Current Events

TOPICS:

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40

 ... 426

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

evanharos

evanharos

I'm lost
May 2007

JUN 11, 2007 01:49 PM





During the most recent Republican Presidential debates, nearly every GOP candidate expressed willingness to nuke Iran in order to stop them from developing nuclear weapons (only that nut job Ron Paul was against turning the lands of ancient Persia into a parking lot). Hillary and the other top Dems are talking tough on Iran also. Is the Islamic Republic really a threat to the national security of the United States?



Scott Ritter, the former UN weapons inspector who tried to tell us back in 2002 that Bush was lying about Iraqi WMD, is saying the same thing now about Administration policy toward Iran. Ritter recently visited Iran and wrote a new book Target Iran: the Truth about the White House's Plans for Regime Change. His view on Iran runs counter to the American media's portrayal of that country:



What an eye-opening experience to be on your own in a nation that has been called an Islamic fascist state. I have been to dictatorships in the Middle East. I have been to nations that have a high security profile. Iran is not one of these nations. I'm a former intelligence officer who has stated some pretty strong positions on Iran, and yet I had full freedom of movement in Iran with no interference whatsoever. And as a result, although I didn't have the approved agenda, I had my own agenda, which allowed me to interview senior government officials, senior military officials, senior intelligence officials, and to visit sites that were deemed sensitive. The conclusion is that the American media has gotten it wrong on Iran. It's a very modern, westernized, pro-Western, and surprisingly pro-American country that does not constitute a threat to the United States whatsoever.



No threat, is he nuts? Did he forget about those hostages back in 1979? And what about that psychopath Ahmadinejad? He says all sorts of terrible things about the United States and Israel. Surely this religious fanatic, who is the president of his country, is a serious threat to us? Ritter disagrees:



we have a poster boy for demonization out there. His name is Ahmadinejad. He's the idiot that comes out and says really stupid vile things, such as, "It is the goal of Iran to wipe Israel off the face of the world," and he makes ridiculous statements about the United States and etc. And, of course, man, he -- it's a field day for the American media, for the Western media, because you get all the little sound bites out there, Ahmadinejad, Ahmadinejad, president of Iran. But what people don't understand is, while he can vocalize, his finger is not on any button of power. If you read the Iranian constitution, you'll see that the president of Iran is almost a figurehead.



The real power in Iran is with the Clergy and their Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. He calls all the shots, he controls the military, and he controls the nuclear program. And here's the kicker: the Supreme Leader issued a fatwa or religious edict that forbids the development of nuclear weapons because they run counter to Islamic Law. Even more surprising is the fact Ayatollah Khamenei sent the Bush Administration an olive branch back in 2003, an offer of peace that the White House rejected:



in 2003 he actually reached out to the Bush administration via the Swiss embassy and said, "Look, we would like to normalize relations with the United States. We'd like to initiate a process that leads to a peace treaty between Israel and Iran." Get this, Israel and Iran. He's not saying, "We want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth." He is saying, "We want peace with Israel." And they were willing to put their nuclear program on the table.





Bush declined to normalize relations with the Iranian regime because it is US policy to bring that regime down. While toppling the Theocracy won't be as easy as it was in Iraq, Bush may want one more crack at the Axis of Evil before he leaves office. Condi Rice assures us their is no plan for war with Iran so we'll have to take her word for it. The question remains: are the Iranians trying to build a bomb? Its certainly possible and one only has to look at Iraq vs North Korea to see what it takes to keep the US military out of your country. But the United States has over 10, 000 nukes and Israel could wipe Iran off the map with its own nuclear arsenal. Are those Ayatollahs really gonna commit mass suicide by managing to lob a nuclear-tipped missile into Tel Aviv?



