Iran - prepared for war

http://www.newstatesman.com/200702190014

"American military operations for a major conventional war with Iran could be implemented any day. They extend far beyond targeting suspect WMD facilities and will enable President Bush to destroy Iran's military, political and economic infrastructure overnight using conventional weapons."

Yeah Fuck Chimpy and his fag mates..


Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, his Iranian counterpart, have pledged to work together to confront US and Israeli “plots” in the Middle East.

Al-Assad arrived in Iran for a two day visit aimed at bolstering robust ties, his second trip to the Islamic republic since Ahmadinejad took power in August 2005.

Al-Assad said: “We should co-operate and work to make the public aware of the sinister aims of the United States and the Zionists.”

The two leaders, accused by the US of destablising the region, warned against the dangers of disunity between Sunni and Shia Muslims in Lebanon and Iraq.
http://terrorizethis.org[/img]

Yeah fuck Chimpy and his fag mates..

Although I agree with your post (mostly) - this pretty much ended your credibility right here.

Quote from: "harold132"

Yeah fuck Chimpy and his fag mates..

Although I agree with your post (mostly) - this pretty much ended your credibility right here.

Wow, died as soon as he opened his mouth, huh?

Wow, died as soon as he opened his mouth, huh?

Yeah, but at least we had no misconceptions that he was worth listening to while reading his post.

Iran can :P(|).

Dan, you're stupid.  Why would you believe that nonsense just posted?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_bomb

and a single weapon is capable of destroying an entire city.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_explosion

Note that a 20 megaton bomb would completely destroy buildings within 6.4 km, destroy most buildings within 17 km and damage all buildings within 47 km.  The largest ever tested nuclear weapon had a yield of over 50 megaton, and that was in 1961.  Do you think that nuclear technology has improved since then, or stayed the same?

The naivety and simplistic thought shown by Dan is astounding.  You should stop posting rubbish, and take some history and international politics classes.

The US will not carpet bomb Iran and certainly would never drop a nuclear weapon on that country.  Iran is a country with a GDPof less than 2 years of the US military budget, and the US military budget accounts for 3.2% of the total US GDP.  Such actions would be considered grievous war crimes, both internationally and within the US.  Unless you're expecting the US to turn into a genuine totalitarian dictatorship within the near future, have no doubt that the action of killing 70 million innocent people would be held to account by the American public, American law, American politicians, and that of the world as well.  Source, source.

In fact in the current political climate, it is very hard to see a genuine war breaking out with the US and Iran.  Given the political and military disasters that are Afghanistan and Iraq, and the fact that, despite counter claims by irrational ignorant political hacks, the US is still a democracy, it is very hard to see any serious support in the US for more serious military action against another Middle Eastern nation.  At best we will see more serious sanctions and possibly air bombing at the extreme.  Beyond that, it is impossible to see the Democratic senate or the next president supporting ground troops in the US, at least until Afghanistan and Iraq have been better dealt with.

This claim that carpet bombing Iran would lead to mass terrorist attacks in the US is also completely bogus.  Do you have any evidence to support that claim?  Of course you don't, because all you post is bullshit.  If you don't believe that the Islamic Middle East has all the motivation and belief to carry out terrorist attacks against you already, you really need to take a look at reality.  Iraq is in ruins, Afghanistan is run by warlords, Iran is oppressed by sanctions and threats, as is Syria.  It's estimated that over 57,000 civilians have been killed so far in the Iraq war alone.  There is no reason to believe that terrorist attacks will significantly increase because of carpet bombing Iran.  Terrorists, fuelled by their irrational beliefs and a disgusting religion, already want to kill you, but they can't, and they're focusing on more practical goals - like  building insecurity and hatred in their region. Source

As for Harold132.  Your homophobia is not appreciated, but no surprise coming from somebody who supports a religion as inhumane and intolerant as Islam.  Certainly Islam hates homosexuals with the same fervour as those who read the bible correctly and homophobia, as well as the horrible oppression of women, is one of the strong moral beliefs of Islam.  Your defence of Bashar al-Assad and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad demonstrates your moral character with eloquence.  Rather than giving you examples of these countries moral integrity, read what amnesty international thinks of them;

