# Iran Obama's 'only chance of success' **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 16, 2010, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682 "2010-05-16T21:31:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Marmite\_Lover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e495f1/32.png) [@Marmite\_Lover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marmite_Lover)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 9:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/61 "2010-05-19T09:59:08Z")
NUmber 3 in the quiz talks of suicide bombers. Because suicide is so totally against Islam, you must surely by now realise that the Wahabist regime of Saudi supported by the USA are the ones doing the suicide bombing!!! Yes?. Unfortunately the support for the Saudi regime by the US is generating a more radical Islam and that terrorist element. Their Saudi oil and your desperate need for it makes you support these terrorist ideologies. Iran is no supporter or Saudi, therefore Iran will be targeted by the USA as the troublemaker. The US and Saudi have common interests. ---
**Author:** ![Marmite\_Lover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e495f1/32.png) [@Marmite\_Lover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marmite_Lover)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 10:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/62 "2010-05-19T10:22:44Z")
> [@Camus](#): > > Are we talking about the same Iran that picks which candidates for political office can even run based on their acceptability by the Ayatollah, violently attacks peaceful protesters who are demonstrating against rigged elections, and ultimately shows the pointlessness of elections in the first place since the Ayatollah has the ultimate say over everything? In comparison, Iraq is a much more ideal representative democracy than Iran. > Then why are they enriching uranium to levels far beyond what are needed to peaceful nuclear power? Why are they stonewalling and prevaricating with IAEA officials and lying about the existence of secret nuclear research/development sites that are built underground or inside mountains? Why would they need to build nuclear research/development sites inside mountains (and lie about their existence) if it was only for peaceful purposes? 😃 in one word Egypt;) I don’t see the US sanctioning Egypt. \*\* "Then why are they enriching uranium to levels far beyond what are needed to peaceful nuclear power? "\*\* Did other countries like Israel and the US and Russia enrich uranium far beyond what is needed for peaceful nuclear power? Can you not see the double standard here that sends the rest of the world crazy with rage? ---
**Author:** ![Marmite\_Lover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e495f1/32.png) [@Marmite\_Lover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marmite_Lover)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 10:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/63 "2010-05-19T10:28:00Z")
Indeed Camus. Ever been down the polling booths in the Gulf, Saudi recently to oversee the voting there ?😃 Funny how no one mentions these elections:D Why Iran is in all the headlines come voting day. Double standards make people crazy. Double standards make suicide bombers. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 10:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/64 "2010-05-19T10:42:03Z")
So far we’ve learned that suicide bombers are caused by: 1. The US-supported Saudi regime; 2. The US policy on the development of nuclear weapons by Iran; and 3. Excessive coverage of Iranian elections/insufficient coverage of Saudi elections by the US media. Furthermore, we know that suicide bombers have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with: 1. Islam Keep fighting the good fight, **Marmite Lover**! ---
**Author:** ![Camus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ba8739/32.png) [@Camus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Camus)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 10:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/65 "2010-05-19T10:48:23Z")
> [@Marmite\_Lover](#): > > Did other countries like Israel and the US and Russia enrich uranium far beyond what is needed for peaceful nuclear power? > > Can you not see the double standard here that sends the rest of the world crazy with rage? We’re talking about Iran. Why do all the self-appointed defenders of Iran always try to change the subject and point to other countries (particularly Israel, which hasn’t even signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty)? The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) does not forbid already-declared nuclear states such as the US or Russia from maintaining or even adding to its nuclear weapon stockpiles, but it does urge nuclear states to move towards disarmament. Which both the US and Russia are doing (albeit very slowly). The NPT does prohibit non-nuclear weapon states, such as Iran, from receiving, manufacturing, or acquiring nuclear weapons or seeking any assistance in doing any of those things. The NPT also requires certain safeguards by the IAEA to ensure that peaceful nuclear energy (and its radioactive by-products) are being diverted towards the development of weapons. If you don’t like the NPT, that’s fine. Iran was not forced to sign it, but they did. As for double-standards regarding the previously existing declared nuclear powers such as the US and Russia, they were written into the NPT. Again, Iran didn’t have to sign it, but they did. They - and their poorly informed defenders - can hardly complain about a double-standard now like it’s a new development. Besides, what is the remedy for this double-standard, nuclear weapons for each and every nation-state? ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 11:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/66 "2010-05-19T11:24:37Z")
> [@Marmite\_Lover](#): > > Iran in this region is seen to be strong and sticking up for injustice. This is probably the single most factual thing you’ve said. > [@Marmite\_Lover](#): > > Iran is not threat to anyone Except Lebanon, which it has repeatedly tried to dominate through force of arms and where it recently nearly caused another civil war as Hezbollah was installing a separate spy-telecom network which would allow them to listen in on all Lebanese communications and for Iran to link up their proxy military forces in the region. But other than that whole “trying to usurp control of Lebanon” they’re not a threat to anybody. Except for their support of both Hamas and Hezbollah, which are both racist, genocidal organizations who openly advocate the destruction of the state of Israel. So except for Lebanon and Israel, Iran isn’t a threat to anybody. Except for their attack where they directed Hezbolah to carry out an act of mass murder on Saudi soil when they killed US military forces at the Khobar Towers or their attack where they armed, trained, financed and directed Hezbollah to carry out an act of mass murder in Lebanon when they killed US non-combatant peacekeepers. So except for Lebanon, Israel, and the US, Iran isn’t a threat to anybody. Except for when Iran’s directed Hezbollah to commit acts of mass murder when they bombed the Israeli embassy and a Jewish center in Argentina. So other than Lebanon, Isreal, the US, Argentina and Jews, Iran isn’t a threat to anybody. Except for the Hezbollah cells that exist [in Europe, Africa, South America, North America, and elsewhere](http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/hizballah.htm). So other than Lebanon, Isreal, the US, Argentina, Jews, Europe, Africa, South america, North America and elsewhere, Iran isn’t a threat to anybody. > [@](#): > > Iran is a moderate Islamic republic which would be totally against and as far as I can see using nuclear weapons. It is just SO against their religion. Mmmm hmmmm… [ > [@](#): > > Iran’s hardline spiritual leaders have issued an unprecedented new fatwa, or holy order, sanctioning the use of atomic weapons against its enemies. > > In yet another sign of Teheran’s stiffening resolve on the nuclear issue, influential Muslim clerics have for the first time questioned the theocracy’s traditional stance that Sharia law forbade the use of nuclear weapons. ]([http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/1510900/Iranian-fatwa-approves-use-of-nuclear-weapons.html](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/1510900/Iranian-fatwa-approves-use-of-nuclear-weapons.html)) > [@](#): > > Do not mistake them for the Taliban or Al Qaeda. Mmm hmmmm. [ > [@](#): > > Turabi sought to persuade Shiites and Sunnis to put aside their divisions and join against the common enemy. In late 1991 or 1992, discussions in Sudan > between al Qaeda and Iranian operatives led to an informal agreement to cooperate in providing support—even if only training—for actions carried out primarily against Israel and the United States. Not long afterward, senior al Qaeda operatives and trainers traveled to Iran to receive training in explosives. In the fall of 1993,another such delegation went to the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon for further training in explosives as well as in intelligence and security. Bin Ladin reportedly showed particular interest in learning how to use truck bombs such as the one that had killed 241 U.S. Marines in Lebanon in 1983.The relation-ship between al Qaeda and Iran demonstrated that Sunni-Shia divisions did not necessarily pose an insurmountable barrier to cooperation in terrorist operations. As will be described in chapter 7,al Qaeda contacts with Iran continued 52 in ensuing years. ]([http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec2.pdf](http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec2.pdf)) [ > [@](#): > > Intelligence indicates the persistence of contacts between Iranian security officials and senior al Qaeda figures after Bin Ladin’s return to Afghanistan. Khallad has said that Iran made a concerted effort to strengthen relations with al Qaeda after the October 2000 attack on the USS Cole, but was rebuffed because Bin Ladin did not want to alienate his supporters in Saudi Arabia. Khallad and other detainees have described the willingness of Iranian officials to facilitate the travel of al Qaeda members through Iran,on their way to and from Afghanistan.For example,Iranian border inspectors would be told not to place telltale stamps in the passports of these travelers. Such arrangements were particularly beneficial to Saudi members