The Iran Controversy

[The last sane person]

sorry, cut open my finger...not able to type much...here goes...

Looking at Iraq, thats not what we see, "giving up weapons of mass destruction". Where *are* they? The only weapons they had, that they used against us, were the ones United States, France, and a few other countries gave them, musterd gas and the like. Now, I consider those damaging enough, I've seen what they can do. But we also see what kinda mess there is over there now. I.E. really radical, really armed militias governing parts of the country, the elections, thats nice and dandy. But tat gov't isnt going to have much control out side of Baghdad.

Its going to be like Kharzai, whom we fondly call the "Governer of Khabul", as soon as you go outside the city limits, you go right back to the warlords and clan rule. All I have to do is peak over the border and I can see that starting to happen.

Will continue this later, have to go get damn stitches.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

What wrong do you feel we have done Iran?

the question to ask is "what wrong does iran feel we have done, or may do, to them?" ... followed by, "are there any acceptable changes we could make to our policy against iran that might make them feel differently"

this is exactly what we are trying to do with other nuclear-armed countries who are not exactly allies

obviously some of iran's leadership's possible goals are completely out of the question (i.e. a muslim-dominated world)... but that is not necessarily the case with all of them... all leaders want security for their countries foremost, and as gaffer pointed out, history says that the only protection from US invasion for those leaders is possessing nuclear weapons

[Spock]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson
What wrong do you feel we have done Iran?

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

the question to ask is "what wrong does iran feel we have done, or may do, to them?" ... followed by, "are there any acceptable changes we could make to our policy against iran that might make them feel differently"

For once L.E. and I agree (shocking, I know). To worry about what some people think we have done is to go crazy. The fact is we haven't done anything. Iran has more oil and other resources for power, etc. that it doesn't need nuclear energy and yet persues it and in a clandestine manner. That is a threat to the region and to the western world in general, especially in view of their presidents latest statement about muslims vs non and the destruction of Israel.

We haven't threatened their security in the past nor do we do it now save to preserve our own.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by The last sane person

Looking at Iraq, thats not what we see, "giving up weapons of mass destruction". Where *are* they? The only weapons they had, that they used against us, were the ones United States, France, and a few other countries gave them, musterd gas and the like. Now, I consider those damaging enough, I've seen what they can do. But we also see what kinda mess there is over there now. I.E. really radical, really armed militias governing parts of the country, the elections, thats nice and dandy. But tat gov't isnt going to have much control out side of Baghdad.

Its going to be like Kharzai, whom we fondly call the "Governer of Khabul", as soon as you go outside the city limits, you go right back to the warlords and clan rule. All I have to do is peak over the border and I can see that starting to happen.

Will continue this later, have to go get damn stitches.

Last Sane Person, isn't this argument of yours solely based on guesses? In spite of insurgency attacks on the Iraqi police recruits, the police force continues to get stronger. The reconstruction steadily continues, and has already had several major successes. For the elections, there was a massive voter turn-out. The Kurds and Shias are strongly supportive of the current government. The Sunnis are becoming more and more strongly involved in the political process. These are signs of strength and growing unity.

Sorry about the stitches .

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

the question to ask is "what wrong does iran feel we have done, or may do, to them?" ... followed by, "are there any acceptable changes we could make to our policy against iran that might make them feel differently"

We have been doing our utmost to solve the crisis through negotiation and offering incentives and deals to help Iran. It's true that there has been US anti-Iran rhetoric, but as Martin Luther King so correctly pointed out, change will many times only come about through the use of pressure.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Spock

We haven't threatened their security in the past nor do we do it now save to preserve our own.

i bet that that is exactly what they are saying

[Spock]

Iran Leader Joins in Anti-Israel Protests
October 28, 2005 12:52 PM EDT
TEHRAN, Iran - Iran's hard-line president marched in the streets of Tehran on Friday alongside tens of thousands of people supporting his call for the destruction of Israel - remarks that have been condemned around the world.

The rally was one of several state-organized anti-Israel demonstrations across the country that drew more than a million Iranians.

World leaders have condemned Wednesday's remarks by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who repeated the words of the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of the Islamic revolution, by saying: "Israel must be wiped off the map."

As he marched alongside demonstrators in downtown Tehran, Ahmadinejad renewed his criticism of the West, saying: "They become upset when they hear any voice of truth-seeking."