Syria
http://web.amnesty.org/report2006/syr-summary-eng

Here are some highlights;

---
    * Ahmad ‘Ali al-Masalma, a Muslim Brotherhood member, died at the end of March, two weeks after he was released from four weeks in detention. He was arrested on his return from 26 years’ exile in Saudi Arabia. He was allegedly tortured in detention and denied essential medication.
    * Sheikh Muhammad Ma’shuq al-Khiznawi, an Islamic religious leader and outspoken figure within the Kurdish community, died on 30 May, 20 days after he “disappeared”, apparently in the custody of Military Intelligence agents. His nose and teeth were broken and there was a wound on his forehead.
    * Seraj Khalbous became seriously ill probably as a result of torture while detained incommunicado in September at al-Mezze and al-Fayha Political Security Branches in Damascus. He was beaten, stamped on, struck with large sticks, threatened with anal rape, subjected to extreme cold, sleep deprivation and humiliation, and witnessed others being tortured with electric shocks. He was released on 25 October.

UN Human Rights Committee

The HRC, commenting on Syria’s third periodic report, criticized the government’s failure to implement human rights reforms recommended by the HRC in 2001. It expressed concern about the continuing state of emergency; restrictions on freedom of expression and other basic rights; discrimination and violence against women; the targeting of human rights defenders; and Syria’s use of the death penalty.

----

Iran
http://web.amnesty.org/report2006/irn-summary-eng

    * In September, Arezoo Siabi Shahrivar, a photographer, was arrested along with up to 14 other women, at a ceremony commemorating the 1988 “prison massacre” in Evin prison, Tehran, in which thousands of political prisoners were executed. In detention she was suspended from the ceiling, beaten with a wire cable and sexually abused.
    * A man from Shiraz sentenced to 100 lashes in 2004 for homosexual activities alleged that he had been tortured and threatened with death by security forces.
      At least three amputations were carried out. It remained common for courts to hand down sentences of flogging.

The UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women visited Iran in January and February. She criticized the arbitrary arrest, torture and ill-treatment of women, including women human rights defenders, and called on Iran to adopt a national action plan to promote and protect human rights that would eliminate violence against women. She also expressed particular concern at discriminatory laws and failures in the administration of justice which result in impunity for perpetrators and perpetuate discrimination and violence against women.


-----------
These are the people you are defending Harold - murderers, torturers and rapists.  I do not support George Bush, or his actions, but neither do I support his enemies when they are responsible for such blatant and horrendous human rights violations.  Your defence of such people gives support to their actions and is morally untenable.

http://www.newstatesman.com/200702190014

"American military operations for a major conventional war with Iran could be implemented any day. They extend far beyond targeting suspect WMD facilities and will enable President Bush to destroy Iran's military, political and economic infrastructure overnight using conventional weapons."

why won't he fucking learn? Bush is such a prat. That's right, destroy another country before finishing the job you started 4 years ago.

The Second Gulf War has lasted longer than WWI and WWII, just to state what is probably oh so obvious.

Forgive me, I am tired and I just got out from doing the graveyard shift from my job...

The Second Gulf War has lasted longer than WWI and WWII, just to state what is probably oh so obvious.

Forgive me, I am tired and I just got out from doing the graveyard shift from my job...

You can't very well say it's the same war, though. The war to take out the official military of Iraq ended long ago. We are now in the middle of a civil war that we refuse to take a side in; thus our military is powerless to stop it. I'm not saying we SHOULD take a side. I am however saying unless we can come up with a plan that has some hope of ending the Iraqi civil war, we need to withdraw our troops.

