Military acton against Iran.

2006-06-03 06:38:14

#1

yuck7777: Member; +12|7003|USA

In my opinion its time for the US to let others do the job. Let someone else take the losses and put up with the news media spin and of course It would be nice to sit back and watch what happens instead of having American troops taking the flak. So what do you think?

Last edited by yuck7777 (2006-06-03 07:57:43)

2006-06-03 06:59:15

#2

Major_Spittle: Banned; +276|6883|United States of America

I don't think that Europe cares if they have nukes or WMDs. They would just wait until Israel is destroyed and say Israel provoked it. Then when a country in Europe gets hit or the worlds oil supply destabilizes and their economy crashes they will all point their fingers at the US a say it is the US's fault some how.

BUT I do say the US just needs to take care of its own back yard. Put the saved money towards alternative fuel infrastructure (Ethanol) and technology. Just protect our borders and don't let any Nukes/long range missiles in the Western Hemisphere. I feel bad for Britain, and the people of Europe who actually do comprehend the things that are going on in the Middle East and Europe. Europe is a nice place, but not so unlike America there is a portion of the population that live in a warm fuzzy place void of logic and reason.

BTW, nice post Yuck-O. +1 to you.

Last edited by Major_Spittle (2006-06-03 06:59:54)

2006-06-03 14:17:22

#3

kr@cker: Bringin' Sexy Back!; +581|6778|Southeastern USA

I'm torn, on one hand I want the EU and the UN to handle it, just so they can see what they've been bitching about, but on the other hand I'm rather attached to that whole living thing. The UN is impotent and should be abolished as they aren't capable of anything more than writing nasty letters to people or trading food for oil stock vouchers, and I don't think the EU would be able to quit fighting with itself long enough to come up with a cohesive plan. You would have a few countries like the UK and Turkey taking the initiative and wanting to actually do something, while others (I suppose I shouldn't name examples in the name of civility) would want to talk to Iran for a few decades while they polish their warhead manufacturing techniques. I say revive Reagans "Star Wars" plan so at least we know North America isn't going to suffer due to someone else's catterwalling and backbiting.

2006-06-03 14:21:08

#4

herrr_smity: Member; +156|6856|space command ur anus

Major_Spittle wrote:
I don't think that Europe cares if they have nukes or WMDs. They would just wait until Israel is destroyed and say Israel provoked it.

well Israel is to a certain degree provoking Iran, by having nukes themselves. What gives the Israelis a right to have nukes.

2006-06-03 14:26:55

#5

teehee1988: Member; +5|6866|Birmingham, UK

erm ok why do we need to deal with them at all?
they have a right to nuclear weapons, you cannot say that they are not allowed them and the US are. Arguebale the US are far more dangerous than Iran. So why should America have nukes???

2006-06-03 14:35:40

#6

yerded: Bertinator; +255|6865|Westminster, California

I've been doing a lot of thinking about this. Irans nut case president is not a popular president and reflects poorly on the Persian culture. Fact; the Persians have historically had mostly friendly relations with the Jews. Fact; He is not a popular leader among the Iranian youth who have one of the highest levels of education in the Middle East. These people have a long and proud tradition of culture and soceity. He is trying to stir up international pressure on Iran to arrouse nationalistic pride and united the counrty.
This Iranian regime is doomed from within, I say; sanctions and political warfare will do the job here. The people want to be free and they are smart enough to make it happen with a little help.
Nuclear energy should be a world wide option because it will help preserve the fosil fuel base.

Last edited by yerded (2006-06-03 14:37:05)

2006-06-03 14:41:49

#7

teehee1988: Member; +5|6866|Birmingham, UK

ok lets think
bigger army, bigger navy, bigger airforce.It has large stocks of both money and nuclear weapons. Has taken part in agressive actions openly without UN backing in the past years. Also because America is such a hge superpower no-one would want to retailiate against her. Whereas more countries would be willing to participate in military action against Iran. Therefore America is potentially a lot more dangerous than Iran.

Someone deleted the post this was replying too...how rude

Last edited by teehee1988 (2006-06-03 14:42:25)

2006-06-03 14:45:26

#8

gator45666: Member; +6|6857|St.Petersburg, Fl.

The UN couldn't handle a bunch of Girl Scouts on their Period Let alone the EU no offense to the people of the EU

2006-06-03 14:46:23

#9

GunSlinger OIF II: Banned.; +1,860|6872

Iran has missles with the ability to reach any country in Europe

Let other European countries battle test their militaries.

Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2006-06-03 14:47:50)

2006-06-03 15:01:32

#10

Major_Spittle: Banned; +276|6883|United States of America

herrr_smity wrote:
Major_Spittle wrote:
I don't think that Europe cares if they have nukes or WMDs. They would just wait until Israel is destroyed and say Israel provoked it.
well Israel is to a certain degree provoking Iran, by having nukes themselves. What gives the Israelis a right to have nukes.

I agree, Nuke the Jews because they have nukes that they have never used. Dat be Un Wat De Furor Wishes.

US has Nukes, Britian has Nuke, Russia, China...... Does that make them a threat (or provoking Iran) and therefore Iran should have the right to just nuke them when capable????

clue: Muslims tend to hate Jews. They say so openly, at least the Muslim I have known.
clue #2: When enough Muslims hate somebody bad things happen to them.
clue #3: I am not Jewish, this is an unbias observation.

