Be a Supporter!

Why Iran should be invaded

  • 8,919 Views
  • 166 Replies
New Topic Respond to this Topic
Korriken
Korriken
  • Member since: Jun. 17, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Gamer
Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 08:38 AM Reply

Before the flaming begins, pay attention.

1. Iran is working on enriching uranium. they say its for peaceful nuclear fuel, but this is the same nation that is actively funding groups that perform Jihadist attacks (to hell with calling it "terrorism") on non Islamic soil.

2. Iran's supreme leader (their "president" is just a puppet) is an extreme Islamic Ayatollah, who of course would love to see nothing more than a completely Islamic world. They also believe that to die in a war against the infidel gets you sent straight to heaven.

3. Iran wants Israel gone. They can't accomplish this with conventional means, Israel has better technology and is back by America and parts of Europe. If Iran were to try and invade they would be obliterated and Iran would be brought to its knees. however, with a nuclear missile, they have a lot more leverage.

4. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been visiting anti American countries in South America. why? to sell them oil? of course not. Venezuela produces its own oil. to make the world see their allies? pfft. Venezuela's army is about as strong as a foam noodle in a sword fight. no. The real reason why Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is in places like Venezuela is to see about setting up missiles sites there to point them at America. Once they have nuclear missiles, they get them there, point them at America and say, "you mess with us, we launch the nukes!"

Of course, once this happens, America has 2 choices, 1. try to destroy those nuclear sites, 2. be Iran's bitch. Not that it would matter, Once Iran has nuclear capabilities, so will Al Qaeda, The Taliban, and other Jihadist groups. why? simple. setting off a conventional car bomb might kill a dozen or so people, but a small nuke would wipe out thousands and leave destructive fallout.

It would be in the world's best interest to invade Iran, destroy their navy, destroy the enrichment centers, and either kill their scientists or force them to defect. Toppling the government is optional.


I'm not crazy, everyone else is.

Cootie
Cootie
  • Member since: Jul. 7, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 43
Movie Buff
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 09:22 AM Reply

You can't just attack countries and start wars all willy nilly because you are paranoid. We have to have concrete information that a country plans to attack us before we do anything like this. America is warmongering enough as it is. I wish we were like the good old days when we attempted to dodge entire World Wars.


For I am and forever shall be... a master ruseman.

BBS Signature
lapis
lapis
  • Member since: Aug. 11, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 26
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 09:39 AM Reply

Required reading material for everyone who thinks he knows something about Iran's motivations.

At 1/21/12 08:38 AM, Korriken wrote: this is the same nation that is actively funding groups that perform Jihadist attacks (to hell with calling it "terrorism") on non Islamic soil.

Which is so much worse than your good friend Israel which is actively funding groups that perform Jihadist attacks (to hell with calling it "terrorism") on Iranian soil (and saying that they're CIA but that's not even the worst part of it).

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been visiting anti American countries in South America.

Yeah, and why could Iran's foreign policy possibly be anti-American? Could it be because of the CIA-backed coup in '53 in which the US used its money and influence in Iran to replace the most democratic government that Iran ever had with a tyrannical Shah whose only virtue was that he was sympathetic to US oil interests? Could it be because of the shit tons of cash that the US gave to Saddam Hussain to fight post-revolution Iran, cash that was probably used in part to develop chemical weapons (you know, WMDs) that were used against Iranian soldiers and civilians? To some extent, certainly.

But the biggest reason for Iran to currently oppose the US politically was the moment in 2002 when Bush decided to brand Iran as one of the members of the illustrious Axis of Evil, together with Iraq and North Korea (Iran at the time even had a reformist president!). When a year later one of these three countries was invaded, Iran knew that whenever the US occupation of Iraq was (successfully?) completed, Iran would be next on the list for regime change, as North Korea already had nukes. So there only two things Iran could do to extend the sovereignty it had over its own country and people:

1) try to stall the Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan and bog down the forces stationed there so that they could not be used for an invasion of Iran, mainly by providing arms and aid to local terrorists and insurgents.
2) develop nuclear weapons in order to at least be as unattractive of a target for invasion as North Korea.

We've seen both in recent years.

-----------

"Before the flaming begins", can you at least agree with me that one motivation for Iran to be developing nukes at the moment is the COMPLTELY LEGITIMATE desire to defend their national sovereignty from US/Western imperialism? After that we can talk about them crazy Jihadists and their intention to spread Sharia law all over the world.

It would be in the world's best interest to invade Iran, destroy their navy, destroy the enrichment centers, and either kill their scientists or force them to defect.

Yegh. What's really sad is that there really is a decent probability that tens of thousands of innocent civilians are going to get slaughtered because US politicians want to pander to people like you.

Toppling the government is optional.

And if carried out, what would you replace them with? What's painfully ironic about this is that if fully democratic elections were held in Iran, the liberals would actually have some shot at winning a majority, unlike so many other countries in the region. Invading the country is going to set the whole 'Green' movement that was active during the last round of elections in Iran back two decades, if not kill it off completely. That is, unless the liberals ally themselves with the Jihadists to drive the Americans out of the country.

Might as well continue with the sanctions and hope that the liberals get so popular that they replace the ayatollahs on their own. Alternatively, there'll be another anti-US coup twenty years from now and another war forty years from now. That is, if the US is at that point still financially able to fight wars overseas and not completely broke after the US invasions of Egypt and Pakistan that are probably also going to occur in the next two decades because people like you were screaming for them.