I was one of 50,000+ protesters in London on Saturday. I doubt that Blair will listen :-/ There were many more as well who protested before the war...didn't listen then either.

probably. Stupid Blair. There's a really cool pic somewhere...*rumages files*

here:

I think calling Blair stupid, or claiming that he won't listen is fairly ignorant.  I am sure that Blair is well aware of the opposition to the war, but what would you have him do?

Do you honestly think that simply removing the Western troops from Iraq will improve the situation? Yes it's a disaster, and probably shouldn't have happened, but we can't go back in a time machine and stop that from occurring.  We need to accept what has happened in the past, and deal with the present.

I agree that the Western troops in Iraq is contributing to the problem, but I think that removing them without replacing them would create far more significant problems.  Given the nature of the Iraq government and the civil war between religious groups, it seems clear that the only way to maintain some semblance of order is with a body of independent troops.  If the allied forces are to withdraw, they need to be replaced by UN forces.  Despite the criticism that the UN often acquires, it is responsible for a 40 percent reduction in conflicts globally since 1992.  I strongly believe that an international force is definitely required in Iraq, to disarm the population, return basic services and maintain order.  I don't believe that the invasion was right, and I don't believe that the current US policies are right, but simply going away and letting the country turn to anarchy is not the solution.

Dio, as you're well aware, Beast is Australian, and would likely shoot himself before regurgitating something that Bush had anyhting to do with.

Beast predictably quotes Amnesty International for abuses in Syria and Iran only to the exclusion of other countries which just happens to be exactly the same countries which the incorrigibly wicked Bush administration is currently puching against.  Thanks beast for restricitng your citations of alleged wrongdoing based exclusively on your politics from those countries which don't fit you brainwashed western mind as good guys. 

For those of you interested in what the other side has to say:
http://www.tehrantimes.com/

- Dionysios

You should read what the Amnesty report says about the USA.

http://web.amnesty.org/report2006/usa-summary-eng

"Thousands of detainees continued to be held in US custody without charge or trial in Iraq, Afghanistan and the US naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. There were reports of secret US-run detention centres in undisclosed locations where detainees were held in circumstances amounting to “disappearances”. Dozens of Guantánamo detainees went on hunger strike to protest against their harsh treatment and lack of access to the courts; some were reported to be seriously ill. Reports of deaths in custody, torture and ill-treatment by US forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantánamo continued to emerge. Despite evidence that the US government had sanctioned interrogation techniques constituting torture or ill-treatment, and “disappearances”, there was a failure to hold officials at the highest levels accountable, including individuals who may have been guilty of war crimes or crimes against humanity. Several trials took place of low-ranking soldiers charged with abusing detainees; in most cases sentences were light. There were reports of police brutality and use of excessive force in the USA. Sixty-one people died after being struck by police tasers, a huge rise over previous years. Sixty people were executed, taking the total to over 1,000 since executions resumed in 1977."

Not a glowing report at all.  There was obviously no need to bring up the US human rights record, which is obviously far from perfect.  Just because you attack one country, does not mean that you support other countries at all.  I did not bring up Iran and Syria, I posted their Amnesty report because Harold was defending those two nations.  If he had have defended the US as well, I would have attacked the US human rights record as well.  In reality he attacked the US too, so there was no need to attack that country either.

Regarding your claims about the "Nuclear myth,"

The bombs dropped in Hiroshima had yields of about  20 kilo tonnes.  The figures I was giving were for nuclear bombs with yields of 20 mega tonnes, or 1000 times bigger.  If you read the wikipedia link you will see this.  Clearly bombs 1000 times greater in force than the Little Boy and Fat Man will have much more destructive forces.

Here is another non wikipedia source for the size of those bombs.

http://library.thinkquest.org/18106/atomic.html

So in fact we can see that your evidence is completely false, and that your so called "nuclear myth" is, in fact, a misunderstanding of sizes, to the tune of 1000 fold.

Nuclear bombs dropped on Japan; 20 kilo tonnes

Largest nuclear bomb ever detonated; 50,000 kilo tonnes...

