Iran Super Thread- Merged

[ChopperHead]

I heard this on the news I dont rember which channel though but i heard Iran has cut off all trade with Denmark over those stupid cartoons. Anyone confirm that?

arnt North Korea and China allies? So if China has the Largest Army in the world and is rapidly becoming a massive Nuclear power as well. Is it not logical to assume that any action against North Korea would in turn provoke a Chinese retaliation? Also North Korea is right beside China and Russia so it's not really a mistery on how they are being supplied here. China is it's ally and with the current state of the Russian Armed forces it would not be difficult to get weapons from them as they need money. so a couple Russian nukes wouldnt surprise me if they showed up on N. Korean soil. or Iranian soil for that matter.

the way i see it the world is just teetering on the brink of another world war. which I do belive will happen in my lifetime. there is that taiwan issue then theres the Iran issue and the situation in Africa etc etc etc the world is being held together by duct tape and that hundred mile tape is getting pretty damn close to the hundreth mile.

 

[Navy_Blue]

Some other interesting reading relating to the above article:

Iran’s Oil Exchange threatens the Greenback
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_mike_whi_060123_iran_92s_oil_exchange_.htm

Enjoy    March is just around the corner lets see if they know what they are talking about eh?




Cheers

 

[Long in the tooth]

If a man states that he will immolate the Jews and create a unified superstate under his leadership I will take him at his word.  After all, that's what Hitler did 15 years before WW2 when he wrote Mein Kampf.  Whether he really intends to do so is moot; the followers he's attracted will follow through.  Recall that the final solution devised in 1942 cannot really be traced to Hitler except by indirect means.  All it often takes is a tacit sanctioning of an action for a mob to to it.

As an American General stated "I'm not really afraid what they can do to us, but more afraid of what we may have to do to them (to end it)."  The US remains the only Hyper Power in history, spending far more on defence than the next 10 countries combined.  Just my 2 cents.

 

[The Gues-|-]

  Just my 2 cents.

You pretty much took the words out of my mouth, so there's my 2 cents as well, 4 cents in total! :dontpanic:

 

[TCBF]

You do what you gotta do to stay on top.  As Canadians, we better hope they DO stay on top.  Once you start to slide....

Tom

 

[48Highlander]

Tyrannical governments, especially Iran's, love to bluster and boast about what they would/should/could do to "Enemy X" but I'd say the contemporary state of affairs is such that none of them will come anywhere close to putting their money where their mouth is

???

So you've got the neighbourhood gangbanger blustering and threatening to shoot people....but because we know he's just "boasting", we shouldn't bother trying to stop him from getting a gun.  We'll just send Glorified Ape to go around the neighbourhood telling people "don't worry, he probably won't use it".

 

[Cannonfodder]

The paradox of the Middle East is that the more that the west tries to control it , the more it gets out of hand . I do not the solution to this one but here is a solution maybe the west could supply Tehran with thorium based nuclear reactors .If Iran's true aim is electrical generation then Thorium based reactors would be a good fit since they do not produce weapons grade plutonium 239 and uranium 235 . If this is there true aim , they should be open to such a proposal if not the writing may be on the wall .

 

[Acorn]

???

So you've got the neighbourhood gangbanger blustering and threatening to shoot people....but because we know he's just "boasting", we shouldn't bother trying to stop him from getting a gun.  We'll just send Glorified Ape to go around the neighbourhood telling people "don't worry, he probably won't use it".

???

Silly analogy, even if I disagree with Glorified Ape.

 

[ZxExN]

When the US can actually improve the living conditions of the country they 'liberate', I'll support them. Before that, I'm just stick and tired of it all. Iraq was 10x better off with Sadam in power and that's the truth. Ask anyone who has gone back to Iraq and they'll tell you same thing. People in live in fear and die every day from terrorist attacks. Children are not going to school, essentially a generation has been lost.

 

[Chummy]

It is interesting that most of the replies to this post address only the nuclear weapons, and not the latter half of the post. Since these weapons are unlikely to be used against the west, or at all if they are an effective local deterrent, the more ominous message in the initial post is the shift in American policy from being a global player, deferent to international law, to being willing to act unilaterally using pre-emptive, and by all standards illegal action. (I am not anti-american, or necessarily anti-war, for that matter - after 9-11, taking out the Taliban was completely justified, and internationally supported. Iraq is another matter).

Gwynne Dyer, in his fairly recent book "Future:Tense", makes a compelling argument to this effect. He argues, with compelling citations, that the war in Iraq was really the result of a neo-conservative agenda to use a weak country to demonstrate American willingness to use unilateral force to justify its military might, by "proving" the willingness and need to keep a "pax americana". He further argues that, if the Americans are not forced from Iraq, the "Rule of Law" represented by the UN that at least allowed countries to save face and back away from conflicts, will cease to exist in any meaningful way.

