• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Would Attacking Iran Be Worth It?

D'rok the Lacone said:
1. I quite agree that there is only so far that one can take the America/Palavi connection.
2. I'm not deeply invested in that argument at all.
3. In fact, I'm quite willing to drop that part of it and let the rest of my argument stand on its own.
4. It's still a bad idea to attack Iran.
Click to expand...
1. We have an accord
2. Aye
3. Aye, 'twas a derail, I share culpability
4. We have an accord.

So, where's the rum gone? ;)

DR
 
Darth Rotor said:
Note: in the real world, moral justification is most often a fig leaf, or a smoke screen, for cold dry-eyed political calculations based on balancing interests and threats. What is nice is those few times when the two motives are in accord.

DR
Click to expand...

Agreed.

My position is that the option of attacking Iran possesses neither genuine moral legitimacy nor justification through dry-eyed political calculation. I've tried to focus on the Realpolitik aspects of the argument, but it can be hard not to get into a pissing match when discussing this topic.
 
D'rok the Lacone said:
Gladly. But I'm going to need some reciprocity first. I've gone to some effort to state my arguments as clearly as I can. You have a litany of assertions that you have not backed up. Please address those first.

BTW..."rational Realpolitik reasons" does not imply approval nor does it provide moral justification. It means cold dry-eyed political calculations based on balancing interests and threats.
Click to expand...
I think in answering my question about "rational Realpolitik reasons", you will find my assertion held.
 
D'rok the Lacone said:
Agreed.

My position is that the option of attacking Iran possesses neither genuine moral legitimacy nor justification through dry-eyed political calculation. I've tried to focus on the Realpolitik aspects of the argument, but it can be hard not to get into a pissing match when discussing this topic.
Click to expand...
Also agreed, and I think getting pissed on rum is a better idea.

(Yes, I saw Pirates III this weekend, and I'm feeling a bit piratical.)

DR
 
strimmer said:
I will agree with that....But Iran has far more screws loose than the other nations we know that have Nuclear capabilities(except North Korea)

I can't remember any of the other states openly stating they want another nation wiped off the face of the earth, granted there crazy ass president says a lot of loony things, and we all now he is just the head of state, a figure head, and has no real power, but i never hear the heads of government coming out and saying they disagree with him.
Click to expand...

And just what do you think the term "Axis of Evil" was? Dubya's way of saying why don't we all be friends?

:rolleyes:
 
Darth Rotor said:
Not quite. Without the force to underwrite the economic warfare directed at the USSR, the containment policy doesn't work. Synergy. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Cherry picking a single variable is OK for lesser wits than thee.
Click to expand...
It's a fair cop. But in my defense, I did say earlier (post 74) that it was due to many factors. However, if I had to pick one factor as most important, it sure as hell wouldn't be bleedin' Ronald Reagan.

Darth Rotor said:
1. We have an accord
2. Aye
3. Aye, 'twas a derail, I share culpability
4. We have an accord.

So, where's the rum gone? ;)
Click to expand...
I have a Civic. Can I have a Cuba Libre?
 
Last edited:
yinyinwang said:
Not as the empty"rational Realpolitik reasons".
Click to expand...


I'm still waiting for some evidence to back up your claims that:
1. Iranian soldiers were captured in Iraq
2. Iran is behind the insurgency in Iraq
3. Al Qaeda is not Sunni
4. Sunni insurgents cannot make IED's without Iran's help.
4a. Implied by 4. That Iran, the center of Shia Islam, would materially aid the Sunni insurgency. These folks are also blowing up Shia neighbourhoods. Your assertion is about as likely as claiming that English Protestants materially aided the IRA.

If you present facts that support these assertions, I will retract my statements appropriately.
Click to expand...
Whenever you're ready.
 
Tricky said:
It's a fair cop. But in my defense, I did say earlier (post 74) that it was due to many factors. However, if I had to pick one factor as most important, it sure as hell wouldn't be bleedin' Ronald Reagan.


I have a Civic. Can I have a Cuba Libre?
Click to expand...

No, but I have some Corona iced down, and a few limes.

Will that suffice? :)

DR
 
yinyinwang said:
As long as my memory does not betray me, the "rational" stuff came out of talking about Iran role in Lebanon. The link is about Iranian nuke program, are you suggesting the same reasons apply to both situations?
Click to expand...

I'm getting pretty tired of this dance. Please just back up your assertions or back down. I'll even settle for one. How about this one:

So Iran is not responsible for its aggressive action to wipe Israel out
Click to expand...
What Iranian actions are aggressively targeted at wiping Israel out? You also should probably explain your equivocation of these actions - whatever they are - with 9/11.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom