• 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.

Time to kick Iran

Matteo Martini said:
Apparently few people have a clue that you need Russia to, let` s say, succeed in isolating Iran, and the current stance of the US is not what you really need in order to get this collaboration
Click to expand...

Wrong again. Have you heard of the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI)? It's a multilateral effort started by the Bush administration, including Russia, to isolate both Iran and North Korea and prevent smuggling of nuclear weapons technology. And it's been going on for years. Strange how little press attention it's gotten, though. Wonder why that might be....
 
Ziggurat said:
Wrong again. Have you heard of the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI)? It's a multilateral effort started by the Bush administration, including Russia, to isolate both Iran and North Korea and prevent smuggling of nuclear weapons technology. And it's been going on for years. Strange how little press attention it's gotten, though. Wonder why that might be....
Click to expand...

I would be wrong on the fact that sanctions are not working, or on the fact that the US are not gettin collaboration from India, China and Russia?
About the fact that the sanctions are not precisely working well, there are a lot of info on the web.
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jLMhw94rFbjTNAby-BBdnaUjw9Xg
About the fact the Russia, India and China, are not precisely cooperating in a big way with the US, also a lot of info too..

--

China for the first time became Iran's biggest trade partner in 2006, replacing Japan, according to customs-cleared trade and other data. This shows China, facing growing energy demand, is deepening its economic relationship with oil-rich Iran at a time when Japanese companies are refraining from new investment in the Middle Eastern country under U.N. sanctions over its nuclear development.

http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=48631

--

New Delhi: Member countries planning a transportation corridor that promises to shorten freight distance between Russia, Iran and India will meet in Kazakhstan next month to resolve taxation and legislative obstacles.

http://www.livemint.com/2007/09/10000657/Russia-Iran-India-will-meet.html

--

particularly as India was stepping up its military contacts with Iran.

[..]

Earlier this year, eight senators had written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on the same subject, but there was no response. According to sources, this latest letter is also being circulated by the Jewish lobby in the US to whip up sentiments against India. India's relations with Iran have been a source of irritation in the US - but Indian government sources aver that there is almost no military relations with Iran.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...tion_Indias_Iran_ties/articleshow/2345468.cms

--

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=22335&sectionid=351020103

According to Indian media, Iran and India are attempting to finalize the Peace Pipeline project to transfer Iran's gas to India via Pakistan.

--

Iran, Russia to continue nuclear project

http://www.cctv.com/english/20070910/102003.shtml

Iran says it has reached a firm agreement with Russia to complete the Bushehr nuclear power plant.

Foreign Ministry Spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini said negotiations are continuing, but are mostly technical. Construction of the plant has been delayed by a dispute over payments, but Hosseini said high ranking Russian officials have agreed to complete the project.
 
Matteo Martini said:
China for the first time became Iran's biggest trade partner in 2006, replacing Japan, according to customs-cleared trade and other data. This shows China, facing growing energy demand, is deepening its economic relationship with oil-rich Iran at a time when Japanese companies are refraining from new investment in the Middle Eastern country under U.N. sanctions over its nuclear development.
Click to expand...

Which just goes to show that China sees limited support for Iran as being in its own interests, and therefore would likely be adopting its current position regardless of what we did. You seem to be following magical thinking, Matteo: the belief that all problems can be solved if we just do the right thing. And since they aren't being solved, that must mean we're doing something seriously wrong. Well, not all problems can be solved, which means the fact that problems exist does not, in and of itself, indicate that we're doing anything wrong.
 
Ziggurat said:
Which just goes to show that China sees limited support for Iran as being in its own interests, and therefore would likely be adopting its current position regardless of what we did. You seem to be following magical thinking, Matteo: the belief that all problems can be solved if we just do the right thing. And since they aren't being solved, that must mean we're doing something seriously wrong.
Click to expand...

I have not said that.
But, I can not think that trying to cooperate more with other nations, could do no good in having them on your side..
 
Ziggurat said:
Wrong again. Have you heard of the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI)? It's a multilateral effort started by the Bush administration, including Russia, to isolate both Iran and North Korea and prevent smuggling of nuclear weapons technology.
Click to expand...

Did not work with China and India, though..
 
Matteo Martini said:
Excellent.
This is why Putin said that the US are sparkling an arms race all around the world.
Click to expand...
You are going to have to explain this. It seems a non-sequitur.