of al Qaeda. Our knowledge of the international travels of the al Qaeda operatives selected for the 9/11 operation remains fragmentary. But we now have evidence suggesting that 8 to 10 of the 14 Saudi “muscle”operatives traveled into or out of Iran between October 2000 and February 2001. ]([http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec7.pdf](http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec7.pdf)) > [@](#): > > Do you know that in Islam you have the right to defence BUT!!! not to harm civilians, women, children and elderly. If you do it is straight to hell. Mmmm hmmm. [ > [@](#): > > On Sunday, November 13, the semi-official Tehran daily Kayhan reported that the Iranian government publicly hung two men, Mokhtar N. (24 years old) and Ali A. (25 years old), in the Shahid Bahonar Square of the northern town of Gorgan. > > The government reportedly executed the two men for the crime of “lavat.” Iran’s shari`a-based penal code defines lavat as penetrative and non-penetrative sexual acts between men. Iranian law punishes all penetrative sexual acts between adult men with the death penalty. Non-penetrative sexual acts between men are punished with lashes until the fourth offense, when they are punished with death. Sexual acts between women, which are defined differently, are punished with lashes until the fourth offense, when they are also punished with death. ]([Iran: Two More Executions for Homosexual Conduct | Human Rights Watch](http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2005/11/21/iran12072.htm)) ---
**Author:** ![Marmite\_Lover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e495f1/32.png) [@Marmite\_Lover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marmite_Lover)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 11:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/67 "2010-05-19T11:26:36Z")
Double standards like this. \*\* "In 1976, President Gerald R. Ford signed a directive that granted Iran the opportunity to purchase U.S. built reprocessing equipment and facilities designed to extract plutonium from nuclear reactor fuel…Thirty years ago, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld agreed. Today, Cheney and Rumsfeld appear to be crawling out of their skins with uncontrollable militarized lust for control of Iranian oil fields via a U.S. occupied, Iran. The NEO-CON war drumbeaters have already devised their plans for the liberation of the people again, this time Iranian people, and making things all better, just like they have done in Iraq. Scary stuff, but it is true. In preparation, the Bush Administration has primed the mainstream media so effectively that 8 out of 10 Americans believe Iran poises an immediate nuclear threat to the United States. The President’s recent and risky travel to regional nuclear powers, Pakistan and India, no doubt also served as a strategic warning to those countries to prepare for the certain public backlash to be expected once the U.S. or Israel begins to drop bombs on Iran. "\*\* > **[U.S. endorsed Iranian plans to build massive nuclear energy industry - Global...](https://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-endorsed-iranian-plans-to-build-massive-nuclear-energy-industry/2067)** > > In 1976, President Gerald R. Ford signed a directive that granted Iran the opportunity to purchase U.S. built reprocessing equipment and facilities designed to extract plutonium from nuclear reactor fuel.    When Gerald Ford assumed... ---
**Author:** ![Marmite\_Lover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e495f1/32.png) [@Marmite\_Lover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marmite_Lover)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 11:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/68 "2010-05-19T11:38:15Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > This is probably the single most factual thing you’ve said. > > Except Lebanon, which it has repeatedly tried to dominate through force of arms and where it recently nearly caused another civil war as Hezbollah was installing a separate spy-telecom network which would allow them to listen in on all Lebanese communications and for Iran to link up their proxy military forces in the region. > But other than that whole “trying to usurp control of Lebanon” they’re not a threat to anybody. > > Except for their support of both Hamas and Hezbollah, which are both racist, genocidal organizations who openly advocate the destruction of the state of Israel. So except for Lebanon and Israel, Iran isn’t a threat to anybody. > > Except for their attack where they directed Hezbolah to carry out an act of mass murder on Saudi soil when they killed US military forces at the Khobar Towers or their attack where they armed, trained, financed and directed Hezbollah to carry out an act of mass murder in Lebanon when they killed US non-combatant peacekeepers. So except for Lebanon, Israel, and the US, Iran isn’t a threat to anybody. > > Except for when Iran’s directed Hezbollah to commit acts of mass murder when they bombed the Israeli embassy and a Jewish center in Argentina. So other than Lebanon, Isreal, the US, Argentina and Jews, Iran isn’t a threat to anybody. > > Except for the Hezbollah cells that exist [in Europe, Africa, South America, North America, and elsewhere](http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/hizballah.htm). So other than Lebanon, Isreal, the US, Argentina, Jews, Europe, Africa, South america, North America and elsewhere, Iran isn’t a threat to anybody. > > Mmmm hmmmm… > > [ > > Mmm hmmmm. > [url=[http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec2.pdf](http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec2.pdf)]]([http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/1510900/Iranian-fatwa-approves-use-of-nuclear-weapons.html](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/1510900/Iranian-fatwa-approves-use-of-nuclear-weapons.html)) > > [ > > Mmmm hmmm. > [url=[Iran: Two More Executions for Homosexual Conduct | Human Rights Watch](http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2005/11/21/iran12072.htm)]]([http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec7.pdf](http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec7.pdf)) This is just pure rubbish so not worth replying to. But let me make just one point in your totally flawed argument. Who was standing with Ahmedinejad a few days ago holding hands in the air to the camera’s? Was that a South American leader or not. Is Chavez South American leader? What about his South American tour to Nicaragua, Bolivia, Equador? Go back and see how many meetings he has had with European leaders, African leaders. Do you not get any news down there in Texas? and I haven’t heard Hariri mention his terror of Iran;) Yep those South Americans, Africans, Europeans, Lebanese are shaking in their shoes:D ---
**Author:** ![Marmite\_Lover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e495f1/32.png) [@Marmite\_Lover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marmite_Lover)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 11:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/69 "2010-05-19T11:43:46Z")
> [@Camus](#): > > We’re talking about Iran. Why do all the self-appointed defenders of Iran always try to change the subject and point to other countries (particularly Israel, which hasn’t even signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty)? The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) does not forbid already-declared nuclear states such as the US or Russia from maintaining or even adding to its nuclear weapon stockpiles, but it does urge nuclear states to move towards disarmament. Which both the US and Russia are doing (albeit very slowly). The NPT does prohibit non-nuclear weapon states, such as Iran, from receiving, manufacturing, or acquiring nuclear weapons or seeking any assistance in doing any of those things. The NPT also requires certain safeguards by the IAEA to ensure that peaceful nuclear energy (and its radioactive by-products) are being diverted towards the development of weapons. > > If you don’t like the NPT, that’s fine. Iran was not forced to sign it, but they did. As for double-standards regarding the previously existing declared nuclear powers such as the US and Russia, they were written into the NPT. Again, Iran didn’t have to sign it, but they did. They - and their poorly informed defenders - can hardly complain about a double-standard now like it’s a new development. Besides, what is the remedy for this double-standard, nuclear weapons for each and every nation-state? If you do not see that double standards exist then I am wasting my time. It’s not just about NPT. It’s okay to send a US drone to drop a bomb on a girls school in Pakistan, but it’s not okay for Hamas to lob a rocket into an Israeli one? Are both wrong or not? ---
**Author:** ![Camus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ba8739/32.png) [@Camus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Camus)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/70 "2010-05-19T11:46:01Z")
> [@Marmite\_Lover](#): > > Double standards like this. Just going around saying “double standards” and randomly quoting something that happened in the 1970s or earlier is not an argument. Saying something is a double-standard is not even a substantive response to an argument. Try making a counter-argument that addresses the key actor here - Iran and its actions in the present and very recent past. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/71 "2010-05-19T11:47:29Z")
> [@Marmite\_Lover](#): > > This is just pure rubbish so not worth replying to. In other words, you’ve got no rebuttal to a long list of cited assertions. And you’re changing the subject again to cover it up. ---
**Author:** ![Marmite\_Lover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e495f1/32.png) [@Marmite\_Lover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marmite_Lover)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/72 "2010-05-19T11:49:11Z")
here have a read at this It’s a Canadian site so no Arab or Persian propaganda here. > **[Knowledge, Truth and Human Action: America Hits the Wall - Global Research](https://www.globalresearch.ca/knowledge-truth-and-human-action-america-hits-the-wall/19190)** > > Americans have a problem with the truth. They seem to be unable to accept it. Beliefs and lies somehow always overwhelm the truth. ---