He also argues that some considerable devaluation of American currency, and power, is inevitable over the next 30-50 years (to get into the details, read the book, I don't want to summarize the whole thing here). Mr. Dyer does not present a scenario where this happens as quickly as suggested in the original post, but I suppose it is not impossible. Certainly, it is not in anybody's interest to put America's back to the wall like that, but undoubtedly a huge fear in Washington is that someone will yell that the emperor has no clothes.   

Mr Dyer argues, and I agree, that what is truly scary is this entire world scenario, precipitated by the current gang in Washington under highly questionable pretenses, appears to be setting the stage for the return to multilateral power alliances, and the type of political conditions that lead to World War I. These are the very conditions that were unthinkable with the advent of nuclear weapons, and resulted in the urgent creation of the United Nations. This is much more complex and fundamentally serious than the usual mantra "War for Oil", or Iran obtaining a nuclear power plant, in terms of the fate of the entire world. 

Hopefully a change in power in Washington will result in Washington taking a more rational world view where the US sees itself as a big, important country, but still just another country in the international community, nevertheless. Hopefully the relative peace and international rule of law (with a few noted exceptions) in the world of the 1990's, and the positive outlook, has not slipped beyond our grasp. The current US regime's world view of America is simply dangerous.

 

[DBA]

When the US can actually improve the living conditions of the country they 'liberate', I'll support them. Before that, I'm just stick and tired of it all. Iraq was 10x better off with Saddam in power and that's the truth. Ask anyone who has gone back to Iraq and they'll tell you same thing. People in live in fear and die every day from terrorist attacks. Children are not going to school, essentially a generation has been lost.

I despair at the complete ignorance expressed in that paragraph. The Shiite and Kurd populations were not better off under Saddam. Children are going to school in present day Iraq in the majority of the country. Large populations lived in fear of persecution including summary arrests and executions while Saddam was in charge so they don't wish for his return. Compared to historical conflicts the Iraq war is pretty mild, just look back to the Iran/Iraq war in which it's estimated over a million died. The country would be rebuilt already and the Americans gone if the terrorists let the job be done so I don't fault the Americans for the slow progress.

 

[Edward Campbell]

...

He also argues that some considerable devaluation of American currency, and power, is inevitable over the next 30-50 years (to get into the details, read the book, I don't want to summarize the whole thing here). Mr. Dyer does not present a scenario where this happens as quickly as suggested in the original post, but I suppose it is not impossible. Certainly, it is not in anybody's interest to put America's back to the wall like that, but undoubtedly a huge fear in Washington is that someone will yell that the emperor has no clothes.   

...

We have discussed this particular point just a few months back; see: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/33469/post-252205.html#msg252205

My point then, as now is that states and empires ebb and flow.  I, personelly, do not detect any divine intervention in the affairs of states and empires over the past few thousand years - not even now, in America.

America can and, I think, will arrest and moderate the rate of its 'decline' but that decline is, of course, not absolute - it is measured relative to the rise of competitors.

I would add that ideas endure longer than empires – Greece is no longer a power but we still read the Iliad and the Odyssey, and Aristotle and Plato.  The British empire is distant memory but Locke, Hume, Smith and Mill remain.  The ideas of Jefferson and Madison will outlive the exploits of the US military.

----------

PS  We already have an Iranian Bourse thread at:  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/39009/post-326653.html#msg326653 perhaps this should be merged with it.

 

[tomahawk6]

There are no competitors to the US just  wannabe's. The economic system of the US is superior to those
so called competing states, in fact no other economy in the world even come's close. None of us in our lifetime will see a US in decline. I dont see Russia, China or India's economy coming close to overtaking the US they have too many weaknesses. My comments might appear jingoistic but I think are realistic. The recent US unemployment number was 4.7%, any other country match that ? Military power I think its unquestioned.
The US has progressed beyond a post industrial economy while our potential rivals are stuck in an industrial economic model. I would recomend Alvin Toffler's Third Wave printed in 1980 as time has proven his thinking out.

 

[a_majoor]

It is interesting that most of the replies to this post address only the nuclear weapons, and not the latter half of the post. Since these weapons are unlikely to be used against the west, or at all if they are an effective local deterrent, the more ominous message in the initial post is the shift in American policy from being a global player, deferent to international law, to being willing to act unilaterally using pre-emptive, and by all standards illegal action. (I am not anti-american, or necessarily anti-war, for that matter - after 9-11, taking out the Taliban was completely justified, and internationally supported. Iraq is another matter).