While there are reports of clandestine US military operations within Iran and plenty of sabre rattling (with two aircraft carrier groups close enough for Ahmadinejad to spit at) it appears at the moment that some cooler heads are starting to prevail and the outright war with Iran that has been threatened for several years now has been avoided. Can there be any doubt as to how great a disaster such a war would be? It would make Iraq look like a cakewalk.

herbancowboy

herbancowboy

San Francisco, CA
June 2004

JUN 11, 2007 06:04 PM

Why does Scott Ritter hate America?

MisterGraves

MisterGraves

Portland, OR
November 2003

JUN 11, 2007 06:08 PM

Oi. No need to expound on that. OI. puke

SockPuppet

SockPuppet

I'm lost
July 2006

JUN 11, 2007 06:15 PM

evanharos said: Can there be any doubt as to how great a disaster such a war would be? It would make Iraq look like a cakewalk.



Problem is, Bush can start it without having to finish it. He is in the position of extremists everywhere: If he starts a war, there's going to be a war.

Personally, I think that removal of US citizenship should be on the list of penalties for war crimes.

Untimely

Untimely

USA
January 2007

JUN 11, 2007 06:18 PM

herbancowboy said:
Why does Scott Ritter hate America?



And why does he hate freedom so much?

Seriously, this whole fucking Iran thing has smelled like a big fat fucking rat since they first started talking about Iraq (Yes, I said Iraq -- not a typo).

But I'll bet money that the rest of America goes along with it without any real criticism, or even an expectation of a clearcut victory strategy, as usual.

To BushCo's credit, (and if you look at the map), at least this will turn two moderately sized policy disasters into one giant disaster.

But who knows-- maybe the third war's a charm?

FastJetta

FastJetta

Nederland, CO
April 2006

JUN 11, 2007 06:31 PM

And the cycle repeats...

According to journalist Jason Leopold, sources at former Cheney company Halliburton allege that, as recently as January of 2005, Halliburton sold key components for a nuclear reactor to an Iranian oil development company. Leopold says his Halliburton sources have intimate knowledge of the business dealings of both Halliburton and Oriental Oil Kish, one of Iran's largest private oil companies.


"Let me make a generalized statement about a trend I see in the U.S. Congress that I find disturbing, that applies not only with respect to the Iranian situation but a number of others as well," Cheney said. "I think we Americans sometimes make mistakes . . . There seems to be an assumption that somehow we know what's best for everybody else and that we are going to use our economic clout to get everybody else to live the way we would like."

Cheney was the chief executive of Halliburton Corporation at the time he uttered those words. It was Cheney who directed Halliburton toward aggressive business dealings with Iran_in violation of U.S. law_in the mid-1990s, which continued through 2005 and is the reason Iran has the capability to enrich weapons-grade uranium.
It was Halliburton's secret sale of centrifuges to Iran that helped get the uranium enrichment program off the ground, according to a three-year investigation that includes interviews conducted with more than a dozen current and former Halliburton employees

No, what's disturbing about these facts is how little attention it has received from the mainstream media. But the public record speaks for itself, as do the thousands of pages of documents obtained by various federal agencies that show how Halliburton's business dealings in Iran helped fund terrorist activities there_including the country's nuclear enrichment program.



Project Censored

It would be so nice if the US stopped training/arming/financing other countries/groups.

SignalNoise

SignalNoise

Chicago, IL
February 2004

JUN 11, 2007 06:36 PM

The Bush administration's interactions with other state is, not surprisingly, just appalling. What's annoying is that having *some* gripes about Iran makes sense. Hell, there are things about *most* states that I could find to complain about. But rather than interacting with Iran in a mature manner - treating them as equals and as rational actors having legitimate interests - the US approach is this sort of "all or nothing" bellicose thing. And clearly, we don't HAVE to be that way - policy with China (currently) or Russian/the Soviet Union (historically) had much more nuance than our current behavior towards states like Iraq, Iran etc. Undoubtedly, perceived "size of threat" matters here - it's unfortuante though that we couldn't be a bit more long-term and equitable in our dealings.

IgnorantProdigy

IgnorantProdigy

Naples, FL
June 2006

JUN 11, 2007 07:06 PM


Does anyone else find it ironic that according to this article Iran has a mentally deficient president who claims to have the support of his country?

Trahern

Trahern

United Kingdom
March 2003

JUN 11, 2007 08:19 PM

Yay, an article that told me things I did not know.

And some things I did, like Bush is a dick.

azathoth42

azathoth42

Dallas, TX
September 2004

JUN 11, 2007 09:23 PM

IgnorantProdigy said:

Does anyone else find it ironic that according to this article Iran has a mentally deficient president who claims to have the support of his country?



Every time I talk to my mom, I try to point out the Irony of our gov't trying to install a theocracy at home, while at the same time trying to discourage the installation of a theocracy in Iraq.

It kinda spirals into a, "Jesus good, Muhammed bad" thing. I guess a logical argument won't work huh?

Snottlebocket

Snottlebocket

Netherlands
March 2004

JUN 11, 2007 10:19 PM

Don't be so difficult, at least he's still trying to pretend he has legitimate reasons for trying to destroy and attack nations.

Rafi

Rafi

Santa Monica, CA
January 2003

JUN 11, 2007 10:22 PM

Oh come on, we haven't invaded a middle-eastern country in like, four years now! I'm getting bored with the last one - when can we do another?!

hadees

hadees

Austin, TX
December 2003

JUN 11, 2007 11:05 PM

The real power in Iran is with the Clergy and their Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. He calls all the shots, he controls the military, and he controls the nuclear program. And here's the kicker: the Supreme Leader issued a fatwa or religious edict that forbids the development of nuclear weapons because they run counter to Islamic Law.


The Supreme leader is in charge so it is safe to say that he at least is ok with Ahmadinejad's rhetoric. I don't exactly see why that is supposed to make people feel any better about Iran and nuclear weapons. As for the fatwa as proof that he doesn't want nuclear weapons, you are basically taking his word for it.

Are those Ayatollahs really gonna commit mass suicide by managing to lob a nuclear-tipped missile into Tel Aviv?


Iran seems to be okay with suicide bombers. If they had a nuke they might use it as a stop gap for all sorts of reasons. What if the people decide they don't want to be ruled by the Ayatollah and revolt.

I think everyone is jumping the gun. All that is happening right now are sanctions because Iran won't stop it's enriching program that could be used to make highly enriched uranium used in nuclear weapons. Seems okay to me. Even the lowest estimates put of their ability to make enough highly enriched uranium for a bomb to 2010. Hopefully Iran will take Russia up on the offer to provide the uranium and Iran can have the peaceful nuclear power plant with out freaking out all it's neighbors (I am not just talking about Israel). Well that is if Iran only wants a nuclear power plant.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

Los Angeles, CA

JUN 11, 2007 11:39 PM

evanharos, you are a criminal.

semyaza

semyaza

Wildomar, CA
December 2004

JUN 12, 2007 04:36 AM

And you call Ron Paul a nutjob? Compared to the "nuke 'em all" club, he is downright SANE. He may have his issues (like we all do), but at least he's not racing us toward arma-fucking-geddon.

NickFaust

NickFaust

USA
April 2004

JUN 12, 2007 05:17 AM

semyaza said:
And you call Ron Paul a nutjob? Compared to the "nuke 'em all" club, he is downright SANE. He may have his issues (like we all do), but at least he's not racing us toward arma-fucking-geddon.



No, he is just a different kind of nut-job.

Nokturn

Nokturn

United Kingdom
April 2006

JUN 12, 2007 07:13 AM

Failing Iran wanting to develop nuclear wepeons, they could have those 'WMD' things instead. And also faeries, unicorns and other assorted works of fiction.