**Author:** ![Camus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ba8739/32.png) [@Camus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Camus)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/73 "2010-05-19T11:49:48Z")
> [@Marmite\_Lover](#): > > If you do not see that double standards exist then I am wasting my time. > > It’s not just about NPT. > > It’s okay to send a US drone to drop a bomb on a girls school in Pakistan, but it’s not okay for Hamas to lob a rocket into an Israeli one? > > Are both wrong or not? Once again, you don’t have a substantive response. If you say it’s not _just_ about the NPT, that means that according to you it is at least partially about the NPT. Why not address this partial part? Do you even have an argument that doesn’t just consist of “teh double standards!!!11”? This thread is about Iran, not about Pakistan or Hamas or Israel. Like any good magician, however, all you seem to be able to do is use misdirection to avoid addressing things you either would rather not address or don’t have any good explanation for. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 11:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/74 "2010-05-19T11:51:06Z")
> [@Marmite\_Lover](#): > > here have a read at this > > It’s a Canadian site so no Arab or Persian propaganda here. > > [Knowledge, Truth and Human Action: America Hits the Wall - Global ResearchGlobal Research - Centre for Research on Globalization](http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19190) Interesting, but has absolutely nothing to do with Iran. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 11:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/75 "2010-05-19T11:55:34Z")
> [@Marmite\_Lover](#): > > This is just pure rubbish so not worth replying to. Brilliant factual refutation. I’ve heard that if you harumph hard enough, facts melt like cotton candy in the rain. > [@Marmite\_Lover](#): > > Who was standing with Ahmedinejad a few days ago holding hands in the air to the camera’s? Was that a South American leader or not. Is Chavez South American leader? This totally counters the fact that there are Hezbollah cells all over the globe, after all, Ahmadinejad was holding hands with a guy. Wait.. does he get the death penalty for that under Iranian law, or only if they start making smoochy faces at each other? I’m a bit fuzzy on this whole concept of “not killing innocents except when you hang them until they’re dead” thing. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/76 "2010-05-19T14:49:59Z")
> [@Marmite\_Lover](#): > > Iran is a moderate Islamic republic which would be totally against and as far as I can see using nuclear weapons. How is Iran in any way “moderate” with their treatment of Baha’is I previously mentioned? I noticed neither you nor Zanthor has responded to my last comment. ---
**Author:** ![Zanthor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e19b73/32.png) [@Zanthor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zanthor)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/77 "2010-05-19T23:16:29Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > He’s not mongering for any wars. He did exactly what you would want a diplomat to do: use diplomacy. > Why is there antipathy between Iran and the U.S.? Like other posters have said, it goes back to U.S. support for the Shah and then got much worse with the hostage crisis. The Iraq war inflamed things more recently but the U.S. and Iran haven’t had formal diplomatic relations for 30 years. > Sanctions are what we do best? I wish! If you’re unable to tell the difference between sanctions and acts of war, you really don’t have the perspective to give an informed opinion on this issue. There’s a valid case to be made that the sanctions placed on Germany _after_ World War I (not before - Germany hadn’t existed for very long) were too burdensome and created some of the conditions that led to World War II. Then again if the demilitarization sanctions had been enforced there might not have been a war in the first place. > I think you’re so far off base that you might as well be making it up. This does not describe pre-WWII Germany or Japan at all. It doesn’t describe Iran or Iraq or Korea either. For starters I don’t think you know what “annex” means. It means “to add.” For example, Hitler annexed the Sudetenland prior to World War II. The U.S. never annexed Germany or Japan. It did not institute regime change in Germany or Japan until after WWII, and if you’re going to argue that was the wrong thing to do, I can only wish you good luck. The sequence of events you’re describing is not possible in the order you are giving them. Annex means to occupy, so it shouldn’t be on there twice. The U.S. instituted regime change in Iran in the 1950s, which was the wrong thing to do. It did not annex Iran. It was also involved in the government of Vietnam, stupidly. But it did not annex Vietnam. Iran has not been starved. > If you’re completely wrong and uninformed, then yes, I think I can dismiss your argument. And most of what you’re saying is absolutely wrong, and where you are correct, it doesn’t apply to Iran today. > It doesn’t matter who writes the history if you don’t bother reading it. diplomacy by increasing troop numbers by a factor of how many exactly? Way to many at the very least. with the obvious outcome. to