Ah yes, "International Law". When you go to a criminal or civil court, you are seeing the State exercising its power. Without the armed power of the State as an ultimate recourse to compel obedience, how will you receive your justice? If you are awarded a judgement in your favor and the other party balks, the sheriff can seize his chattel property and the offender can be arrested and jailed. Without the recourse to State power, you are SOL.

But where is the overweaning Power to compell a Sovereign State? Even a relative pipsqueak State like Ba'athist Iraq was able to defy "International Law" through the 1990s, with some assistance from the "Oil for Food" crowd to be sure, but since no one was able or willing to compel Saddam Hussein to follow the directives, he simply did not. If Iraq doesn't follow "International Law" without compulsion, then what is to stop Iran from defying "International Law" (and they don't even have nuclear weapons yet!). How about a Sovereign State with vastly more power and resources like China?

Gwynne Dyer, in his fairly recent book "Future:Tense", makes a compelling argument to this effect. He argues, with compelling citations, that the war in Iraq was really the result of a neo-conservative agenda to use a weak country to demonstrate American willingness to use unilateral force to justify its military might, by "proving" the willingness and need to keep a "pax americana". He further argues that, if the Americans are not forced from Iraq, the "Rule of Law" represented by the UN that at least allowed countries to save face and back away from conflicts, will cease to exist in any meaningful way.

I wonder why arguments like this always end up with appeals to the UN. After the complete failure of the UN through the 1990s (Former Yugoslavia, Somalia, Oil for Food, Rwanda, WMD inspections in Iraq, genocide in Dafur...shall I continue?) is there any possible legitimacy left in that organization? For that matter, would you want to give the sort of power required to compel a Sovereign State to a corrupt and profoundly illiberal institution like the UN?

Mr Dyer argues, and I agree, that what is truly scary is this entire world scenario, precipitated by the current gang in Washington under highly questionable pretenses, appears to be setting the stage for the return to multilateral power alliances, and the type of political conditions that lead to World War I. These are the very conditions that were unthinkable with the advent of nuclear weapons, and resulted in the urgent creation of the United Nations. This is much more complex and fundamentally serious than the usual mantra "War for Oil", or Iran obtaining a nuclear power plant, in terms of the fate of the entire world.

NATO was not a multi-lateral power alliance? What about the G-8? The Anglosphere? The Francaphonie? The British Commonwealth? The world has always had shifting formal and informal alliances, some which are reflected in formal organizations (think back to @400 BC when the Delian League was locked in a series of hot and cold wars with "Sparta and her Allies". All the City-States of Greece were involved, as well as the Persian Empire and many unaffiliated Greek City-States throughout the Mediterranean sea.)

Hopefully a change in power in Washington will result in Washington taking a more rational world view where the US sees itself as a big, important country, but still just another country in the international community, nevertheless. Hopefully the relative peace and international rule of law (with a few noted exceptions) in the world of the 1990's, and the positive outlook, has not slipped beyond our grasp. The current US regime's world view of America is simply dangerous.

A far more compelling argument is that the inattention of the United States to the external world through the 1990's set the stage for the present state of affairs.

 

[BKells]

There are no competitors to the US just  wannabe's. The economic system of the US is superior to those
so called competing states, in fact no other economy in the world even come's close. None of us in our lifetime will see a US in decline. I dont see Russia, China or India's economy coming close to overtaking the US they have too many weaknesses. My comments might appear jingoistic but I think are realistic. The recent US unemployment number was 4.7%, any other country match that ? Military power I think its unquestioned.
The US has progressed beyond a post industrial economy while our potential rivals are stuck in an industrial economic model. I would recomend Alvin Toffler's Third Wave printed in 1980 as time has proven his thinking out.

The United States has an 8 trillion dollar debt and a 415 billion dollar budgetary deficit. Their trade deficit is 610 billion, the largest ever recorded in history. Do you know anything about what continual budget deficits does to the money market? If you don't, I'll sum it up for you: RECESSION. Negative GDP Growth. Depression.

You let me know how this is anywhere near a desired economy. They are indeed poised for a very great fall.

 

[Remius]

There are no competitors to the US just  wannabe's. The economic system of the US is superior to those
so called competing states, in fact no other economy in the world even come's close. None of us in our lifetime will see a US in decline.

There is no question that the US economy is powerful but to adopt the attitude that there are no competitors is dangerous.  Underestimating the competion is the 1st step to failure.  If China ever decides to wake up completely the US will be in trouble.  The sheer amount of manpower that emanates from there is scary.  

Although the US is the only real superpower right now, don't think for a second that things can't change over night.  The roman empire was unmatched in both economy and military and it fell apart due to social and cultural erosion.  The decline happened quite rapidly.  The same could happen in the US in the span of only a few years if the right ingredients are in place so don't get too comfortable with your notion of "WE ARE ALL POWER, NONE CAN FACE US".  Sometimes defeat comes from within.  Then your competitors (so called wannabes) become a real threat.