BBS Signature
BUTANE
BUTANE
  • Member since: May. 9, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 22
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 09:52 AM Reply

At 1/21/12 08:38 AM, Korriken wrote: Before the flaming begins, pay attention.

The real reason why Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is in places like Venezuela is to see about setting up missiles sites there to point them at America. Once they have nuclear missiles, they get them there, point them at America and say, "you mess with us, we launch the nukes!"

It would be in the world's best interest to invade Iran, destroy their navy, destroy the enrichment centers, and either kill their scientists or force them to defect. Toppling the government is optional.

There hasn't been a single headline about Iran setting up nuclear missiles in south American Countries, you completely made that up.

As far as the "what if" goes, if Iran does make a nuclear weapon (even though they claim they are enriching uranium for peaceful means), it doesn't really matter. Iran is a country with a functioning government. The thing about nuclear states is that they want to preserve their state and not be destroyed (otherwise why put in so much money and effort to enrich uranium). If Iran obtains nuclear weapons, it will be nothing more than a deterrent. Nobody will attempt to invade Iran if it has a nuclear weapon pointed at Israel. Also, Iran will not attack any western countries because it knows it will be wiped out (mutually assured destruction).


BBS Signature
Zultra
Zultra
  • Member since: Jan. 12, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 11:33 AM Reply

I agree entirely, you will tell if Iran has a nuke is if America threatens to invade when Iran gets a nuke the US will back down if they don't they will invade, If I was the president of Iran I would get a nuke ASAP.

Korriken
Korriken
  • Member since: Jun. 17, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Gamer
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 12:33 PM Reply

WHY Iran hates America is irrelevant. the fact that they do and are gaining the capabilities to challenge much larger nations is a problem. We have our interests, they have theirs. Allowing them to gain an advantage that we can prevent is unacceptable. Letting them acquire a weapon they can leverage, or even use against us to cause mass destruction is a major problem.

It would be in the best interests of the west to shut them down before they gain the ability.


I'm not crazy, everyone else is.

Korriken
Korriken
  • Member since: Jun. 17, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Gamer
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 12:48 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 09:52 AM, BUTANE wrote:
There hasn't been a single headline about Iran setting up nuclear missiles in south American Countries, you completely made that up.

Not that you've HEARD of. Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities were also once a secret. they wouldn't

Also, we're talking about countries who aren't exactly free to report what they want. someone like Chavez could come out, say "I was talking to the leader of Iran about puppies and kittens." what do you think would be in the paper?


As far as the "what if" goes, if Iran does make a nuclear weapon (even though they claim they are enriching uranium for peaceful means), it doesn't really matter. Iran is a country with a functioning government. The thing about nuclear states is that they want to preserve their state and not be destroyed (otherwise why put in so much money and effort to enrich uranium).

normally, yes, but we're not dealing with a "normal" country.

If Iran obtains nuclear weapons, it will be nothing more than a deterrent. Nobody will attempt to invade Iran if it has a nuclear weapon pointed at Israel. Also, Iran will not attack any western countries because it knows it will be wiped out (mutually assured destruction).

Deterrent, yes, but it can also be used to leverage other countries, especially if they did get a missile battery set up to strike Israel and the US, or maybe even our allies in Europe. one thing people forget, not all nation leaders are mentally stable. not to mention Nukes are worth a fortune, selling them to even nuttier countries like Best Korea is a very real possibility.


I'm not crazy, everyone else is.

morefngdbs
morefngdbs
  • Member since: Mar. 7, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 49
Art Lover
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 12:52 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 08:38 AM, Korriken wrote: Before the flaming begins, pay attention.

1. Iran is working on enriching uranium. they say its for peaceful nuclear fuel, but this is the same nation that is actively funding groups that perform Jihadist attacks (to hell with calling it "terrorism") on non Islamic soil.

Pay attention...so does Saudi Arabia !
As a matter of fact ,Saddam Insane...hated al quaeda & actively hunted & destroyed them in Iraq...but he had weapons of mass destruction (nod nod, wink wink) what he really had was the second largest supply of untapped oil inthe world & the US couldn't access any of it...but you've got it now.

2. Iran's supreme leader (their "president" is just a puppet) is an extreme Islamic Ayatollah, who of course would love to see nothing more than a completely Islamic world. They also believe that to die in a war against the infidel gets you sent straight to heaven.

THe last bunch of US Presidents are puppets as well.
As a matter of record (see who gives these politicians their MIllions of dollars for campaigning) big business & the Fed banking Cartel own your country.

3. Iran wants Israel gone. They can't accomplish this with conventional means, Israel has better technology and is back by America and parts of Europe. If Iran were to try and invade they would be obliterated and Iran would be brought to its knees. however, with a nuclear missile, they have a lot more leverage.

Anyone ever heard of the Warsaw ghetto during the time of the Nazi's ?
See any parallels between that action & Gaza today ?...I do, so do many others
Heres a link, US mainstream news rarely reports this
http://archive.arabnews.com/?page=7&sect ion=0&article=107394&d=2&m=3&y=2008

4. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been visiting anti American countries in South America. why? to sell them oil? of course not. Venezuela produces its own oil. to make the world see their allies? pfft. Venezuela's army is about as strong as a foam noodle in a sword fight. no. The real reason why Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is in places like Venezuela is to see about setting up missiles sites there to point them at America. Once they have nuclear missiles, they get them there, point them at America and say, "you mess with us, we launch the nukes!"

