• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Iran Super Thread- Merged

Considering Iran has got Western forces on two flanks, I don't think it's going anywhere soon.  Israel would love a reason to send Merkava's westward, pushing its enemies along the whole way.

What would be the opposite of "push them into the sea"?  Push them into the Hindu-Kush?  Push them into India? :akimbo:
 
Yeah its an interesting situation, Iran flanked by Iraq and Afghanistan, Iraq flanked by Iran and Syria.

Iran-Syria Mutual self Defence pact
http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,12858,1416319,00.html
 
Syria flanked by Israel and Iraq (and Turkey?).  Don't forget a couple million Indians who are just looking for an excuse to go into Dar al-Islam.  All the makings of a nice 1914 scenario....
 
Just a little background on some of the politics of our friend.

In practice, the control of foreign policy, nuclear policy, and the main economic policies were already within the power of the supreme leader. From the beginning, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei wanted Ahmadinejad to be the next president because he did not want an equal partner or rival as president. The presidency was the last holdout of Iran's reformists, and the victory of Ahmadinejad gave total control of Iran's state institutions to hard-liners. Khamenei controlled the Parliament, the judiciary, the army, radio and television, and now he will be able to control the presidency as well. The conservative political establishment made a decision late in the campaign to support Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad, more closely tied to Khamenei than either Rafsanjani or Khatami, is unlikely to challenge the Guardian Council, particularly given the alleged Guardians Council support for his presidential bid.

Ahmadinejad was perhaps the most conservative of the seven candidates who were permitted to compete in the presidential race. The Rafsanjani campaign attempted to stick Ahmadinejad with the label of an extremist, intent on rolling back reform. They called Ahmadinejad a fundamentalist who is probably taking Iran back to some kind of Taliban-style of governing. Reformists charged that an element of the Revolutionary Guard is violating prohibitions agains military involvement in politics by mobilizing votes for Ahmadinejad.

Ahmadinejad, an unabashed conservative, resurrected the fervor of the 1979 Islamic Revolution during the campaign by saying Iran "did not have a revolution in order to have democracy, but to have an Islamic government." Ahmadinejad had a bloody background. He was responsible for the execution of hundreds of dissidents after the war.

Ahmadinejad said in an 08 June 2005 interview on state broadcasting that he favored relations with all other countries on the basis of respect. He said relations with immediate neighbors were the most important, followed by countries that were once part of the Persian Empire. Then come Muslim states, and last but not least, states that are not hostile to Iran. Turning to the United Nations, Ahmadinejad said its structure is "one-sided, stacked against the world of Islam."

The three most prominent new members of Ahmadinejad's government are all known for their conservative views:


Manouchehr Mottaki, foreign minister, is a former ambassador to Japan and Turkey who has strongly backed Iran's nuclear programme and supported the move to resume uranium conversion

Mostafa Pourmohammadi, interior minister, is a hardline former deputy intelligence minister

Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejehei, intelligence minister, is an Islamic cleric thought to be an opponent of press freedom.
All three men are understood to be followers of Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Just two clerics were named to the cabinet, and no women were appointed.

Sounds to me like hes set himself up nicely.  Noone to undermine his authority.  Complete control.  This may be a more serious situation then people choose to admit.

For more info: www.globalsecurity.org



 
We believe that Iran is trying to buy time so it can develop a nuclear bomb," said Mr. Shalom. "Iran is a clear and present danger."

Whoops...Iran is now at the centre of a very accurate and dangerous weapons site!

I would never want to hear those words aimedat me by such a capable nation as Isreal
 
Israel can hold it's own. If Israel so desired Iran would no longer be able to consider itself "developing" (the technological disparities between Israel and Iran are even more pronounced than they were between Israel and Egypt/Syira in '76).

I am just amazed that someone who is a "democratically" (heh) elected leader would say that towards another nation. The amount of ignorance is just astounding. Modern states really don't do such things (what does that say about Iran)?

Bah!
 
Germany called his comments "completely unacceptable," and France "firmly condemned them."