If the US was serious about wishing to avoid the dangers of nuclear wepeons, it would get rid of some of its own.
Not happening. Let's move to Antarctica- it's getting warmer anyway.

mingol

mingol

Singapore
July 2005

JUN 12, 2007 07:37 AM

It's demoralizing to realize just how little our fearless leaders know or understand about the countries they're hell-bent on attacking and/or invading.

I mean, I knew most of this stuff, and I've never even been to Iran, nor do I know anyone from there. (And I don't have the entire CIA at my disposal, either.) What excuse do they think they have?

Jennifer_

Jennifer_

Venezuela
November 2006

JUN 12, 2007 07:55 AM

If Ayatollah Khameni views nuclear weapons as a violation of Islamic law, why hasn't he spoken out against Ahmedinejad and the nuclear programme?
Iran is rarely tolerant of percieved violations of Islamic law.

Or is Khameni just going along with the 'we're only developing nuclear power for energy' line?

Chainlink

Chainlink

Dickeyville, WI
August 2005

JUN 12, 2007 09:33 AM

Jenni said:
If Ayatollah Khameni views nuclear weapons as a violation of Islamic law, why hasn't he spoken out against Ahmedinejad and the nuclear programme?
Iran is rarely tolerant of percieved violations of Islamic law.

Or is Khameni just going along with the 'we're only developing nuclear power for energy' line?



Nuclear power is not against Islamic law.
Khameni is dictating the " only for energy " policy.

bald_eagle

bald_eagle

Indianapolis, IN
November 2006

JUN 12, 2007 09:38 PM

What? Bush is lying to us? eeek

Jennifer_

Jennifer_

Venezuela
November 2006

JUN 13, 2007 02:48 AM

chainlink said:

Jenni said:
If Ayatollah Khameni views nuclear weapons as a violation of Islamic law, why hasn't he spoken out against Ahmedinejad and the nuclear programme?
Iran is rarely tolerant of percieved violations of Islamic law.

Or is Khameni just going along with the 'we're only developing nuclear power for energy' line?



Nuclear power is not against Islamic law.
Khameni is dictating the " only for energy " policy.


Yes, I know. What I was curious about it is why Khameni hasn't done more to state his opposition to nuclear weaponry and-re-assure the international community, given the radical language of the people in his administration. Or maybe I'm wrong and he already has?

Sorry, I think I must've phrased the question in an odd way.

SockPuppet

SockPuppet

I'm lost
July 2006

JUN 13, 2007 03:44 PM

Nokturn said:
If the US was serious about wishing to avoid the dangers of nuclear wepeons, it would get rid of some of its own.



And stop selling their delivery systems to the UK, as well.

HowardPHD

HowardPHD

New York, NY
September 2006

JUN 15, 2007 03:54 AM

If Iran isn't a threat why do they say they want to nuke the United States and Israel. Until USA nuclear inspectors are all over Iran, Iran is a threat. Until the ayatollahs like wine, free speech, and religious freedom; Iran is a threat. I was a captain in the US military reserves and have only the greatest respect for our brothers who are in the special forces (I wasn't). This world is a great blessing that God gave us. We have to use it well and love one another but we have to be ready for those who would mske us glow in the dark and kill us with nukes or whatever. Evil also exists and as one guy said Freedom is not Free.

fountainofdreams

fountainofdreams

Mokena, IL
January 2005

JUN 15, 2007 07:51 AM

HowardPHD said:
If Iran isn't a threat why do they say they want to nuke the United States and Israel. Until USA nuclear inspectors are all over Iran, Iran is a threat. Until the ayatollahs like wine, free speech, and religious freedom; Iran is a threat. I was a captain in the US military reserves and have only the greatest respect for our brothers who are in the special forces (I wasn't). This world is a great blessing that God gave us. We have to use it well and love one another but we have to be ready for those who would mske us glow in the dark and kill us with nukes or whatever. Evil also exists and as one guy said Freedom is not Free.



Let's see, religious intolerance...halfbaked claims about "Freedom"...a claim to be in/have been in the military...

We have a winner!

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next