What difference is there in that than say, the USA putting missles on Canadian soil, or over in their bases in friendly Arab nations, in Japan. The 15 battle groups & who knows how many nuclear weapons platform/submarines off the coasts of many other world nations ?
Its OK for the US to do it...but no one else is ?
I strongly disagree. No one should be doing it, not the US not anyone.

Of course, once this happens, America has 2 choices, 1. try to destroy those nuclear sites, 2. be Iran's bitch. Not that it would matter, Once Iran has nuclear capabilities, so will Al Qaeda, The Taliban, and other Jihadist groups. why? simple. setting off a conventional car bomb might kill a dozen or so people, but a small nuke would wipe out thousands and leave destructive fallout.

It would be in the world's best interest to invade Iran, destroy their navy, destroy the enrichment centers, and either kill their scientists or force them to defect. Toppling the government is optional.

It wouldn't be in the Worlds best interest...but it sure would be in the Corporate US worlds interests, the military suppliers, the oil companies that would profit...they are very interested.

What the USA should do is stay out of the affairs of those who want nothing to do with the biggest bulley in the world. Stop invading & destroying other soveriegn nations like Libya, when they have done nothing to the US.
Stop hiding behind a war on terror when you bring more terror & have murdered more innocent men, women & children, which you so disturbingly call "collateral damage"

What I believe we all really need to be fearful of ,is the only country in the world that has attacked another with nuclear bombs.
That's who we all need to be watching...they are the problem & seeing as they have almost completely done away with the protections of the US constitution.
We all should be very afraid, of the nuclear bully who has nuclear weapons & has used them on another nation that had no nuclear weapons ! ! !

What ?
You didn't think anyone wouldn't remember that ?
I understand why other nations are trying to band together, they are tired of living in fear of a bunch of war mongering assholes who will destroy you, whether they have a reason or not & are quite happy to invent a ficticious reason if that's what it takes.

Sorry dude, your so fucking brainwashed your dripping soap suds all over the place !


Those who have only the religious opinions of others in their head & worship them. Have no room for their own thoughts & no room to contemplate anyone elses ideas either-More

adrshepard
adrshepard
  • Member since: Jun. 18, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 07
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 12:55 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 09:39 AM, lapis wrote: Required reading material for everyone who thinks he knows something about Iran's motivations.

That's a fantasy devised by Iranians to disguise the fact that they themselves were responsible for reinstituting the shah. Do you honestly believe a handful of CIA agents could take down a leader over the resistance of all Iranians? Of course not. The country was divided and we provided middling support to a side.

At 1/21/12 08:38 AM, Korriken wrote: this is the same nation that is actively funding groups that perform Jihadist attacks (to hell with calling it "terrorism") on non Islamic soil.
Which is so much worse than your good friend Israel which is actively funding groups that perform Jihadist attacks (to hell with calling it "terrorism") on Iranian soil (and saying that they're CIA but that's not even the worst part of it).

After how many years of Iranian support of Hezbollah and Hamas? The Israelis don't mess around. If Iran supports terrorist groups against Israel, who also kill women and children, Israel can do the same to terrorist groups targeting Iran. Perhaps they don't have the same "we're better than that" complex as Americans. Not a big problem for me so long as they don't instigate it.

Could it be because of the shit tons of cash that the US gave to Saddam Hussain to fight post-revolution Iran, cash that was probably used in part to develop chemical weapons (you know, WMDs) that were used against Iranian soldiers and civilians? To some extent, certainly.

What did they expect? Saddam was getting hammered and Iran was our enemy.

But the biggest reason for Iran to currently oppose the US politically was the moment in 2002 when Bush decided to brand Iran as one of the members of the illustrious Axis of Evil, together with Iraq and North Korea (Iran at the time even had a reformist president!).

Except that they had been doing the same sort of covert research and material purchasing for the past decade. http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/ir anbackground032100.pdf
Iran hasn't exactly been forthcoming and open about its nuclear work. They have to know what it looks like to the rest of the world.

So there only two things Iran could do to extend the sovereignty it had over its own country and people:

You forgot "stop screwing around and start actively cooperating."

"Before the flaming begins", can you at least agree with me that one motivation for Iran to be developing nukes at the moment is the COMPLTELY LEGITIMATE desire to defend their national sovereignty from US/Western imperialism?

No, because they risk more from this sort of secret weaponization act than they would if they just played ball. You can still save face as a leader without deliberately antagonizing other countries all the time.

lapis
lapis
  • Member since: Aug. 11, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 26
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 01:18 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 12:33 PM, Korriken wrote: WHY Iran hates America is irrelevant. the fact that they do and are gaining the capabilities to challenge much larger nations is a problem. We have our interests, they have theirs. Allowing them to gain an advantage that we can prevent is unacceptable. Letting them acquire a weapon they can leverage, or even use against us to cause mass destruction is a major problem.

Okay, but the motivations that drove them to develop nuclear weapons determine the urgency of the threat. I remember from a couple of years of back, when the 'Iran getting nukes' issue was already hotly debated, that people claimed that Ahmadinejad was part of Shi'a cult called the Hojjatieh. The supposed aim of this group was to expedite the return of the Mehdi, the Messiah of Shi'a Islam, to Earth by spreading chaos and destruction. Of course, when the aim of a country to obtain nukes is to cause wanton destruction, then a lot is jusitified in preventing them from obtaining nukes. But when they're just trying not to get invaded then the level of urgency is much lower.

It's funny that I haven't heard anything about the Hojjatieh thing in years, which just shows how flimsy those claims were. And from the way you were presenting the case against Iran it also seemed like you were arguing that the Iranian government was completely devoid of rational thought. Now don't get me wrong: the Iranian government warrants serious criticism. However, I don't believe they're crazy enough to not abide by the law of Mutually Assured Destruction. And if they were to give a nuclear weapon to a group like the Taliban, who would then use it against a city in, say, India or Israel, then the retaliation against Iran's cities would be massive if the nuke could be traced back to Iran (and believe me, a lot of effort would be spent finding those traces). And if for nothing else, Iranians are too proud of their heritage to just sacrifice their entire nation for a nuclear strike.

It would be in the best interests of the west to shut them down before they gain the ability.

Agreed. However, you need to weigh the pros and cons of invasion. If the Iranian government is not going to randomly fire ICBMs with nuclear warheads at targets around the world, then the pros of the invasion are much lower than if they just want to keep them around as leverage. In fact, the pros might then not weigh to the con of killing the pro-democracy movement in Iran, which is actually doing not so bad at the moment.


BBS Signature
BUTANE
BUTANE
  • Member since: May. 9, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 22
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 01:30 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 12:48 PM, Korriken wrote:
At 1/21/12 09:52 AM, BUTANE wrote:
There hasn't been a single headline about Iran setting up nuclear missiles in south American Countries, you completely made that up.
Not that you've HEARD of. Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities were also once a secret. they wouldn't

Not that you've heard of either. You have zero evidence to back up your claim, so don't state it like it's a fact. It is nothing more than your own personal suspicion.


BBS Signature
lapis
lapis
  • Member since: Aug. 11, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 26
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 01:51 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 01:18 PM, lapis wrote:
At 1/21/12 12:33 PM, Korriken wrote:

Hmm, not sure where's an angry emoticon above this post, by the way. Must have clicked it accidentally. I was actually trying to get closer in terms of positions.

At 1/21/12 12:55 PM, adrshepard wrote: That's a fantasy devised by Iranians to disguise the fact that they themselves were responsible for reinstituting the shah. Do you honestly believe a handful of CIA agents could take down a leader over the resistance of all Iranians?

Oh come on, (promises of) US financial support bolstered the elements of the royalist faction to the point where they were stronger than the majority of the population. Of course there were elements in Iranian society that backed the coup, but foreign cash (Iran wasn't very rich at the time) and careful crafting of the momentum can put a dictatorship in place that otherwise would never have emerged.

After how many years of Iranian support of Hezbollah and Hamas?

Hmm, answer that one for me, will you? I would like to know if it predates US support for Saddam Hussain.

The Israelis don't mess around.

Right, but in doing so they lost all claims to moral superiority. I guess you don't care much about abstract concepts such as "morality", but when someone uses the fact that Iran supports terrorists as reinforcing the notion that they're crazy and evil, then it doesn't help that your major ally in the region is guilty of the exact same thing.

What did they expect? Saddam was getting hammered and Iran was our enemy.

They expected that you wouldn't support a dictator who used WMDs against civilians? And this stuff at the very least influences the debate in the US. If Bush's only argument in favour of the Iraq war had been "we want their oil and $500 is worth more to us than the life of an innocent Iraqi civilian" then the public reaction to the invasion within the US might have been a little different. Just sayin'.

I mean, if you want to have a debate just about the banal economic and geopolitical pros and cons of such an invasion for the US then that's great. But you have to understand that it irritates me when these kinds of invasions are justified by politicians using all sorts of allusions to high moral standards that they themselves would never follow.

Except that they had been doing the same sort of covert research and material purchasing for the past decade. http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/ir anbackground032100.pdf
Iran hasn't exactly been forthcoming and open about its nuclear work. They have to know what it looks like to the rest of the world.

South Africa and Brazil have also been interested in nuclear weapons in the past and nobody's saying that they should be invaded. Iran's nuclear weapon program didn't seriously get off the ground since the Ahmadinejad got to power, with the real threat of an US invasion looming over his country.

You forgot "stop screwing around and start actively cooperating."

Cooperating with what? Turning over sovereignty over their oil industry to the USA?

No, because they risk more from this sort of secret weaponization act than they would if they just played ball. You can still save face as a leader without deliberately antagonizing other countries all the time.

Please elaborate on what you mean by "just playing ball"?


BBS Signature
lapis
lapis
  • Member since: Aug. 11, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 26
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 01:53 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 01:51 PM, lapis wrote:
At 1/21/12 01:18 PM, lapis wrote:
At 1/21/12 12:33 PM, Korriken wrote:
Hmm, not sure where's an angry emoticon above this post, by the way. Must have clicked it accidentally. I was actually trying to get closer in terms of positions.

Not sure why there's an angry emoticon ...

I can explain the emoticon above this post, though.


BBS Signature
satanbrain
satanbrain
  • Member since: Dec. 6, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 40
Melancholy
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 02:36 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 01:51 PM, lapis wrote: Right, but in doing so they lost all claims to moral superiority. I guess you don't care much about abstract concepts such as "morality", but when someone uses the fact that Iran supports terrorists as reinforcing the notion that they're crazy and evil, then it doesn't help that your major ally in the region is guilty of the exact same thing.

Can you prove we were funding terrorists? Can nonsecretive officers in the CIA affirm that?