Dan, you're stupid.  Why would you believe that nonsense just posted?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_bomb

Quote

and a single weapon is capable of destroying an entire city.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_explosion

Note that a 20 megaton bomb would completely destroy buildings within 6.4 km, destroy most buildings within 17 km and damage all buildings within 47 km.  The largest ever tested nuclear weapon had a yield of over 50 megaton, and that was in 1961.  Do you think that nuclear technology has improved since then, or stayed the same?

The naivety and simplistic thought shown by Dan is astounding.  You should stop posting rubbish, and take some history and international politics classes.

The US will not carpet bomb Iran and certainly would never drop a nuclear weapon on that country.  Iran is a country with a GDPof less than 2 years of the US military budget, and the US military budget accounts for 3.2% of the total US GDP.  Such actions would be considered grievous war crimes, both internationally and within the US.  Unless you're expecting the US to turn into a genuine totalitarian dictatorship within the near future, have no doubt that the action of killing 70 million innocent people would be held to account by the American public, American law, American politicians, and that of the world as well.  Source, source.

In fact in the current political climate, it is very hard to see a genuine war breaking out with the US and Iran.  Given the political and military disasters that are Afghanistan and Iraq, and the fact that, despite counter claims by irrational ignorant political hacks, the US is still a democracy, it is very hard to see any serious support in the US for more serious military action against another Middle Eastern nation.  At best we will see more serious sanctions and possibly air bombing at the extreme.  Beyond that, it is impossible to see the Democratic senate or the next president supporting ground troops in the US, at least until Afghanistan and Iraq have been better dealt with.

This claim that carpet bombing Iran would lead to mass terrorist attacks in the US is also completely bogus.  Do you have any evidence to support that claim?  Of course you don't, because all you post is bullshit.  If you don't believe that the Islamic Middle East has all the motivation and belief to carry out terrorist attacks against you already, you really need to take a look at reality.  Iraq is in ruins, Afghanistan is run by warlords, Iran is oppressed by sanctions and threats, as is Syria.  It's estimated that over 57,000 civilians have been killed so far in the Iraq war alone.  There is no reason to believe that terrorist attacks will significantly increase because of carpet bombing Iran.  Terrorists, fuelled by their irrational beliefs and a disgusting religion, already want to kill you, but they can't, and they're focusing on more practical goals - like  building insecurity and hatred in their region. Source

As for Harold132.  Your homophobia is not appreciated, but no surprise coming from somebody who supports a religion as inhumane and intolerant as Islam.  Certainly Islam hates homosexuals with the same fervour as those who read the bible correctly and homophobia, as well as the horrible oppression of women, is one of the strong moral beliefs of Islam.  Your defence of Bashar al-Assad and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad demonstrates your moral character with eloquence.  Rather than giving you examples of these countries moral integrity, read what amnesty international thinks of them;

Syria
http://web.amnesty.org/report2006/syr-summary-eng

Here are some highlights;

---
    * Ahmad ‘Ali al-Masalma, a Muslim Brotherhood member, died at the end of March, two weeks after he was released from four weeks in detention. He was arrested on his return from 26 years’ exile in Saudi Arabia. He was allegedly tortured in detention and denied essential medication.
    * Sheikh Muhammad Ma’shuq al-Khiznawi, an Islamic religious leader and outspoken figure within the Kurdish community, died on 30 May, 20 days after he “disappeared”, apparently in the custody of Military Intelligence agents. His nose and teeth were broken and there was a wound on his forehead.
    * Seraj Khalbous became seriously ill probably as a result of torture while detained incommunicado in September at al-Mezze and al-Fayha Political Security Branches in Damascus. He was beaten, stamped on, struck with large sticks, threatened with anal rape, subjected to extreme cold, sleep deprivation and humiliation, and witnessed others being tortured with electric shocks. He was released on 25 October.

