Your Ad Here Your Ad Here
Page 1 of 7 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 63

Thread: Ahmadinejad says...

  1. #1
    j2k4's Avatar en(un)lightened
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Oh, please...
    Posts
    15,254
    ...""Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation...the Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm."

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,191819,00.html

    Sounds like a threat to me...as he persists with this provocative tack, how should the International community respond?

    Let's say he uses a continuous stream of this rhetoric to gauge the will of the those who might take action.

    He defies the U.N. and it's inspectors, ala Saddam.

    He finds no action forthcoming, and, having managed to develop his nuclear capability sufficiently to destroy Israel, he proceeds to do just that.

    What then?

    Is Israel avenged?

    How?

    By whom?
    “Think about how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of 'em are stupider than that.” -George Carlin

  2. The Drawing Room   -   #2
    cpt_azad's Avatar Colonel
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Surrey, BC
    Posts
    6,741
    Quote Originally Posted by j2k4
    What then?

    Is Israel avenged?

    How?

    By whom?
    Then WWIII, or something close to it.

    Most likely yes, Israel didn't got to where it is today by having a shitty military, the retaliation will be massive, and it won't just be Israel that will launch a counter-attack (if not a pre-emptive one).

    Use of nuclear weapons, this won't be a conventional war.

    The US? Duh.

    Jeff Loomis: He's so good, he doesn't need to be dead to have a tribute.

  3. The Drawing Room   -   #3
    j2k4's Avatar en(un)lightened
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Oh, please...
    Posts
    15,254
    Quote Originally Posted by cpt_azad
    Quote Originally Posted by j2k4
    What then?

    Is Israel avenged?

    How?

    By whom?
    Then WWIII, or something close to it.

    Most likely yes, Israel didn't got to where it is today by having a shitty military, the retaliation will be massive, and it won't just be Israel that will launch a counter-attack (if not a pre-emptive one).

    Use of nuclear weapons, this won't be a conventional war.

    The US? Duh.
    Where is the U.N. in all of this?

    Again, let's assume no one moves against Iran because, after all, it's just bluster and rhetoric, right?

    Taking advantage of U.N. stasis, Iran eradicates Israel, per it's own stated goal.

    Russia and China realize they've been had, diplomatically, and renounce their support of Iran.

    Is Iran then, for lack of a better term, forfeit?

    On a different tack, as some here have clearly stated, America's aim is to make Iraq it's "bitch" in the mideast.

    Is it better/the same/worse if Russia and/or China makes Iraq it's "bitch"?

    Harking back to the attempted Soviet subjugation of Afghanistan in 1980, who was the bad guy:

    The U.S., for supporting Afghanistan, or the U.S.S.R., for it's efforts?
    “Think about how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of 'em are stupider than that.” -George Carlin

  4. The Drawing Room   -   #4
    cpt_azad's Avatar Colonel
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Surrey, BC
    Posts
    6,741
    Quote Originally Posted by j2k4
    Quote Originally Posted by cpt_azad
    Then WWIII, or something close to it.

    Most likely yes, Israel didn't got to where it is today by having a shitty military, the retaliation will be massive, and it won't just be Israel that will launch a counter-attack (if not a pre-emptive one).

    Use of nuclear weapons, this won't be a conventional war.

    The US? Duh.
    Harking back to the attempted Soviet subjugation of Afghanistan in 1980, who was the bad guy:

    The U.S., for supporting Afghanistan, or the U.S.S.R., for it's efforts?
    The U.S. were the good guys in that conflict, no doubt about that.

    Another thing, although China and Russia have said that Iran should use uranium enrichment for civillian purposes, I have yet to read/hear of them supporting Iran completely (refer to the other thread).

    Jeff Loomis: He's so good, he doesn't need to be dead to have a tribute.

  5. The Drawing Room   -   #5
    tralalala's Avatar The Almighty
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    6,396
    The UN is a joke.. absolutely pathetic - just before the 6 day war broke out in 1967, the Egyptians said to the UN forces in Gaza strip to move out, with no reason, and they went, no questions asked.. pathetic if you ask me.


    If anything, Israel, US and UK would probably attack Iran before they even get a chance to launch their fighter planes with the nuclear bombs...


    I read an article the other day where the person said that Russia and China are also against the nuclear abilities of Iran - Chine and Russia have vast ammounts of Shiite Muslims who are, what you would call "pestering" the people leading the country - these people cannot retaliate if Iran has nuclear abilities, as no one is to know what they would do - Mr. Mahmoud Jihad is stupid enough to use these weapons...