America has had nuclear/atomic weapons for 60 years. We've been in some very serious hostilities with nations that did not have nuclear weapons. America has shown no desire to drop the bomb since the end of WWII and there is no indication whatsoever that we want to now.

On the flip side we have a guy, Ahmadinejad, who wants an apocolypic war. He doesn't care if his country is wiped out. He expects it. He believes it is necassary to bring back the Wahabi.

The hypothetical you pose is rational. Ahmadinejad is not.
 
RandFan said:
You are going to have to explain this. It seems a non-sequitur.

America has had nuclear/atomic weapons for 60 years. We've been in some very serious hostilities with nations that did not have nuclear weapons. America has shown no desire to drop the bomb since the end of WWII and there is no indication whatsoever that we want to now.

On the flip side we have a guy, Ahmadinejad, who wants an apocolypic war. He doesn't care if his country is wiped out. He expects it. He believes it is necassary to bring back the Wahabi.

The hypothetical you pose is rational. Ahmadinejad is not.
Click to expand...

This is true, what you say about America " has shown no desire to drop the bomb since the end of WWII " is true.
But, do not you think that the fact that America, just for the fact that owns, along with other nations, nukes, could be a reason why other nations want nukes as well?
Why America yes, and other nations ( not specifically, Iran ) no?
After all, you wrote:
" The willingness to use the bomb is the only thing that makes it of any use. "

Also, the link you have posted is not 100% neutral.

P.S.
Hey, you changed avatar again!!
 
Matteo Martini said:
But, do not you think that the fact that America, just for the fact that owns, along with other nations, nukes, could be a reason why other nations want nukes as well?
Click to expand...
I think I answered that. I think I said yes. My answer is the same. ;)

Why America yes, and other nations ( not specifically, Iran ) no?
Click to expand...
From whose perspective? According to the UN nuclear proliferation is a danger to the world. America agrees, so do I.

" The willingness to use the bomb is the only thing that makes it of any use. "
Click to expand...
Yes, I did.

Also, the link you have posted is not 100% neutral.
Click to expand...
I don't know of anything that is 100% neutral. Google Ahmadinejad and Mhadi or Ahmadinejad and armageddon.

In Iran, Arming for Armageddon

Hey, you changed avatar again!!
Click to expand...
:) I told you I would.
 
RandFan said:
In Iran, Arming for Armageddon
Click to expand...

We can discuss endlessly about Ahmadinejad willingness to start an Holocaust or not.
But, this is not the point I am trying to make, as I am in favour of stopping Iran to have nukes.
And, I said the best way may not be the one put forward by the current administration.
My point, was that all the nations should be prevented from getting or keping nukes ( including Russia, China, the US, France, Israel .. )
 
Matteo Martini said:
But, this is not the point I am trying to make, as I am in favour of stopping Iran to have nukes.
Click to expand...
I have no doubt about that. The problem is that you can't easily divorse this fact from the discussion.

My point, was that all the nations should be prevented from getting or keping nukes ( including Russia, China, the US, France, Israel .. )
Click to expand...
Let's assume for a moment that all members of the nuclear club agree to disarm.

How do we enforce the agreement? How do we keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons?
 
supposedley Mutually Assured Destruction is the best tried and approved strategy that we've yet had in World Wars and that. So the best thing would be for every country to have the same number and power of nuclear missiles. Thus would be guaranteed future stability and opportunities for earthly happiness :)
 
plumjam said:
supposedley Mutually Assured Destruction is the best tried and approved strategy that we've yet had in World Wars and that. So the best thing would be for every country to have the same number and power of nuclear missiles. Thus would be guaranteed future stability and opportunities for earthly happiness :)
Click to expand...
Yep, great idea, give nuclear weapons to people that expect an apocalypse and who want to be wiped out in order to bring back the Mahdi.

Now, that's something we can all smile at.
 
RandFan said:
Yep, great idea, give nuclear weapons to people that expect an apocalypse and who want to be wiped out in order to bring back the Mahdi.

Now, that's something we can all smile at.
Click to expand...

sure,
or should we, instead, give the nuclear weapons to the only nation in history to use them against hundreds of thousands of civillians, in order to frighten off another another nation for political gain?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom