one ruled by the religious clergy. I know Algeria had a religious revolution so they may be the same. All the other Middle Eastern states are either ruled by monarchies (eg the Gulf States) or are ruled by an Arab nationalist regime (eg Syria and Egypt) or are democracies like Lebanon (or Iraq supposedly!) None of these states are 'Muslim states' they are 'Arab states' and have a long history of kicking the shit out of the religious factions of their countries (usually by means of mass death) and are in the whole allied to the United States

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer lol they gonna invade Iran with what army exactly?

Tats true, the US simply does not have the manpower to mount another Iraq-style campaign for quite a number of years. However, military action against Iran is likely to revolve around airstrikes against their nuclear facilities.

quote:

ok on the serious part now,I hope they try to invade Iran because this time they will get fuck in the ass like never before oops wait thats already happening in Iraq.

Well when 1000s are dying at the hands of American bombs I shall quote you on that!

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Well when 1000s are dying at the hands of American bombs I shall quote you on that!

Well, thousands already have in Iraq, so time to quote him.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Well, thousands already have in Iraq, so time to quote him.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Tats true, the US simply does not have the manpower to mount another Iraq-style campaign for quite a number of years. However, military action against Iran is likely to revolve around airstrikes against their nuclear facilities.

I doubt that since Iran will 1. launch attacks to Iraq (lots of Americans,easy target).or cause an uprising there since they have about 60% of the people there behind them.
2.They will start launching Missiles to Isreal.

3.It will hurt them internationally.More countries would be against them simply because again they are making bullshit up like what they did in the Iraq war(WMD story).

I mean there is alot of things to loose here for the U.S. but since we all know that Bush and his admin have no brains,it simply wouldnt matter to them when comes down to the consequences or the aftermath of their attacks against Iran.


But we'll just have to wait and see what happens.you'd think Bush cant fuck up anymore or would do less at least after Iraq or Katrina but this man is all about his paople and peoples freedom.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer lol they gonna invade Iran with what army exactly? ok on the serious part now,I hope they try to invade Iran because this time they will get fuck in the ass like never before oops wait thats already happening in Iraq.

+me

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer I doubt that since Iran will 1. launch attacks to Iraq (lots of Americans,easy target).or cause an uprising there since they have about 60% of the people there behind them. 2.They will start launching Missiles to Isreal. 3.It will hurt them internationally.More countries would be against them simply because again they are making bullshit up like what they did in the Iraq war(WMD story). I mean there is alot of things to loose here for the U.S. but since we all know that Bush and his admin have no brains,it simply wouldnt matter to them when comes down to the consequences or the aftermath of their attacks against Iran. But we'll just have to wait and see what happens.you'd think Bush cant fuck up anymore or would do less at least after Iraq or Katrina but this man is all about his paople and peoples freedom.

I think a missile strike on Iran's nuclear facilities is the most likely option if America chooses to attack Iran

However, in response to your concerns...

1. Retaliation by Iran would result in more attacks on other targets other than the nuclear facilities. It is extremely likely that this scenario would be taken into consideration if America did decide to attack and would perhaps result in simultaneous strikes on Iran's wider military aparatus. I know Iran has ballistic missiles but I am not sure what the lauch facilities are. They only have short range BMs and if they are not in concrete silos could be destroyed in a first strike. Certainly their conventional forces could take quite a battering by airstrikes/missile strikes. I'm not sure Iran would risk retaliating as they would almost certainly suffer the same fate as Saddam's regime. Also, oppressive regimes tend not to be too popular with their own citizens and any weakening (in this case it would be a severe weakening) of it's security aparatus could result in much civil strife against the government should America itself not decide to topple the regime.

2. Also dragging Israel into a conflict could have even worse results for the Iranian regime as Israel would go full out on the offensive and they have nukes (so the theory of assured destruction would come into play)

3. I really don't think they care! And unfortunately I think they can afford not to care!

I think the point about the effects of attacking Iran will have on the Iraqis is a very valid point and would certainly fuck up everything they are working towards in that country. I think that, and the fact they simply do not have the manpower for another conflict will mean Iran is safe (ish!) from a military attack. I would expect sanctions if anything (seeing as in the end it turned out they worked a treat in preventing Saddam from building any WMDs!!!)

The high oil prices have resulted in Iran building up it's financial reserves just a tad. This will mean Iran can afford to close it's oil pumps just long enough to create another oil shock and put further strain on western economies.

Secondly Iran has developed the Shahaab(Persian word for Shooting Star) missiles that can reach as far as Israel and right into Iraq. If attacked, the Iranian government will most likely terget oil wells in the region in order to further increase the oil crisis.

This could have very devestating results!

quote:

Originally posted by arnoldjch it wouldnt surprise me that Iran is next in the list of the countries to invade, but i doubt it if we invade them all hell is going to brake lose. in my opinion were freakin losing the war in Iraq, i dont see that much progress in the sense we are stopping the resistance(insurgency). well clearly many muslims think that London planned those bombings, and i know because i have many muslim friends that say that they even say that Al Qaeda dosent exist and that it was made up by the U.S and that OBL was not responsible for the 9/11 attacks the problem is that this people use their own sources and just dont follow some news that the media says and come up with their own conclusion/theories, sometimes they say shiet that makes sense and maked you think but in the other hand is not that credible( its like wtf are you saying)

god your a tool.

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