whit. [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/19/us/19dead.html?hp](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/19/us/19dead.html?hp) “…On Tuesday, the toll of American dead in Afghanistan passed 1,000, after a suicide bomb in Kabul killed at least five United States service members. Having taken nearly seven years to reach the first 500 dead, the war killed the second 500 in fewer than two. A resurgent Taliban active in almost every province, a weak central government incapable of protecting its people and a larger number of American troops in harm’s way all contributed to the accelerating pace of death…” So, you think all this death worth it? theirs and yours? I remember when the American ppl said No More Slaughter in Vietnam, I stood , on the front line unflinchingly ( In New Zealand actually, as the cops moved in with their batons flashing, Spiro Agnew was visiting NZ, to drum up more killing $$$pree war support… The baton hit the ladies head sitting next to me, cracked it open, i managed to catch her baby she was nursing… Did not matter too much, we were just ‘Collateral Damage’ right??? Would that the blow had of hit me rather than her?, i like to think so, not sure. My question is, mand was, what will it take for you to say, enough killing is enough killing? like then, like now. If the Drafted your young to kill and die, like before? for another stupid, ‘noble cause’??? would that do it…? Self Preservation rules, no caring about ‘the other ppl’ we slaughter??? How much better to just… back off, stop meddling, interfering? stop bombing foreign nations, messing in their politics, invading? How is what is happening in Iraq, Afghanistan, probably Iran Pakistan if you can manage it. diff than what happened in Vietnam etc. Its called Manufacturing Consent for war, a watered down version, Manufacturing Consent to trade sanctions imposed upon them, to subdue them. I see the difference as only Subtle, no more, no less. Strange, I see sanctions as a total act of war, I look at Google Earth, or Nasa pics at night, I see America ablaze with Energy consumption, most of the rest of the wordl strangely quiet, dark, dare i say it, suppressed? heck… exploited even. The Rich in glass bubbles, the rest, aliens, not important, the evil enemy.. a few cruise missiles will silence their diff in ideology from ours, why bother reasoning with them. much easier to dominate by WARFARE!!! as to the rest, later, BTW, thank you for sorting out my last post into some sort of order. did not even try to separate individual points, seems way too complicated. My apologies again. BTW, I figured that the Vietnamese wanted Political Asylum in the USA during the Vietnamese war was cos they knew if they could make it to America they might be safe their, America would be unlikely to bomb and Napalm its own country, or perhaps why they did not retaliate was cos they are basically Buddhists, revenge goes totally against what they believe in, unlike Christianity, as practiced by us. which demands, Hate your Enemy, BOMB and KILL HIM, HER, Man, Women and Child of them, it simply does not matter. War is good, like greed, good for Business, Ask Chaney, Halliburton, Blackwater, etc etc etc, right?. BTW, when I started this thread, it was mainly about our perception of our treatment and Perception of Irans President, how if we began normal negotiations, stop hurting them by trade sanctions, it might actually save the USA… Zanthor ---
**Author:** ![Zanthor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e19b73/32.png) [@Zanthor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zanthor)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2010, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/78 "2010-05-19T23:26:44Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > He’s not mongering for any wars. He did exactly what you would want a diplomat to do: use diplomacy. > Why is there antipathy between Iran and the U.S.? Like other posters have said, it goes back to U.S. support for the Shah and then got much worse with the hostage crisis. The Iraq war inflamed things more recently but the U.S. and Iran haven’t had formal diplomatic relations for 30 years. > Sanctions are what we do best? I wish! If you’re unable to tell the difference between sanctions and acts of war, you really don’t have the perspective to give an informed opinion on this issue. There’s a valid case to be made that the sanctions placed on Germany _after_ World War I (not before - Germany hadn’t existed for very long) were too burdensome and created some of the conditions that led to World War II. Then again if the demilitarization sanctions had been enforced there might not have been a war in the first place. > I think you’re so far off base that you might as well be making it up. This does not describe pre-WWII Germany or Japan at all. It doesn’t describe Iran or Iraq or Korea either. For starters I don’t think you know what “annex” means. It means “to add.” For example, Hitler annexed the Sudetenland prior to World War II. The U.S. never annexed Germany or Japan. It did not institute regime change in Germany or Japan until after WWII, and if you’re going to argue that was the wrong thing to do, I can only wish you good luck. The sequence of events you’re describing is not possible in the order you are giving