Ahhh, the Axis of Weasels offering tepid, backhand condemnation of the Axis of Evil. Good to know some things will stay forever constant. I would put down good money that the only time the UN would ever invade any country in a timely fashion would be if Isreal started kicking some ass in the name of self defence.

On topic, how do you say "Get Some" in Hebrew?
 
I realize many believe that the U.S. and/or Israel were lookaing for an excuse to go to war with Iran....now they don't even need an excuse. Especially considering the many marchers in support of this guy the next day. Is Iran asking to be attacked or what? Iran reportedly does NOT have nuclear weapons, so why would the guy say this? Is he that out of touch? Even if you feel this way, why say it out loud?
 
Iran doesn't really have to worry about the US or Allied forces at its borders.

Iran knows, just like the US and NATO does, that NATO and the US are too pre-occupied with Iraq and Afghanistan to mount a credible offensive.  Yes, US Forces are in Iraq right now, neighbouring Iran - but an offensive would require that US Forces relocate themselves, and this can't happen with the current political and security situation there.

This isn't anything new.  Sabre rattling, just like always.
 
CBH99 said:
Iran doesn't really have to worry about the US or Allied forces at its borders.

Iran knows, just like the US and NATO does, that NATO and the US are too pre-occupied with Iraq and Afghanistan to mount a credible offensive.   Yes, US Forces are in Iraq right now, neighbouring Iran - but an offensive would require that US Forces relocate themselves, and this can't happen with the current political and security situation there.

This isn't anything new.   Sabre rattling, just like always.

What would an offensive in Iran get, except a population that absolutely hated the USA even more...Its not like anything can actually be done with the country, is it?

Does anyone know of a pro-West influence struggling to come out over there?
 
Slim said:
Does anyone know of a pro-West influence struggling to come out over there?
I don't know if they're "pro-west" per se, but there is strong ground-swell for reform amongst the youth. In fact, this is seen in some parts as the reason for the crack-down by the hard-liners.
 
paracowboy said:
I don't know if they're "pro-west" per se, but there is strong ground-swell for reform amongst the youth. In fact, this is seen in some parts as the reason for the crack-down by the hard-liners.

Oh that's just great...Weren't the STUDENTS the ones who wanted the hardliners in in the first place?!
 
Slim said:
Oh that's just great...Weren't the STUDENTS the ones who wanted the hardliners in in the first place?!
not these students. Their parents.
The times, they are a changin'. To everything, there is a season. Smoke on the water (sorry, wrong song.)
 
There is an armoured force of rebels that roams on the desert. I've only heard of them on the news, however, sorry.

However, Iran has sizeable minorities of Azeris, Zoroastrians and Bahai'is, the later two being rather small, but may like not having an oppressive Islamic government govern them.

paracowboy said:
not these students. Their parents.
The times, they are a changin'. To everything, there is a season. Smoke on the water (sorry, wrong song.)

Aye, I go to school with many people from Iran. I onced asked a friend what he thought of the Ayatollah - "he's worse than the shah". They may not be counter-revolutionaries (though one of them claims to have desecrated a copy of the Qu'ran), but it's an indication, perhaps a more realistic one of Iranian youth, compared to those mass rallies with those "down with Israel" tees and burqhas.
 
Some of the academic students are definetly pro-reform (whatever that means in that neighnourhood) - but a lot of disenfranchised youth is lookign for a scapegoat - and the hardliners are going to use them and Israel as a rallying cry.

Just when I figured Syria was next on the mapquest people to visit.  ;)

Though Israel will nuke them to glass if they get frisky so...
 
10 to 1 says Isreal kicks there ass in 30 days or less,IF they start throwin knuckles...any takers!!! ;) :eek:
 
bubba said:
10 to 1 says Isreal kicks there *** in 30 days or less,IF they start throwin knuckles...any takers!!! ;) :eek:

How bout 7 days, or dare I say 6.
 
http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20051208-092511-8567r.htm

Iran with nuclear weapons may well accelerate armageddon. Pre-emptive strike may not solve the problem but it will delay it and cost them billions and hopefully there will be a revolution.
 
Back
Top