UN Human Rights Committee

The HRC, commenting on Syria’s third periodic report, criticized the government’s failure to implement human rights reforms recommended by the HRC in 2001. It expressed concern about the continuing state of emergency; restrictions on freedom of expression and other basic rights; discrimination and violence against women; the targeting of human rights defenders; and Syria’s use of the death penalty.

----

Iran
http://web.amnesty.org/report2006/irn-summary-eng

    * In September, Arezoo Siabi Shahrivar, a photographer, was arrested along with up to 14 other women, at a ceremony commemorating the 1988 “prison massacre” in Evin prison, Tehran, in which thousands of political prisoners were executed. In detention she was suspended from the ceiling, beaten with a wire cable and sexually abused.
    * A man from Shiraz sentenced to 100 lashes in 2004 for homosexual activities alleged that he had been tortured and threatened with death by security forces.
      At least three amputations were carried out. It remained common for courts to hand down sentences of flogging.

The UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women visited Iran in January and February. She criticized the arbitrary arrest, torture and ill-treatment of women, including women human rights defenders, and called on Iran to adopt a national action plan to promote and protect human rights that would eliminate violence against women. She also expressed particular concern at discriminatory laws and failures in the administration of justice which result in impunity for perpetrators and perpetuate discrimination and violence against women.


-----------
These are the people you are defending Harold - murderers, torturers and rapists.  I do not support George Bush, or his actions, but neither do I support his enemies when they are responsible for such blatant and horrendous human rights violations.  Your defence of such people gives support to their actions and is morally untenable.

I feel what you said was all very interesting, but in my opinion, the only GENUINE war America has engaged in Was WWII and the Korean (forgotten) Wars.

And as for the "we won't nuke Iran" Well, you shot yourself in the foot there. They already said they are able to do just that with "bunker buster" low yield ordnance. They are nuclear in execution, thus, a nuke. If we hit them, those will be used. And when that happens, all bets are off, regarding the fear of M.A.D.

My cousin is currently stationed in the gulf on a carrier, and his emails home are anything but peachy.

Genuine war? Before my time.

Yeah right.  What I said was that they would not nuke Iran, not that they couldn't.  Obviously they physically can drop any kind of different nuke on Iran but will they?  I don't think you can say that I've shot myself in the foot until they actually do, and it seems very unlikely that any government in the current political climate would.

I just know I'm voting for the black guy running for president :p

I heard his speech that he gave before the war in Iraq even started where he stated that it was a bad idea and predicted the out come perfectly. He has a brain and I'll be damned if I'm going to let it go to waste if I can help it :p

I don't understand.  What does his race or if he has slave ancestors have to do with his ability to be President?

Yeah right.  What I said was that they would not nuke Iran, not that they couldn't.  Obviously they physically can drop any kind of different nuke on Iran but will they?  I don't think you can say that I've shot myself in the foot until they actually do, and it seems very unlikely that any government in the current political climate would.

Granted. But you and I both know that has not stopped them before 

666Beast666

It is no surprise to see such a post from you Harold.  You are very good at expressing your radical views, but they are obviously views with very little reasoning behind them, and actually come from an irrational view of the world.  When somebody points out reality, you have little option but either to concede that your views are incorrect or to simply ignore the facts present and to launch some kind of personal attack on them.  Not that I find it at all insulting that you should refer to me as Satan.  Although it's not the reason I chose this username, I am certainly very certain that God does not exist, and that all religion is irrational.  You calling me Satan would be be like me calling you the Tooth Fairy.  Because you are unable to either address the facts and reality, nor will concede that you're wrong, and resort to such mindless insults really demonstrates that your views are dogmatic and not rational.  Your views about politics are the same as any religious view.  It is dogmatic beliefs that led to the war in Iraq and to everything you oppose.  Holding your irrational views actually contributes to the problem, because it allows other people to also hold views that simply do not stack up to reality.  Instead of holding dogmatic views, why don't you start facing reality, and demanding that people put forward satisfying rational explanations for their political views and actions?  If the world can move to rationalism, wars will stop happening.