(הֲבֵל הֲבָלִים אָמַר קֹהֶלֶת, הֲבֵל הֲבָלִים הַכֹּל הָבֶל. דּוֹר הֹלֵךְ וְדוֹר בָּא, וְהָאָרֶץ לְעוֹלָם עֹמָדֶת. (קהלת א ג, ה

BBS Signature
lapis
lapis
  • Member since: Aug. 11, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 26
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 02:40 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 02:36 PM, satanbrain wrote:
At 1/21/12 01:51 PM, lapis wrote: Right, but in doing so they lost all claims to moral superiority. I guess you don't care much about abstract concepts such as "morality", but when someone uses the fact that Iran supports terrorists as reinforcing the notion that they're crazy and evil, then it doesn't help that your major ally in the region is guilty of the exact same thing.
Can you prove we were funding terrorists? Can nonsecretive officers in the CIA affirm that?

Can you prove Iran is building nuclear weapons? If not, what do you think is the purpose of this thread?


BBS Signature
Warforger
Warforger
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 02:46 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 08:38 AM, Korriken wrote: Before the flaming begins, pay attention.

1. Iran is working on enriching uranium. they say its for peaceful nuclear fuel, but this is the same nation that is actively funding groups that perform Jihadist attacks (to hell with calling it "terrorism") on non Islamic soil.

Sounds like Iraq. Then again, if Iran does go to war, even if they do set a nuke off anywhere, they're going to ruined considering the Arab states like Israel more than they like Iran and instant boycott due to well war.

2. Iran's supreme leader (their "president" is just a puppet) is an extreme Islamic Ayatollah, who of course would love to see nothing more than a completely Islamic world. They also believe that to die in a war against the infidel gets you sent straight to heaven.

Do you have any evidence for these claims? Because it seems you're just making blanket statements that some Muslims have said thus all extremist muslims must believe. That would be like saying that just because people in Bosnia want to murder more Muslims thus all white people hate Muslims. The only place they'd seek to invade would be Iraq or Israel, Iraq to save the Shia population and Israel to save the Palestinians.

3. Iran wants Israel gone. They can't accomplish this with conventional means, Israel has better technology and is back by America and parts of Europe. If Iran were to try and invade they would be obliterated and Iran would be brought to its knees. however, with a nuclear missile, they have a lot more leverage.

You do realize Israel has Nuclear weapons too right? And Again the Arabic states are not too friendly with Iran either and are arguably more friendly towards Israel.

4. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been visiting anti American countries in South America. why? to sell them oil? of course not. Venezuela produces its own oil. to make the world see their allies? pfft. Venezuela's army is about as strong as a foam noodle in a sword fight. no. The real reason why Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is in places like Venezuela is to see about setting up missiles sites there to point them at America. Once they have nuclear missiles, they get them there, point them at America and say, "you mess with us, we launch the nukes!"

......You do realize not only the extreme difficulty of doing such a task without being detected (as shown in the Cuban Missile Crisis along with the Iranian navy not being heard of after they announced their Global tour) but the huge mess Venezuela would be in? Again their economy would go to shit once all their customers put an embargo on them and they're invaded by everyone. You're just making really far streches that is coming out of your insanely patriotic mindset.

Of course, once this happens, America has 2 choices, 1. try to destroy those nuclear sites, 2. be Iran's bitch. Not that it would matter, Once Iran has nuclear capabilities, so will Al Qaeda, The Taliban, and other Jihadist groups. why? simple. setting off a conventional car bomb might kill a dozen or so people, but a small nuke would wipe out thousands and leave destructive fallout.

.......Because bringing a nuclear bomb into a civilian area is easy and will definatly not get detected once they get anywhere near a transport.

It would be in the world's best interest to invade Iran, destroy their navy, destroy the enrichment centers, and either kill their scientists or force them to defect. Toppling the government is optional.

...........You know I wonder if we do this that if anyone would bring up Iraq or Vietnam other then those stupid pussy liberals as a reason for why this invasion is a terrible idea.


"If you don't mind smelling like peanut butter for two or three days, peanut butter is darn good shaving cream.
" - Barry Goldwater.

BBS Signature
Iron-Hampster
Iron-Hampster
  • Member since: Aug. 27, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 03:33 PM Reply

The nuclear missile is a defensive tool for intimidation purposes, not a means to eradicate people you don't like for petty reasons. And all this talk of invasion is really giving them even more reason to build one of their own. Let Israel fend for itself, America is out of money, simple as that, and can not afford to intervene in other peoples problems any longer.

by no money I mean thats it, zip, go to war with iran and you are broke, no peso for Paco, sorry. That is just the way life works.


ya hear about the guy who put his condom on backwards? He went.

BBS Signature
J1993
J1993
  • Member since: May. 26, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 03:40 PM Reply

Iran has never overthrown a democratic regime in a foreign country has it, unlike the US which did so in Chile and Guatemala for instance. Id say if anything US foreign policy is a greater threat to anyone who doesnt act like a good little servant than Irans is. That said China looks set to take over as world power and they would relish an oppurtunity to help the Iranians fight an invasion off since the UN would not issue the US permission to invade Iran meaning that if they did anyone that doesnt like America could throw their hats in with Iran.

J1993
J1993
  • Member since: May. 26, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 03:42 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 03:33 PM, Iron-Hampster wrote: The nuclear missile is a defensive tool for intimidation purposes, not a means to eradicate people you don't like for petty reasons. And all this talk of invasion is really giving them even more reason to build one of their own. Let Israel fend for itself, America is out of money, simple as that, and can not afford to intervene in other peoples problems any longer.

by no money I mean thats it, zip, go to war with iran and you are broke, no peso for Paco, sorry. That is just the way life works.

Id suspect Iran wants nukes to ensure Israel doesnt consider using them or at least air strikes against them since Israel has threatened to do the latter before.

Warforger
Warforger
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 04:09 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 03:40 PM, J1993 wrote: an oppurtunity to help the Iranians fight an invasion off since the UN would not issue the US permission to invade Iran meaning that if they did anyone that doesnt like America could throw their hats in with Iran.

Because the USA gives a fuck whether the UN says it can invade a nation or not.


"If you don't mind smelling like peanut butter for two or three days, peanut butter is darn good shaving cream.
" - Barry Goldwater.

BBS Signature
Th-e
Th-e
  • Member since: Nov. 2, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 23
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 04:19 PM Reply

Iran should be invaded if we get to the Now or Never Point.

If Iran develops nuclear weapons, they can be fully insulated from an attack by outside forces. If someone (say, Israel) threatens Iran, Iran will say they will nuke the other country if it attacks. Israel, with pressure from the international community, backs down because no one wants nuclear war.

An insulated Iran will be able to launch terrorist attacks abroad without fear of retribution. This will create a safe haven for other terrorist networks, including Al Qaeda and its affiliates. Terrorist attacks will increase worldwide.

Also, Iran may have the potential to attack and possibly take over other nations. Libya, Iraq, Syria (if Assad falls), Afghanistan, Lebanon, Jordan, etc. could be targeted for takeover, which would allow the Iranian network, nukes, and terrorists to have a huge base of operations. Stronger countries like Israel and Saudi Arabia would not be targeted with takeover, but would feel the effects though car bombs and suicide bombers. I do not know if Iran would try that.

This is what a nuclear Iran would be. The point before Iran gains this immunity is the Now or Never Point.

Also, it wouldn't be enough to target nuclear sites. The regime would have to be toppled, or else they would accelerate the creation of new nukes.

Until then, sanctions and such remain the best option. A nuclear Iran is not an option, and war is a last resort move.


Feel no mercy for me. It will only cause you to suffer as well.

camobch0
camobch0
  • Member since: Jan. 10, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 27
Gamer
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 07:31 PM Reply

Russia has nukes, and we don't attack them. They are also under essentially a dictatorship, and their country is filled with violence and corruption. So why should we attack a country who is attempting to develop one nuclear device, when they haven't done anything to us?


A vagina is really just a hat for a penis.

BBS Signature
orangebomb
orangebomb
  • Member since: Mar. 18, 2010
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 19
Gamer
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 10:52 PM Reply

As much as I want to agree with you, considering how the leadership and the hardcore supporters of Iran both in the country and abroad are fucked up to a degree, a war with Iran is only going to make the problem worse, and put us even deeper in the hole than we are trying to get out of from Iraq and Afghanistan. Wars cost money and lives, and we don't have a lot of the former, and if the shit hits the fan with those bastards, then the latter could potentially be true.

All we can really do at this point is to use sanctions and tough talk against Iran. Now if they forcibly try to invade or even so much as to bully themselves into other countries around them, {Iraq, Afghanistan, Jordan, etc.} then some type of military action would be needed to stop this from happening. Iran {more specifically, the leadership} is like a dormant cancer, it may not be doing much damage now, but once it spreads, then you can see the deteration of the body of work until a point of no return. Nuclear weapons are tools of intimidation and leverage, and that is what Iran wants them for, not to use it for attacking other countries, unless other nations fall for their trap of invading their homeland.

We are playing with fire when it comes to these assholes, best to keep the gas can at bay.


Just stop worrying, and love the bomb.

BBS Signature
satanbrain
satanbrain
  • Member since: Dec. 6, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 40
Melancholy
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 11:40 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 02:40 PM, lapis wrote: Can you prove Iran is building nuclear weapons? If not, what do you think is the purpose of this thread?

I was wondering if there is even one official publicily stating this allegation.


(הֲבֵל הֲבָלִים אָמַר קֹהֶלֶת, הֲבֵל הֲבָלִים הַכֹּל הָבֶל. דּוֹר הֹלֵךְ וְדוֹר בָּא, וְהָאָרֶץ לְעוֹלָם עֹמָדֶת. (קהלת א ג, ה

BBS Signature
adrshepard
adrshepard
  • Member since: Jun. 18, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 07
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 11:43 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 01:51 PM, lapis wrote:
Oh come on, (promises of) US financial support bolstered the elements of the royalist faction to the point where they were stronger than the majority of the population.

No, you "come on." All you're saying now is that our word alone overthrew the Iranian pm, that the US somehow took out Mossadegh through the international equivalent of "peer pressure."
If promises of money were all that was needed to get our way we would never have fought Vietnam, Korea, or either Iraq campaign.

After how many years of Iranian support of Hezbollah and Hamas?
Hmm, answer that one for me, will you? I would like to know if it predates US support for Saddam Hussain.

That would be relevant if Hezbollah and Hamas targeted the US and not Israel.

Right, but in doing so they lost all claims to moral superiority. I guess you don't care much about abstract concepts such as "morality", but when someone uses the fact that Iran supports terrorists as reinforcing the notion that they're crazy and evil, then it doesn't help that your major ally in the region is guilty of the exact same thing.

Obviously, the Israelis don't care about whether or not you approve of their morality, thankfully. And it isn't the same thing if Israel is supporting Iran's enemies in retaliation. What did Israel ever do to Iran? Ever ask yourself that? Or do these Islamic fundamentalists who execute homosexuals just overflow with emphathy that they think Jordanian "Palestinians" are just as important as fellow Iranians.