them. Annex means to occupy, so it shouldn’t be on there twice. The U.S. instituted regime change in Iran in the 1950s, which was the wrong thing to do. It did not annex Iran. It was also involved in the government of Vietnam, stupidly. But it did not annex Vietnam. Iran has not been starved. > If you’re completely wrong and uninformed, then yes, I think I can dismiss your argument. And most of what you’re saying is absolutely wrong, and where you are correct, it doesn’t apply to Iran today. > It doesn’t matter who writes the history if you don’t bother reading it. diplomacy by increasing troop numbers by a factor of how many exactly? Way too many at the very least. with the obvious outcome. to whit. [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/19/us/19dead.html?hp](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/19/us/19dead.html?hp) “…On Tuesday, the toll of American dead in Afghanistan passed 1,000, after a suicide bomb in Kabul killed at least five United States service members. Having taken nearly seven years to reach the first 500 dead, the war killed the second 500 in fewer than two. A resurgent Taliban active in almost every province, a weak central government incapable of protecting its people and a larger number of American troops in harm’s way all contributed to the accelerating pace of death…” So, you think all this death worth it? theirs and yours? I remember when the American ppl said No More Slaughter in Vietnam, I stood , on the front line unflinchingly ( In New Zealand actually, as the cops moved in with their batons flashing, Spiro Agnew was visiting NZ, to drum up more killing $$$pree war support… ) The baton hit the ladies head sitting next to me, cracked it open, i managed to catch her baby she was nursing… Did not matter too much, we were just ‘Collateral Damage’ right??? Would that the blow had of hit me rather than her?, i like to think so, not sure. My question is, and was, what will it take for you to say, enough killing is enough killing? like then, like now. If they Drafted your young to kill and die, like before? for another stupid, ‘noble cause’??? would that do it…? Self Preservation rules, no caring about ‘the other ppl’ we slaughter??? meanwhile’s? So, How much better to just… back off, stop meddling, interfering? Now… stop bombing foreign nations, messing in their politics, invading? How is what is happening in Iraq, Afghanistan, probably Iran Pakistan if you can manage it. diff than what happened in Vietnam etc. Its called Manufacturing Consent for war, a watered down version, Manufacturing Consent for approval of trade sanctions imposed upon them, to subdue them. Provoke internal discord in their county, internal Regime change’ without having to get too much blood on your hands by actually having to invade to achieve US foreign Policy? basically, DOMINATE, at all costs, nearly, no matter what it costs, blood, money. who really cares??? I see the difference between all out war, and trade sanctions, as only Subtle, only a matter of degree, no more, no less. Strange, I see sanctions as a total act of war, I look at Google Earth, or Nasa pics at night, I see America ablaze with Energy consumption, most of the rest of the world strangely quiet, dark, dare i say it, suppressed? heck… exploited even. The Rich in glass bubbles, the rest, aliens, not important, the evil enemy.. a few cruise missiles will silence their diff in ideology from ours, why bother reasoning with them. much easier to dominate by WARFARE!!! as to the rest, later, BTW, thank you for sorting out my last post into some sort of order. did not even try to separate individual points, seems way too complicated. My apologies again. BTW, I figured that the Vietnamese wanted Political Asylum in the USA during the Vietnamese war was cos they knew if they could make it to America they might be safe their, America would be unlikely to bomb and Napalm its own country, or perhaps why they did not retaliate was cos they are basically Buddhists, revenge goes totally against what they believe in, unlike Christianity, as practiced by us. which demands, Hate your Enemy, BOMB and KILL HIM, HER, Man, Women and Child of them, it simply does not matter. ---
**Author:** ![Zanthor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e19b73/32.png) [@Zanthor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zanthor)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/79 "2010-05-20T00:14:24Z")
> [@Marmite\_Lover](#): > > Zanthor. > > It is so refreshing to see someone actually go to the bother of asking ‘why’. > > What we need is more people like you to help us save this planet.🆒 > > Iran in this region is seen to be strong and sticking up for injustice. That is by the people, not the despotic, undemocratic government puppets supported by US dollars. > > Iran is not threat to anyone, but make no mistake they will defend if attacked. I do not believe at all all the hype about nuclear weapons. It’s the same old WMD story rolling out. > Iran is a moderate Islamic republic which would be totally against and as far as I can see using nuclear weapons. It is just SO against their religion. Do not mistake them for the Taliban or Al Qaeda. Do you know that in Islam you have the right to defence BUT!!! not to harm civilians, women, children and elderly. If you do it is straight to hell. > Now just because some crazies do that doesn’t mean they all do or think that way. I live in a Muslim country and believe me killing with nuclear or even having it on your soil is totally against God. > It is against humanity. > > As for Iran. > > There is more respect for it’s leader in standing up to the US bully boys, than for their own leaders. I am talking about the people here. > > Iran is being targeted for one reason only. > Because it is not a coward. > I looked at the quiz and answered about 99% right. It’s a shame that the West swallow so much misinformation about Iran, but good to see you not falling for it any longer.😉 Never did ever fall for it. even back then, late 60’s. when I was drafted, I saw thro their lies and manipulation. I had registered as a Conscientious Objector, It did not matter, i was drafted anyways. I refused point blank to go Vietnam to kill ppl, I would rather have been crucified upside down like Peter than kill innocent ppl. They told me to go stand in the corner. for hours, ponder my error. I was scum to them I did not need to ponder. I knew what i thought Like Iraq when manufacturing consent from the gullible public, i knw then, like i do now. Pre-Emptive war is solely based on greed and self preservation, from enemies we either image, or create, or ppl that are not really enemies at all… as to the rest of your post, agreed, it is so. it is universal law, love your enemy, but most of us have no idea what it means or what it requires… meanwhiles, all we can do is try, right? Btw, nice to see a fellow traveler, fare the well Sir. Btw, I am sure most ppl did not appreciate the irony of , the Kingdom, as Saudi ‘Royals’ name themselves, or the true Kingdom, as spoke of by Seals and Crofts… We will have children, of the Kingdom, they wont be torn by war, will refuse to hate, will love justice… etc etc… Huge difference hey? Regards ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 9:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682/80 "2010-05-20T09:53:56Z")
> [@Zanthor](#): > > How is what is happening in Iraq, Afghanistan, probably Iran Pakistan if you can manage it. diff than what happened in Vietnam etc. Are you reading _anything_ anyone is saying to you? Obama is winding down the US operations in Iraq. The US is leaving. The escalation in Afgahanistan was necessary to achieve the military objectives (which, I’m assuming, still are basically the neutralizing of the Taliban and capture of whatever Al-Qaeda forces are still in the country) because SOMEBODY originally diverted troops away from the conflict there to pursue a rather stupid war in Iraq. Listen carefully: WE. ARE. NOT. GOING. TO. INVADE. PAKISTAN. It’s not going to happen. It would achieve nothing, it would make the situation in the region much worse, it’s not even militarily possible at the moment, and nobody on either side of the US political scene has expressed even the slightest desire to do so. Not happening. Stop saying that we are. Which leaves Iran, which is the country we were supposed to be discussing (although you seem anxious to turn the conversation to anything else). It is true that there are those in the right-wing political sphere in the US (media and politicians) who have made some statements about invading Iran. These people are not in power. The Obama administration is not talking up an Iranian invasion. There are good reasons for this. 1. There’s no reason to invade. Yes, military actions get talked about, but only because it can’t be removed from the table without weakening the diplomatic negoatiating position. Military actions were discussed all the time during the Cold War, and yet we never invaded Russia either. There is still every reason to continue diplomatic discussions, especially since the Iranian people themselves may eventually force their own government to adopt a more moderate and democratic system. 2. There’s no will to invade. The American people are quite sick of the wars they already have. Adding another war would make the President _extremely_ unpopular. 3. There’s no military to invade. There’s already a significant military overstretch with Iraq and Afghanistan. At this point Obama would have to start drafting people if he wanted another war. 4. There’s no money to invade. Even if we had the reason, the will and the troops, you may have noticed that the budget is a bit pinched at the moment. > [@](#): > > BTW, when I started this thread, it was mainly about our perception of our treatment and Perception of Irans President, how if we began normal negotiations, stop hurting them by trade sanctions, it might actually save the USA… What’s abnormal about our negotiations? What have the Iranians suffered from the sanctions? Save the USA from what? Iran’s President is a demagogue with limited power. Even the Iranian people say that. He gains prominence internationally and at home by setting himself as a foil to the evil Western powers. It’s meaningless political rhetoric, in the same way the Mugabe blames all of Zimbabwe’s current woes on white people. By the way, are you ever going to comment on the treatment of Baha’is and homosexuals in Iran? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-obamas-only-chance-of-success/539682.md?page=5)