Various totalitarian ideologies have the idea of a slogan to unite the people against a percieved enemy, such as Nazis Sieg Heil, and the more modern ‘Death to America’
Iran is a totalitarian state which needs to be defeated no matter the cost. If diplomacy doesn’t bring it down eventually, and Iran contributes to terrorism and a deteriotating security situation, we should used armed forced to bring them down.
The Iranian leadership wants to see the destruction of the US, and damage US interests in the middle east as much as possible, given the choice between us and them, I’d choose us everytime regardless.
I’m curious Ryan_Liam, obviously you have decided it would be “worth it” to start active military hostilities with Iran, but do you envision any non-negligible problems resulting from it?
Do you think US oil prices would be affected- to a degree which harms the US economy? How much, during these defecit times, should the US be willing to pay for a subdued Iran.
Will it create a disporea of terror sources? Might these sources try to settle in more western countries and try to “hide behind our freedoms”- will this cause any social problems in these Western countries. Will there be any increase in attempts at revenge on the US mainland?
In short, I’m curious which bad side-effects you’ve accepted but over-ruled.
So, how about, say, taking our people hostage, wishing death on us, supporting terrorism, trying to get nuclear weapons - something that a normal mind would interpret as threatening.
Put it this way - suppose your next door neighbor wound up every day by sending you a letter saying, “Death to Diogenes - the Great Satan!” He has already shot your dog, and is trying to obtain dynamite and blasting caps from the Internet.
So you go to the police, and they tell you, “That’s not a threat, and besides, if everyone had lots of dynamite in their basements it would be a safer world” - would you nod quietly in agreement and go home? Or would you consider someone who denied what is obviously true to be a fucking idiot?
You know what - your posts are crossing over a line here. If you aren’t accusing Karl Rove of burglarizing CBS and planting documents, you are denying that there was any risk in voting in the Iraqi elections, or denying that death threats from a terrorist regime who is trying to get nuclear weapons are anything to worry about.
Your hatred of Bush, in other words, is leading you into delusions. It’s not healthy.
Of course not. Words never hurt anybody. They do not constitute a physical threat.
Besides, I hear Americans saying stupid shit about how we need to tirn Iraq/Iran. Saudi Arabia/etc. into a “parking lot” and the like all the time. Who gives a shit? That does not rise to the level of a meaningful threat and it does not give you an excuse to drop bombs on people.
Cite for Iran doing that? Or are you talking about the 80’s? can we stick to this century, please?
They can wish whatever they want. No skin off my dick. And not a threat, no.,
Against the US? Cite?
How is that a threat? They have every right to defend themselves against aggressive, rogue countries like the US.
I trhink your analogy is bogus. Iran has not expressed any intent to harm the US, nor does it have the ability. You are perfectly safe. Relax.
Either it comes down from implosion, or military intervention, if implosion doesn’t work, invasion is necessary to bring it down.
Oil prices may very well go up, even to the point where they actively hurt the economy, but if thats the price worth paying to ensure liberty for these people, and eventual safety for us by destroying a regime with a harsh Islamist totalitarian ideology, then so be it.
Heard this before, yet fail to see any sort of attack in ‘revenge’ on the US mainland at all.
If it createds a diaspora, then you can explain to me Hezbollah, why should we tolerate a regime which exports terrorism if we can somehow get rid of it? The Muallah regime will never be happy until the US is either subdued, or completely driven off the Arabian peninsula, to ensure it can slaughter Israel and then drive them out too.
You can sugar coat the regime all you want, say all the benefits over the Shah etc blah blah blah, but it doesn’t change the fact the Theocracy is totally despicable and should be brought down.
This I do not. Everything I’ve read about Iran’s support for international terrorism leads me to suspect if they can find a way to attack the US and/or some number of its allies via those channels and survive, they will do it.
Yeah with one exception,* its not state policy * to utter those words.
This is ridiculous, oh lets forgive and forget eh? Even though its the same fucking regime that held them hostage.
Sure as hell incites them though to carry out stupid attacks
Hezbollah which blew up 241 US marines to get them out of Lebanon. Its supported by Iran.
The founder of the Theocracy explicitly said the Americans were the enemy of Iran and Islam.
Why should we listen to your opinion anyway? You’re already biased, you said you were ashamed to be a US citizen, so why should we listen to this b.s you’re feeding us?
If you think the reasons behind that are anything other than fear of American retaliation, I’d love if you posted your comments in my “Bombing America a Good idea?” thread. Here though, I wasn’t suggesting any of those things WOULD happen, merely tossing them out as examples of possible bad side effects. Can I take it that you think higher oil prices are the only likely serious consequence?
:dubious: Does that apply to all totalitarian states? You want we should invade China? There are many dictatorships in the world, we can’t and shouldn’t forcibly regime-change them all.
No good ever comes of whole nations holding grudges, Ryan. There are just too many historical scores to be settled. From the Iranians’ POV, they still owe us for engineering the 1952 coup against Prime Minister Mossadegh, which made the Shah an absolute ruler.
I don’t care, if we overthrow there government, and give them elections and a democratic government, and let them find the government they want without the consent of a guardian council, then we’ll be on the right course.
Radicalisation of some sections of Muslim society, but whatever we do, its going to happen anyway. Its just something we’re going to have to wade through.
Yes Diogenes :rolleyes: I’m sure the state department calls on every section of American society to kill the infidels and jews.
Some people can hold grudges, like the Iranians and the Shah.
Hezbollah, currently trying to uproot the Palestinian fatah movement and the Jewish state. Sponsored by Iranian government.
Well, those hostages were being held in Iran, remember?
Within Iran yes? Surely you knew my generalisation was within limits to the Iranian state.
It doesn’t matter how much you try to polish the turd that is the Iranian regime, you cannot deny it is a threat to the United States, Israel and Iraq in general, this regime like I’ve stressed repeatedly, will become the dominant player within the Middle East unless stopped by the United States and its allies. A Theocratic Islamist state must be stopped from ever gaining prominance within the area.
What we need is a secular Arab state on Iran’s borders to act as a counterweight. With a strongman dictator in charge probably, so as to ensure that the religious types in his own country don’t gain any influence.
Well Ryan_Liam I think you underestimate the economic consequences. Besides oil prices there is, of course, the straight cost of whatever action is taken. I also fear that this will really push third worlders towards Europe in trade and diplomatic ties. I guess you think these things will happen regardless but I would think caution now could mitigate damage.
All this and tax cuts too? As my pullcord GI Joe used to say: “Looks like trouble!”
I don’t see why it necessarily has to be secular, a democracy which let the religious people have a voice would act as a considerable counterweight to Theocracy next door. A religious government in Iraq which can rule Iraq without having to suppress popular opinion, holds power through some honestry and integrity. would be a much better threat than any secular ‘strongman’
I’m European, I’m not complaining. Anyway, I sincerly believe we will never invade Iran, no matter how much bitching otherwise goes on in this thread. We’ll do the old Soviet containment method, arms race, economic pressure, and hey presto! Instant regime collapse because of the rise of a strong Iranian middle class with a thirst for change in politics.
If the US wishes to perpetuate the “war on terror” and run out of operations in Iraq, then Iran would be a place to continue the war.
Keeping the Iran option would also be useful should the polls indicate the Republicans were declining in popularity but wish to win the White House with a solid majority again. Will it be President Arnold or Jeb? My money’s on Jeb.
