It seems we have a problem

Anything goes, but keep it seemly...

It seems we have a problem

Postby Hud » Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:43 am

Anyone care to speculate on how this Iranian situation is going to end up? I don't think "nuke em" is an option. As an American, I can't think of a worse leader for that country. I thought Khomeini was bad but this guy is pure evil imo. Right now the popular opinion is an oil embargo but since they produce around 5 or 6% of the worlds oil, I wonder if we have the stomach for that? I think the Israelis would and could take out any bricks and mortar, but I also think we're trying to prevent that. Eventually, if it becomes a matter of state security, they'll do it.
Hud
 
Posts: 570
Joined: 29 October 2005

Re: It seems we have a problem

Postby coloin » Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:55 pm

Hud wrote:As an American, I can't think of a worse leader for that country


As a member of the rest of the world, I cant think of a worse leader than Bush !


What gives America the right to bomb a villiage in Pakistan ?

Answer please.
coloin
 
Posts: 1629
Joined: 05 May 2005

Postby Hud » Mon Feb 06, 2006 4:13 am

I don't see what your nasty reply has to do with the original question, but I'll try to answer it anyway. I've never thought Bush was qualified to be president of this great country, but he is and that's that. When your country is attacked by someone who is quite probably residing in a country like Pakistan, I would assume you would try to remove him in anyway possible. It also seems that the terrorists I'm referring to have no problem hiding behind women and children and also strapping bombs to them to remove the "Great Satan" or anyone who their masters compel to do it to. By the way, what do you really think will happen to Iran eventually?
Hud
 
Posts: 570
Joined: 29 October 2005

Postby Crazy Girl » Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:27 pm

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."—George W. Bush,:(:(
Crazy Girl
 
Posts: 189
Joined: 08 November 2005

Postby tarek » Mon Feb 06, 2006 1:45 pm

this looks like déjà vu all over again:D
User avatar
tarek
 
Posts: 2607
Joined: 05 January 2006

Postby TKiel » Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:09 pm

You people in the rest of the world have to remember that God is on our side, so whatever we do must be right. And contrary to all scientific evidence, the solar system (and the universe) does indeed revolve around the earth and specifically the US.

Tracy
TKiel
 
Posts: 209
Joined: 05 January 2006

Postby Animator » Mon Feb 06, 2006 6:37 pm

Please stop going off-topic. You've got an entire forum for that!

The main question that was asked: what do you think about the situation in Iran. (And how do you think the world will solve it.)

The only thing that was mentioned about the US was the nationality of the one asking the question.

Now what is more important? The nationality and/or the government of the person that asked the question, or the actual question?
Animator
 
Posts: 469
Joined: 08 April 2005

Postby MCC » Tue Feb 07, 2006 5:39 pm

The Iranian situation is not an easy one to answer, in the short term do we stop the Iranians from having a nuclear policy in order to stop the Mullahs from getting Uranium for bombs, when in the long term, what with oil and other carbonaceous fuels being quickly used up, there will be a need for other forms of generating power, such as nuclear.

At the moment there is a polarization in Iran between the Mullahs and the Iranian peoples.

The following was taken from this site:

http://www.ncr-iran.org/content/view/972/69/

National Council of Resistance of Iran - Foreign Affairs Committee

“The Iranian people and their organized resistance, see the specter of the mullahs being armed with nuclear weapons as a disaster that would prolong their rule and add to the misfortune of the Iranian people. In the view of the Iranian people, a nuclear armed regime in Tehran would only result in more torture and hangings of Iranian youth… This is why we tell the IAEA Board of Governors and the world community that if you have the least regard for the fate of Iran's oppressed people, then it is imperative you abandon once and for all the policy of undue conciliation and futile expectation of improvement in the conduct of the mullahs' dictatorship. The pain and suffering of the Iranian people and the nightmare facing regional countries must not continue more than it already has,”.

MCC
MCC
 
Posts: 1275
Joined: 08 June 2005

Postby coloin » Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:44 pm

Hud wrote:I don't see what your nasty reply has to do with the original question, but I'll try to answer it anyway.

My reply was my opinion on a leader - which was identical to the phrasing you used in your post.

If you were a villager in pakistan and your son was killed by an air attack out of the blue - you would perhaps have more of an idea of what the word "nasty" means. If my question is uncomfortable for you I am sorry.

I dont think removing a terrorist "in any way possible" is the way to do it at all. By killing innocent civilians you are doing exactly the same as the terrorists did initially.

Hud wrote:. By the way, what do you really think will happen to Iran eventually?
I think the U.S/Israel will bomb Iran.

By the way.......what right has the U.S. to bomb Pakistan the way they did ? I'm afraid your answer didnt wash with those villagers.
coloin
 
Posts: 1629
Joined: 05 May 2005

Postby Hud » Wed Feb 08, 2006 2:50 am

I'm gratified that some of you understood the original post. How Pakistan got into it is beyond me. However, I'll simply state that the border area of Pakistan is not under government control, and truth be told, it's a lawless place under control of warlords who are in the employ of Al-Queda.

I sincerely hope the people of Iran can remove their president peacefully, but I doubt that it'll happen. Remember that they did elect him. I read today that the whole Muslim/west conflict is a battle between the 7th and 21st centuries.

I actually believe the US won't take direct action against Iran, but somebody will unless things change for the better.

I'm sorry to get emotionally involved in a discussion like this, but as advertised, it's been troubling me. Now if only I could solve colouring and swordfishes.
Hud
 
Posts: 570
Joined: 29 October 2005

Postby tarek » Wed Feb 08, 2006 3:02 am

I think that the US,Israel candidates forced the Iranian hidden single through a double implication chain. This will lead to a contradiction as only 1 nuclear power is allowed in the MIDDLE block. Therefore one of the candidates in the original cell should be taken out or the hidden single should be taken out to have a valid solution:(
User avatar
tarek
 
Posts: 2607
Joined: 05 January 2006

Postby MCC » Wed Feb 08, 2006 5:35 pm

I don't think the USA will bomb Iran, it's to everyones benefit for a more political solution.

Bombing of Iran could lead to the Iranian people backing their Mullah leaders even with their hatred of the present regime, to the detriment of the West.

Isreal could be a wild card here and the USA will have to keep an eye on them.

An embargo would seem to be the most likely option.

Although Iran is the second largest producer of oil and gas, it uses more oil than it can refine so has to import oil, and an embargo would lead to an economical disaster.

An embargo could lead to the uprising of the Iran people against their Mullah leadership.



MCC
MCC
 
Posts: 1275
Joined: 08 June 2005


Return to Coffee bar