2006-06-03 15:03:33

#11

kr@cker: Bringin' Sexy Back!; +581|6778|Southeastern USA

Nations like the US, UK, Israel, etc. are cool with nukes because they don't run around saying things like "Monaco should be wiped off the face of the map!!". In theory, it would be nice if no one had nukes. Western governments that have nukes only use them as a deterrent measure, mutually assured destruction. "He won't fire his because he knows I'll fire mine". Dictators and theocrats are generally less stable, and if the Iranian people do successfully rise up against "Pres" Ahminoielfj;saoidfjo, who's to say he won't say "If I can't have it no one will" and press the button.

2006-06-03 15:10:23

#12

yerded: Bertinator; +255|6865|Westminster, California

yup, what he said.

2006-06-03 15:14:38

#13

teehee1988: Member; +5|6866|Birmingham, UK

so because the dont say it, that's ok???
bas w countries dont say "Monaco should be wiped off the face of the map!!". etc
however they could easily be planning and thinking about it
so they're still just a threat
and to be honest a bigger threat in many cases.

2006-06-03 15:16:04

#14

GunSlinger OIF II: Banned.; +1,860|6872

could you people honestly, truly trust Iran with nuclear weapon capabilties. Could you? Wouyld you risk the lives of your friends and loved ones for a religiously fundamental nation full of zealots and outspoken terrorists to have the ability to incinerate everything you know to exist? I could goto sleep at night knowing Israel has nuclear capabilities. despite being completely surrounded by enemies, they have yet to use that option. You think if Iran has its own unsupervised ability to use nuclear technology, that they would use it responsibly? Iran is one of the biggest contributors to terrorists organizations in Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and who knows where else. If you honestly believe they could be trusted, i dont know what else to say.

2006-06-03 15:19:03

#15

teehee1988: Member; +5|6866|Birmingham, UK

actually i bet the US is one of the biggest funders to terroists....taliban...iraq.....the list is endless...
im not saying that iran can be trusted, but what i am saying is we should not do anything about it
because that is not the right thing to do. To be honest i dont think iran are that stupid to use nuclear weapons...

2006-06-03 15:20:56

#16

GunSlinger OIF II: Banned.; +1,860|6872

teehee1988 wrote:
actually i bet the US is one of the biggest funders to terroists....taliban...iraq.....the list is endless...
im not saying that iran can be trusted, but what i am saying is we should not do anything about it
because that is not the right thing to do. To be honest i dont think iran are that stupid to use nuclear weapons...

well tell me how nuclear winter is like over europe

2006-06-03 15:21:59

#17

yerded: Bertinator; +255|6865|Westminster, California

They'll find out if they sit on their blimey arses!

2006-06-03 15:24:02

#18

GunSlinger OIF II: Banned.; +1,860|6872

its like trusting a kindergarden class to a registered pedophile

2006-06-03 15:24:24

#19

teehee1988: Member; +5|6866|Birmingham, UK

ok if it comes i wil
pre-emptive stirkes do not put you in the right. You cant attack someone for doing nothing wrong. How is that right??

2006-06-03 15:26:17

#20

GunSlinger OIF II: Banned.; +1,860|6872

teehee1988 wrote:
ok if it comes i wil
pre-emptive stirkes do not put you in the right. You cant attack someone for doing nothing wrong. How is that right??

Iran is doing something wrong right now by ignoring UN demands. What the fuck do they gotta do, kill 800,000 israelies in one blast for you to support military action?

thats 800,000 men, women and children that just might have disagreed

Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2006-06-03 15:27:01)

2006-06-03 15:28:50

#21

teehee1988: Member; +5|6866|Birmingham, UK

but why are UN demands right?????
why isn't irans demands right
what makes the UN's demands any better than what iran wants?????

2006-06-03 15:30:33

#22

GunSlinger OIF II: Banned.; +1,860|6872

i guess you didnt read post #14. unless for some reason you think actively supporting suicide bombers is acceptable for a national government.

2006-06-03 15:31:10

#23

yerded: Bertinator; +255|6865|Westminster, California

Would you trust this man or his friends with nukes???!!!

https://img101.imageshack.us/img101/2378/afghanistan2sffabd101200605241.jpg

Yes, I am going for maximum mileage out of the Haji and his girlfriend pix

Last edited by yerded (2006-06-03 15:35:48)

2006-06-03 15:32:56

#24

kr@cker: Bringin' Sexy Back!; +581|6778|Southeastern USA

Even in your own UK there isn't any one person that could initiate a nuke exchange. What do you think that Tony, the Queen, Parli's top jobbers, and the ministry brass are going to get too drunk playing strip poker and bust out their launch codes for a pretty fireworks display? My basic point is, we have safeguards, Kim Jong-Il doesn't.

2006-06-03 15:34:41

#25

teehee1988: Member; +5|6866|Birmingham, UK

im not saying it's right or wrong
im saying it is a different opinion to yours, they are fighting for what they belive in. The are fighting for it in a new and different way. I can't say whether it is right or wrong not up for me to decide. And national government supporing contraversial schemes......hmmm what have the US done?? supported the taliban, gave Iraq weapons in the Iran-Iraqi war. In his day mandela was considered a terroist, now he isn't. How do you know in many years opinions woint change in the same way, when people actually stop being ignorant and start thinking WHY these people are doing this. Anyway its midnight im going to bed

Let the U.N handle it and send UN troops.	38%	38% - 19
Let the European armys do the job.	34%	34% - 17
Let the US do it.	26%	26% - 13
Total: 49

BF2S Forums Military acton against Iran.

Poll

Major_Spittle wrote:

herrr_smity wrote:

Major_Spittle wrote:

teehee1988 wrote:

teehee1988 wrote:

Board footer