They expected that you wouldn't support a dictator who used WMDs against civilians?

That would be pretty impressive considering US support predated Saddam's gas attack on the Kurds.

And this stuff at the very least influences the debate in the US. If Bush's only argument in favour of the Iraq war had been "we want their oil and $500 is worth more to us than the life of an innocent Iraqi civilian" then the public reaction to the invasion within the US might have been a little different.

Ok. Except I've never said those things, so I don't care.

South Africa and Brazil have also been interested in nuclear weapons in the past and nobody's saying that they should be invaded.

Invaded now? Of course not. South Africa's were dismantled and the army government of Brazil disbanded, with current reactors (all two of them) under international inspection. All of this happened decades ago.

You forgot "stop screwing around and start actively cooperating."
Cooperating with what? Turning over sovereignty over their oil industry to the USA?

Not at all. One option would be to abide by the Additional Protocol to inspections, which is voluntary, but would nonetheless do a hell of a lot to defuse the situation if the Iranian effort is as peaceful as they claim. The country's past secret and undeclared nuclear work didn't help gain any trust, either.
And, at the very least, not play such an elaborate game of deception and secrecy that the IAEA comes out with reports like this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew s/middleeast/iran/8878002/Iran-is-buildi ng-nuclear-arms-say-UN-inspectors.html.

Cochises
Cochises
  • Member since: Aug. 27, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 21st, 2012 @ 11:52 PM Reply

At 1/21/12 08:38 AM, Korriken wrote: Before the flaming begins, pay attention.

1. Iran is working on enriching uranium. they say its for peaceful nuclear fuel, but this is the same nation that is actively funding groups that perform Jihadist attacks (to hell with calling it "terrorism") on non Islamic soil.

The IAEA hasn't even said they have nuclear weapons, they had no sufficient evidence and just claimed Iran to be close to please the Americans. Iran is a member of the NPT, Israel and America are not.

Non Islamic soil? Is that why Iran hates Saudi Arabia? The holiest "Islamic soil" ?


2. Iran's supreme leader (their "president" is just a puppet) is an extreme Islamic Ayatollah, who of course would love to see nothing more than a completely Islamic world. They also believe that to die in a war against the infidel gets you sent straight to heaven,

Iran's Ayatollah is only taken seriously in Iran, Sunni Islam, which is about 80% of Muslims in the world, don't even believe in an Ayatollah. Islam doesn't have any leaders.

Muslims believe if you defend yourself, or another person you go to heaven, be it any faith.


3. Iran wants Israel gone. They can't accomplish this with conventional means, Israel has better technology and is back by America and parts of Europe. If Iran were to try and invade they would be obliterated and Iran would be brought to its knees. however, with a nuclear missile, they have a lot more leverage.

Iran never said they wanted Israel gone, that was a purposley mistranslated quote, Ahmnejads actually quote was "the Zionist Regime of Israel faces a deadend and will under God's grace be wiped off the map," and "the Zionist Regime that is a usurper and illegitimate regime and a cancerous tumor should be wiped off the map."

Zionism is NOT Israel.
Even Israels Defense Minister said if he was Iranian, he would want Nuclear Weapons.
Quote "Probably...I don't delude myself that they are doing it just because of Israel. They have their history of 4,000 years. They look around, they see the Indians are nuclear, the Chinese are nuclear, Pakistan is nuclear...Israel allegedly has it (military nuclear capability)."


4. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been visiting anti American countries in South America. why? to sell them oil? of course not. Venezuela produces its own oil. to make the world see their allies? pfft. Venezuela's army is about as strong as a foam noodle in a sword fight. no. The real reason why Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is in places like Venezuela is to see about setting up missiles sites there to point them at America. Once they have nuclear missiles, they get them there, point them at America and say, "you mess with us, we launch the nukes!"

The reason why he is visitng South American countries is because most of them know that the American's are the criminals, and most of the South American countries have been through what Iran has. From the false flag operations, CIA missions and installing leaders.


Of course, once this happens, America has 2 choices, 1. try to destroy those nuclear sites, 2. be Iran's bitch. Not that it would matter, Once Iran has nuclear capabilities, so will Al Qaeda, The Taliban, and other Jihadist groups. why? simple. setting off a conventional car bomb might kill a dozen or so people, but a small nuke would wipe out thousands and leave destructive fallout.

Iran understands that if they acquire Nuclear capabilities, they will not be pushed around, you see how fast they sanction Iran? Funny shit's getting serious as soon as Iraq ended...


It would be in the world's best interest to invade Iran, destroy their navy, destroy the enrichment centers, and either kill their scientists or force them to defect. Toppling the government is optional.

It would be the the world's WORST interest, the blockade of straight of Hormuz? Iran stopping it's oil production, Iran's allies, possibly in South America stop selling oil to Western countries? ANOTHER war in the near the Middle East area (Iran are NOT Arabs, nor are they in the Middle East) and most importantly, America and Israel will become extremely isolated. So it'll probably be the American's who end up paying for this.

MrFlopz
MrFlopz
  • Member since: Mar. 29, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 03
Musician
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 22nd, 2012 @ 03:29 AM Reply

Why not? Seeing how well Iraq worked out for us let's just go ahead and invade.


The average person has only one testicle.