"They think they are the absolute rulers of the world," he added.

Many marching with him held placards reading, "Death to Israel, death to America,"

[Lief Erikson]

In the words of the Iraqi president, "God willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world without the United States and Zionism."

Originally Posted by CNN

Some of the missiles, which have a range of 2,000km bore banners proclaiming "Israel should be wiped off the map" and "We will trample the US under our feet."

Thousands of protesters throughout Iran are now saying those things, their energy gaining momentum because of the full support of their government.

Are these declarations a defense? An endeavor to strengthen Iran's security? The president's words about the US and Israel were based strongly upon a foundation of religion. I have not seen him quoted as saying, "we shall defend ourselves if the US attacks!" Rather, "God willing, the US will cease to exist!" While President Bush called Iran part of an "axis of evil," he never has called for Iran's destruction. Rather, he left the door open for negotiation, and he has been seeking since the beginning of his presidency to resolve the disputes with Iran and North Korea through negotiation and economic incentive.

[Spock]

Indeed, IMO, this isn't the time to sing "kumbi yah".

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Spock

Indeed, IMO, this isn't the time to sing "kumbi yah".

so we either embrace them or kill them? there is no middle road in your opinion?

[Lief Erikson]

What do you all think about Israel's demands that Iran be removed from the UN over its remarks? It's of course understandable that Israel should demand this, but do you think they are in the right? Should Iran be banned from the UN?

[Spock]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

so we either embrace them or kill them? there is no middle road in your opinion?

There you have it...misquoting in an effort to start an argument.

I said neither nor implied either.

What road there is was not and is not posted.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Spock

There you have it...misquoting in an effort to start an argument.

I said neither nor implied either.

What road there is was not and is not posted.

He didn't misquote. He just, apparently, has misinterpreted your meaning. He isn't trying to start an argument either- he merely wanted to know what your opinion on the matter was.

[Spock]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

He didn't misquote. He just, apparently, has misinterpreted your meaning. He isn't trying to start an argument either- he merely wanted to know what your opinion on the matter was.

Ok but deliberate, consistent misquoting or misstating can only be interpreted in that direction. A direct question is simple and unambiguous.

and I have already replied aboveWhat road there is was not and is not posted.

[Tessar]

Guys, stop fighting now please. More pissy little arguments will lead to your rights to post in this thread being removed.

Thank you.

[Rían]

Many marching with him held placards reading, "Death to Israel, death to America,"

..

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

..

One thing I can't understand is the motive for making those statements. It's turning the entire international community against Iran, and is lending justification to US arguments regarding Iran's nuclear endeavors. I thought I read somewhere that it would take 8 to 10 years for Iran to get access to nuclear weapons, so right now their words of "trampling the US" under their feet and wiping out Israel are just words. It only takes a matter of weeks for the US to conquer a country. Shouldn't they be waiting until they have the weapons to back such an aggressive position? And wouldn't it be smarter to keep some hope of support from the international community until they have those weapons? This public declaration of support for terrorism seems rather badly timed.

Also, I wonder what the views of the Entmoot community are regarding Israel's claims that Iran should be expelled from the UN. Do you agree with Israel? Disagree?

[Spock]

Unfortunately Iran has a huge, well trained army-admittedly better than Iraq. It also already has nuclear facilities and has had them for some time. The original estimates have fallen by the way side as we learned more about what they've kept from the world.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

Also, I wonder what the views of the Entmoot community are regarding Israel's claims that Iran should be expelled from the UN. Do you agree with Israel? Disagree?

lines of communication must always be kept open, so i disagree

[Spock]

Originally Posted by Tessar

Guys, stop fighting now please. More pissy little arguments will lead to your rights to post in this thread being removed.

Thank you.

Boy ever since we became mods, you've turned into one of the Gamesters of Triskellion", lurking in the shadows and popping up unexpectedly.
And I used to have that rep.

[Spock]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

Also, I wonder what the views of the Entmoot community are regarding Israel's claims that Iran should be expelled from the UN. Do you agree with Israel? Disagree?

Well with Israel seeking a seat on the Security Council ( UN ) and notorious human rights violators are in charge of the UN human rights panel, I don't see this happening.

BTW, communication doesn't have to to through the UN. In fact some of the best examples are things done outside of it's corrupt sphere of influence.