 

[a_majoor]

The United States has an 8 trillion dollar debt and a 415 billion dollar budgetary deficit. Their trade deficit is 610 billion, the largest ever recorded in history. Do you know anything about what continual budget deficits does to the money market? If you don't, I'll sum it up for you: RECESSION. Negative GDP Growth. Depression.

You let me know how this is anywhere near a desired economy. They are indeed poised for a very great fall.

This sort of accounting ignores the over 51 Trillion dollars of assets in the hands of US citizens. In fact, by the reasoning above, Canada should have landed in the toilet a long time ago given our vast debt and deficits. (Even today, I would wonder what exactly Canada's budgetary position is given Paul Martin's Enron like accounting since 1993.....). The US debt and deficits have been growing for DECADES, many economists see no direct connection between debt, deficits and economic growth. After all, the Great Depression occured while the United States balanced its budget, and the "New Deal" which eventually helped end the depression was explicitly financed by debt and deficit spending.

As for their "desired" economy, an annual @ 4% growth rate in the GDP and an unemployment of 4.7% dosn't sound too shabby to me.

 

[Navy_Blue]

I think the US is coming to the top of a peak and in our life time we will see it head down (Not really good for CND).  I'm only 28 and China in the 21st century makes China of the 70's & 80's look like the dark ages.  They have done in 20 years (or less) what it took the US more than 50 to do.  A country like China is in a limbo between Communist and Capitalist.  They enjoy the Labour costs of a communist country with monetary rewards of a capitalist nation.  Most of our manufactured goods comes from Asia.  More and more of our raw material and natural resource are are going to head west.  We're seeing it now with Chinese firms having real intrest in buying up our biggest mining companies.  These people are going too pass us before we even know we have been passed.

Europe (UK, France, Germany) of the 19th century was the power house.  It had the real military might and the infancy of the industrial revoltion fueling it.  In the 20th Century North America took over (partly because we just finished bombing Europes industry into the ground).  Our economy has sored in the past fifty years while Europe leveled out (until the EU started to change things).  China and Asia is in the passing lane now beside us giving us a smerk and getting ready to hit the gas.  I think we may be seeing the tail lights soon.

Unemployment rates are steady for now but the big three (or two now) have laid down major layoffs.  GM is saying if they don't figure out how to dig out of there slump they have just over 1000 days before they are in real trouble.  Ford is dumping 30,000 over the next few years.  When auto makers in the US start seeing red the industries which support them will follow.  The economy is not in happy boom times like it was prior to 911.  We're heading down.  I'm glad I work for the government and have a contract for the next 15 years.

The writing is on the wall our arrogance is blinding us too it.  I haven't seen anything saying "we're alright"..."this will all pass and we'll be fine."  Its all "Global Warming"...."Crisis in Iraq"...."Terrorists"..."Nukes in Iran" We are witnessing a change in world order.

Goodluck everybody

 

[regulator12]

I think it is a scary thought for the average person that America could and will fall. It scares people to think that China will be the next super power. These are issues that most people turn a blind eye to and hope wont happen. This world is changing fast and i think the next few years to come will be very interesting for all of us.....

 

[a_majoor]

All right, listen up you pessimists!

We are the inheritors of an intellectual and cultural tradition which goes back over 2500 years.

The West has overcome challenges ranging from Global Cooling from @1400-1800, the loss of 1/3 of the population due to the Black Plague, invasions from the most terrifying armies in all history (the Huns), internal conflict over religion which devastated most of central Europe (30 years war), and challenges to the ideas and ideals of liberal democracy by the most terrifying philosophies that the West could produce (backed by modern industrial armies and states) in the forms of Fascism, National Socialism, and Communism .

Our ancestors did all that and at the same time raised a towering cultural edifice of art, music, literature etc. second to none. We created and operate the industrial and post industrial economy which directly or indirectly feeds, clothes, houses and employs virtually everyone in the world. We even landed men on the Moon.

If we walk away from these great achievments, if we complain about the problems we face but fail to take actions to solve them, if we don't use the wide ranging freedom of inquiry, capital and personal mobility to impliment the best possible solutions, then we deserve everything which happens. Many of the problems pointed out here are relatively a fraction of the size of problems like the Great Depression or National Socialist Germany were to previous generations, our resources and the depth of our knowledge is vastly greater than what was available to them, and in terms of relative size, the problems are much smaller.

NO MORE WHINGIG about debt, trade imbalance, oil, Jihadis or anything else unless you are going to be a true member of Western Civilization and offer a solution as well. Better yet, tell us how YOU personally will impliment this!