    If he were to attack anyone, my guess is that the US, Israel, Russia and the UK would retalliate in a way that would screw Irans military forces all over.
    The thing is, when is this going to happen, and how the psychological games of the pres. will affect the leaders of the nations.

  6. The Drawing Room   -   #6
    cpt_azad's Avatar Colonel
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Surrey, BC
    Posts
    6,741
    Quote Originally Posted by tralalala
    The UN is a joke.. absolutely pathetic - just before the 6 day war broke out in 1967, the Egyptians said to the UN forces in Gaza strip to move out, with no reason, and they went, no questions asked.. pathetic if you ask me.


    If anything, Israel, US and UK would probably attack Iran before they even get a chance to launch their fighter planes with the nuclear bombs...


    I read an article the other day where the person said that Russia and China are also against the nuclear abilities of Iran - Chine and Russia have vast ammounts of Shiite Muslims who are, what you would call "pestering" the people leading the country - these people cannot retaliate if Iran has nuclear abilities, as no one is to know what they would do - Mr. Mahmoud Jihad is stupid enough to use these weapons...

    If he were to attack anyone, my guess is that the US, Israel, Russia and the UK would retalliate in a way that would screw Irans military forces all over.
    The thing is, when is this going to happen, and how the psychological games of the pres. will affect the leaders of the nations.
    Completely agreed, it's in Russia's best interest (think about this for a second) to prevent a full scale war from taking place, not to mention the economical boost it will gain, after all, look at their oil reserves and how much oil Russia exports, if Iran was taken out of the picture "temporarily" ala a pre-emptive strike (even if it were for a few weeks/months) it would mean a huge thing for Russia.

    But money aside, I honestly think that Iran having nuclear capabilities is completely wrong and just plain threatning.

    I don't know if you know this trala, but I for one do not "like" Israel as much as the next guy for the things they've done to Palestinians over the years and would like to see a peaceful co-existence b/w them.

    But I will forego Israel's wrongdoings if it means that we can stop a country like Iran totally f'ing up the planet, and killing hundreds of thousands of people (which will escalate to millions once the counter-attacks begin) be it Jewish, Muslims, w/e.

    The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, and those few are Iranian leaders/military commanders that need to be taken out ASAP.

    Jeff Loomis: He's so good, he doesn't need to be dead to have a tribute.

  7. The Drawing Room   -   #7
    tralalala's Avatar The Almighty
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    6,396
    I don't mind people not "liking" Israel, I would frankly be fine having the pres. of Iran say he hated us, but all the threatening is completely out of order.

    I am now wondering if Israel will carry out an attach on Iran like they did on Iraq in the 80's taking out their nuclear reactors.......

  8. The Drawing Room   -   #8
    cpt_azad's Avatar Colonel
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Surrey, BC
    Posts
    6,741
    Quote Originally Posted by tralalala
    I don't mind people not "liking" Israel, I would frankly be fine having the pres. of Iran say he hated us, but all the threatening is completely out of order.

    I am now wondering if Israel will carry out an attach on Iran like they did on Iraq in the 80's taking out their nuclear reactors.......
    I for one would definitely support such an attack, and I'm deadset againts pre-emptive attacks. But with all due respect, this is one of those occasions where it's absolutely necessary.

    But you have to remember, if Israel attacked Iran now, the retaliatory attack by Iran would be pretty massive, they do have a good number of ground troops, though I'm not sure what they'd be able to do against Israeli troops who are some of (if not) the best trained soldiers in the world.

    If that happened, I'm 100% sure that the U.S. would launch their attacks (co-ordinated of course) against Iran.

    Better to end it quickly and early rather than have to take action at the last second or until something happens, because then it WOULD turn into a war and it WOULD drag on for a loooong time.

    Jeff Loomis: He's so good, he doesn't need to be dead to have a tribute.

  9. The Drawing Room   -   #9
    tralalala's Avatar The Almighty
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    6,396
    Indeed.

    In that article it said that no attack on Iran could be taken out without the US leading, since no army has any troops, tanks, aircraft etc. like the US. Israel could donate technology and well trained troops, the UK - more arms, same about Russia, and even Chine..


    As you said - better quick and early than late and sore.....

  10. The Drawing Room   -   #10
    cpt_azad's Avatar Colonel
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Surrey, BC
    Posts
    6,741
    Quote Originally Posted by tralalala
    Indeed.

    In that article it said that no attack on Iran could be taken out without the US leading, since no army has any troops, tanks, aircraft etc. like the US. Israel could donate technology and well trained troops, the UK - more arms, same about Russia, and even Chine..


    As you said - better quick and early than late and sore.....
    Agreed word for word.

    Jeff Loomis: He's so good, he doesn't need to be dead to have a tribute.

Page 1 of 7 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •