5 ms·

No, next they'll build nukes and ballistic missiles. Not just for isolationism but for attacking their neighbors and manipulating world's oil supply. It is har

by dmk23 15y ago

No, next they'll build nukes and ballistic missiles. Not just for isolationism but for attacking their neighbors and manipulating world's oil supply. It is hard to see how a war with Iran can be avoided. EDIT: Anyone who is downvoting, please post an actual reasoned response on what exactly you disagree with.

ollerac 15y ago
These are people just like us who are interested in self-preservation. Do you have any idea how many times the U.S. has completely screwed up their economy? The world isn't fair mostly because people can't stop fucking with each other.
- samic 15y ago
  who are you talking about?! in iran, government and people are two different things! and I have no doubt that if this government get his hands on an atomic bomb, the world will be in a big trouble! attacking iran is the best choice! hear it from an Iranian.
ef4 15y ago
For one thing, the regime has been a fairly rational actor that does what's necessary to stay in power. You need to look at what they do, rather than what they say, which often has more to do with domestic politics. There's no doubt that actually launching a nuclear first strike would be the end of the regime, and they know it. But they still quite rationally want a nuclear deterrent so they can achieve a balance of power with Israel and insurance against an American invasion. So war is not a foregone conclusion, even if they really manage to build a nuclear weapon, and if they could credibly threaten to deliver it, which is much harder and not at all certain. Consider that a nation like China values stability and plays for the long term, and yet they've been willing to continue backing Iran. Clearly China has evaluated the Iranian regime and decided it's stable enough to rely on. My money is on China knowing what they're doing. The push for war has everything to do with the US and Israel wanting to maintain overwhelming military dominance. Iran is not a realistic threat to the existence of Israel or US security. But it's a threat to American regional hegemony.
- jeebus 15y ago
  Just for what it's worth: you are presuming China is backing Iran for the long term, when they could be using it as a bargaining chip against a different conflict with the US / western powers. E.g. Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan, the Koreas, to name the ones just bordering / within China. That said, I agree Iran has acted rational to their means, but as the country tends dangerously close to provoking an Israeli attack, one might alter that viewpoint.
- philwelch 15y ago
  > But they still quite rationally want a nuclear deterrent so they can achieve a balance of power with Israel and insurance against an American invasion. Israel is no threat to Iran. The worst they could do is make limited air raids, and the only interest they'd have in that would be to destroy their nuclear program. So the Iranian nuclear program only increases the risk of Israeli action. As for the US, there's no rational risk of US action if they don't develop nuclear weapons. Iraq is no precedent, if only because Iraq was already in an untenable situation with the economic and military sanctions, and the last thing you do if you want to become Iraq is give the rest of the world a reason to impose sanctions. Developing nuclear weapons and violating human rights are both fantastic ways to get sanctions imposed. Of course, these arguments are a bit wounding to the national pride, but you're saying Iran is acting rationally, not pridefully. > Consider that a nation like China values stability and plays for the long term, and yet they've been willing to continue backing Iran. Clearly China has evaluated the Iranian regime and decided it's stable enough to rely on. My money is on China knowing what they're doing. By that logic, North Korea is a stable and reliable regime. There's something more going on here. Charitably speaking, maybe China thinks they can keep some control over Iran, the same way they have some control over North Korea, by fostering dependence.
  - patrickk 15y ago
    It's a power play between east and west. China uses Iran and N.Korea as a leverage against the west. Russia does something similar with Syria. It's got nothing to do with Iran, N.Korea or even Israel ultimately. It's certainly got nothing to do with human rights (if so, why hasn't NATO invaded Darfur?) I'm going to stop now because this is becoming too political.
nextparadigms 15y ago
Even if they did that. So what? Do you think Russia cares about manipulating their gas supplies? They only care as a far as market forces go, and they know others will quit buying from them if they make it too expensive, and that's about it. But who gets to decide that Iran is not allowed to do whatever the heck they want with their oil supply? Is Iran indebted to the world to give them oil? Maybe the world should just find an alternative if they don't like it. That's not a reason to start a war. And if people really understood that this is the real reason and not some imminent nuclear threat, they'd probably be against the war, too, and learn to deal with the situation, and adapt.
jakeonthemove 15y ago
On nukes: I believe that they would only go as far as build them (if even that) and start threatening other countries. The reason they will probably never use them is that if they do, they're pretty much screwed - the US and NATO will finally have a clear reason to start a war with them and they'll go the way of Iraq for sure. They don't have the military power to oppose any serious attack from NATO, at least from what I can see. Russia and China stepping in would be the only possible game changers, but I don't see a reason for them to side with Iran as it is now, either... P.S. Is it me or downvoting seems flawed here - one downvote and the comment is out of sight?
el_presidente 15y ago
I don't think Iran has ever attacked another country. OTOH, there is a country that attacks Iran's neighbors and tries to manipulate the world's oil supply. Thankfully there's no way China would let them start a war with Iran. A middle eastern country with weapons of mass destruction... where have I heard that before?
andybak 15y ago
If you provided an argument with a little more detail and substance, then I'm sure you'll receive the reasoned responses that you crave. Until then I'm just down-voting you for baldly stating something that contradicts most reasoned analyses that I've read.

by dmk23 15y ago

ollerac 15y ago

These are people just like us who are interested in self-preservation. Do you have any idea how many times the U.S. has completely screwed up their economy? The world isn't fair mostly because people can't stop fucking with each other.

samic 15y ago
who are you talking about?! in iran, government and people are two different things! and I have no doubt that if this government get his hands on an atomic bomb, the world will be in a big trouble! attacking iran is the best choice! hear it from an Iranian.

ef4 15y ago

For one thing, the regime has been a fairly rational actor that does what's necessary to stay in power. You need to look at what they do, rather than what they say, which often has more to do with domestic politics. There's no doubt that actually launching a nuclear first strike would be the end of the regime, and they know it. But they still quite rationally want a nuclear deterrent so they can achieve a balance of power with Israel and insurance against an American invasion. So war is not a foregone conclusion, even if they really manage to build a nuclear weapon, and if they could credibly threaten to deliver it, which is much harder and not at all certain. Consider that a nation like China values stability and plays for the long term, and yet they've been willing to continue backing Iran. Clearly China has evaluated the Iranian regime and decided it's stable enough to rely on. My money is on China knowing what they're doing. The push for war has everything to do with the US and Israel wanting to maintain overwhelming military dominance. Iran is not a realistic threat to the existence of Israel or US security. But it's a threat to American regional hegemony.

jeebus 15y ago
Just for what it's worth: you are presuming China is backing Iran for the long term, when they could be using it as a bargaining chip against a different conflict with the US / western powers. E.g. Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan, the Koreas, to name the ones just bordering / within China. That said, I agree Iran has acted rational to their means, but as the country tends dangerously close to provoking an Israeli attack, one might alter that viewpoint.
philwelch 15y ago
> But they still quite rationally want a nuclear deterrent so they can achieve a balance of power with Israel and insurance against an American invasion. Israel is no threat to Iran. The worst they could do is make limited air raids, and the only interest they'd have in that would be to destroy their nuclear program. So the Iranian nuclear program only increases the risk of Israeli action. As for the US, there's no rational risk of US action if they don't develop nuclear weapons. Iraq is no precedent, if only because Iraq was already in an untenable situation with the economic and military sanctions, and the last thing you do if you want to become Iraq is give the rest of the world a reason to impose sanctions. Developing nuclear weapons and violating human rights are both fantastic ways to get sanctions imposed. Of course, these arguments are a bit wounding to the national pride, but you're saying Iran is acting rationally, not pridefully. > Consider that a nation like China values stability and plays for the long term, and yet they've been willing to continue backing Iran. Clearly China has evaluated the Iranian regime and decided it's stable enough to rely on. My money is on China knowing what they're doing. By that logic, North Korea is a stable and reliable regime. There's something more going on here. Charitably speaking, maybe China thinks they can keep some control over Iran, the same way they have some control over North Korea, by fostering dependence.
- patrickk 15y ago
  It's a power play between east and west. China uses Iran and N.Korea as a leverage against the west. Russia does something similar with Syria. It's got nothing to do with Iran, N.Korea or even Israel ultimately. It's certainly got nothing to do with human rights (if so, why hasn't NATO invaded Darfur?) I'm going to stop now because this is becoming too political.

nextparadigms 15y ago

Even if they did that. So what? Do you think Russia cares about manipulating their gas supplies? They only care as a far as market forces go, and they know others will quit buying from them if they make it too expensive, and that's about it. But who gets to decide that Iran is not allowed to do whatever the heck they want with their oil supply? Is Iran indebted to the world to give them oil? Maybe the world should just find an alternative if they don't like it. That's not a reason to start a war. And if people really understood that this is the real reason and not some imminent nuclear threat, they'd probably be against the war, too, and learn to deal with the situation, and adapt.

jakeonthemove 15y ago

On nukes: I believe that they would only go as far as build them (if even that) and start threatening other countries. The reason they will probably never use them is that if they do, they're pretty much screwed - the US and NATO will finally have a clear reason to start a war with them and they'll go the way of Iraq for sure. They don't have the military power to oppose any serious attack from NATO, at least from what I can see. Russia and China stepping in would be the only possible game changers, but I don't see a reason for them to side with Iran as it is now, either... P.S. Is it me or downvoting seems flawed here - one downvote and the comment is out of sight?

el_presidente 15y ago

I don't think Iran has ever attacked another country. OTOH, there is a country that attacks Iran's neighbors and tries to manipulate the world's oil supply. Thankfully there's no way China would let them start a war with Iran. A middle eastern country with weapons of mass destruction... where have I heard that before?

andybak 15y ago

If you provided an argument with a little more detail and substance, then I'm sure you'll receive the reasoned responses that you crave. Until then I'm just down-voting you for baldly stating something that contradicts most reasoned analyses that I've read.