BBS Signature
MrFlopz
MrFlopz
  • Member since: Mar. 29, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 03
Musician
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 22nd, 2012 @ 03:43 AM Reply

At 1/21/12 12:33 PM, Korriken wrote: WHY Iran hates America is irrelevant. the fact that they do and are gaining the capabilities to challenge much larger nations is a problem. We have our interests, they have theirs. Allowing them to gain an advantage that we can prevent is unacceptable. Letting them acquire a weapon they can leverage, or even use against us to cause mass destruction is a major problem.

It would be in the best interests of the west to shut them down before they gain the ability.

This is why terrorism happens. It's not because Muslims hate gay marriage and apple pie. It's because of our imperialistic approach to foreign policy. We constantly suppress the arab world by crushing democracies, installing dictators and destroying infrastructure. Then we wonder why they lash out. Maybe the problem is not that we don't intervene enough to control the region, but that attempt to control their lives and give them no other choice but retaliation. Maybe if we allowed the arabs to fix the problem in the middle east on their own, people would be less willing to sacrifice their lives to kill us.


The average person has only one testicle.

BBS Signature
Light
Light
  • Member since: May. 29, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 21
Reader
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 22nd, 2012 @ 04:04 AM Reply

At 1/21/12 08:38 AM, Korriken wrote: Before the flaming begins, pay attention.

1. Iran is working on enriching uranium. they say its for peaceful nuclear fuel, but this is the same nation that is actively funding groups that perform Jihadist attacks (to hell with calling it "terrorism") on non Islamic soil.

A fallacious connection to make. Just because Iran has done this(By the way, it seems that Israel has done this before. Perhaps we should invade them since they have nuclear weapons), it doesn't mean that they're lying when they say that the uranium enrichment is for peaceful purposes.

2. Iran's supreme leader (their "president" is just a puppet) is an extreme Islamic Ayatollah, who of course would love to see nothing more than a completely Islamic world. They also believe that to die in a war against the infidel gets you sent straight to heaven.

Prove it. I challenge you to prove your claims correct.

3. Iran wants Israel gone. They can't accomplish this with conventional means, Israel has better technology and is back by America and parts of Europe. If Iran were to try and invade they would be obliterated and Iran would be brought to its knees. however, with a nuclear missile, they have a lot more leverage.

As Warforger said, Israel already has nuclear weapons. Iran wouldn't gain much leverage against Israel or anyone else if they created a nuclear weapon. If they were to use such a weapon, mutually assured destruction will result. If you recall, mutually assured destruction was what deterred the U.S. from attacking the Soviet Union with nukes and vice versa.

4. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been visiting anti American countries in South America. why? to sell them oil? of course not. Venezuela produces its own oil.

What?

Just because a country produces its own oil, that doesn't mean that they don't import oil. The U.S. produces its own oil, and yet it imports oil from Canada, Saudi Arabia, and several other countries.

to make the world see their allies? pfft. Venezuela's army is about as strong as a foam noodle in a sword fight. no. The real reason why Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is in places like Venezuela is to see about setting up missiles sites there to point them at America.

Please substantiate this outrageous claim.

Once they have nuclear missiles, they get them there, point them at America and say, "you mess with us, we launch the nukes!"

All of what you said regarding the relationship between Iran and Venezuela is highly unlikely. Again, I request that you substantiate this outrageous claim.

Of course, once this happens, America has 2 choices, 1. try to destroy those nuclear sites, 2. be Iran's bitch.

This is a false dichotomy; a logical fallacy.

Also, I didn't know that refusal to destroy such sites constituted being submissive to Iran.

Not that it would matter, Once Iran has nuclear capabilities, so will Al Qaeda, The Taliban, and other Jihadist groups. why? simple. setting off a conventional car bomb might kill a dozen or so people, but a small nuke would wipe out thousands and leave destructive fallout.

How would these terrorist groups even use nuclear weapons. It seems unfeasible to me.

It would be in the world's best interest to invade Iran,

That's what was said about Iraq and Vietnam.

destroy their navy, destroy the enrichment centers, and either kill their scientists or force them to defect. Toppling the government is optional.

Destruction, murder, conquering, and subversion....

People like you disgust me. You're so eager to wage war after war. You're so eager to spill the blood of our servicemen and women unnecessarily so that you can eliminate threats that you can't even prove to exist. People like you perpetuate the negative opinions held by non-Americans that the U.S. is imperialistic. People like you don't give a shit about the consequences. People like you merely want to satisfy their desires assert some kind of dominance over other nations.

People like you have stigmatized American patriotism. Reexamine your beliefs and the information that you know to be true, and tell me that it is OK to continue to topple governments all over the world whose interests conflict with our own.

I sincerely wish that neoconservatives such as yourself never come to power in significant numbers.


I was formerly known as "Jedi-Master."

"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind."--Dr. Seuss

BBS Signature
J1993
J1993
  • Member since: May. 26, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Blank Slate
Response to Why Iran should be invaded Jan. 22nd, 2012 @ 08:52 AM Reply

At 1/21/12 04:09 PM, Warforger wrote:
At 1/21/12 03:40 PM, J1993 wrote: an oppurtunity to help the Iranians fight an invasion off since the UN would not issue the US permission to invade Iran meaning that if they did anyone that doesnt like America could throw their hats in with Iran.
Because the USA gives a fuck whether the UN says it can invade a nation or not.

I didnt suggest that the US would care but lack of UN support or outright condemnation gives other countries with interests in Iran a solid legitimate reason to oppose US forces should anyone be stupid enough to launch an invasion.