MCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1279 times:
I know, the Ayatollahs are the ones who are really in control, but he is their mouthpiece.
I brought up the fact the Iran Air is allowed to fly into the US, despite sanctions. I also brought up the possibility of their placing a clandestine nuclear weapon aboard an airliner in an attempt to detonate it over a US city (the ultimate suicide bomb). I immediately drew harsh criticism and was called things like "paranoid", even "insane".
Why is this so far outside the realm of reason, folks? Iran is the single largest state sponsor of terrorism. They funnel untold amounts of money into terrorist organizations and completely support actions like suicide car bombings, even paying the surviving family members of "martyrs". They have sworn upon the destruction of Israel and the US on countless occasions and have embarked on a nuclear weapons program, even in the face of world protest. It occurs to me that smuggling one of these weapons into the US would be their ultimate goal. Also, the chances are very good that they'd supply their terrorist allies with one of these weapons (e.g. Al Queda).
I guess I just find this level of naivete incredible. How is it I'm so wrong?
Please, if you're a person who thinks the US is responsible for all the bad things that happen to it or that "the US has nukes, why not IRI", then please, don't post. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
QANTAS077 From China, joined Jan 2004, 5751 posts, RR: 48 Reply 1, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1265 times:
lol...take a valium or something, it's not going to happen! loud mouthed he may well be, stupid he aint...if it's as bad as you suggest then why hasn't it happend already? the Iranians could've purchased a dirt bomb from any number of places without going to extraordinary lengths of building one.
it's a little hard to smuggle an atomic bomb anywhere...
a true friend is someone who sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else believes the smile on your face.
MCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1256 times:
I'm a whitewater kayaker. I attended a big kayaking meet of my local club at a local lake. It's a big affair where we barbecue and the reps from different kayak and canoe manufacturers show up to show off their latest designs.
The sun had set and we were all enjoying shrimp and crab around the campfire when the discussion turned political. Eventually, I touched on the subject of Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda. I said "I don't understand why we don't go into Afghanistan and get Osama Bin Laden". Well, the reps from the Dagger kayak co. immediately laid into me with things like "Afghanistan is a sovereign nation" and "he's not that stupid". They spent probably five solid minutes attacking me (not that I cared what they thought, I only paddle German plastic, Prijon). They were college age and very much struck me as "hippie" types (one man, one woman), college kids with no real world exeperience.
The date of that kayaking meet was 9/09/2001.
Aloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8394 posts, RR: 47 Reply 3, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1225 times:
I think you've seen "The Sum of All Fears" one time too many.
The Iranians know that if anyone detonated an atomic bomb over a NATO member nation, all hell would break loose and they'd be on the receiving end of it. Any Iranian commercial airliner flying into US airspace would easily be traced, and if somehow it ended up as a nuclear explosion, we'd know if it had happened aboard.
An a-bomb is several sizes bigger than 9/11, even though that was the worst single terrorist attack in history. Nice to see you're so easily scared.
Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
MCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1220 times:
Well you see, that's what's so scary in this particular situation, they don't care about retaliation. Unlike the cold war, they're not concerned with MAD. In their minds, if we lay waste to Tehran with a nuclear weapon, they'll simply end up in paradise with 72 virgins. They're fanatics and fanatics are dangerous.
MCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1196 times:
In Iran, what the rank and file thinks is irrelevant. Their leaders are fanatics and that's all that matters there. It was encouraging to see a terrorist attack against their own military however.
Scorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4934 posts, RR: 46 Reply 7, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1192 times:
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 4): Well you see, that's what's so scary in this particular situation, they don't care about retaliation.
How do you know that?
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 4): Unlike the cold war, they're not concerned with MAD. In their minds, if we lay waste to Tehran with a nuclear weapon, they'll simply end up in paradise with 72 virgins. They're fanatics and fanatics are dangerous.
There is one thing Iran wants more than anything: power. Iran doesn't want to set off a nuke over the U.S., it wants to become the dominant power in the Middle East. Getting nukes is one of the ways in which they can achieve that. Actually using it is a surefire way of completely and immediately losing all that power they have been striving for for so long. And they know that.
In short: the best way of having power is having a nuke. The best way of losing power is using one.
MCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1181 times:
Well I'm sorry, given their previous actions, I take them at their word when they say they "imagine a world without Israel or the USA".
Scorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4934 posts, RR: 46 Reply 9, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1177 times:
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 8): Well I'm sorry, given their previous actions, I take them at their word when they say they "imagine a world without Israel or the USA".
Hey, if you are hellbent on believing all of Iran's actions are part of a gigantic kamikaze mission, have at it
MCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1172 times:
No, I don't think all Iranians think that way. I think most Iranians would happily wave goodbye to the regime. The question is, can they do something about it before their leaders do something stupid and get them in trouble?
Rammstein From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1141 times:
Quoting MCIGuy (Thread starter): They have sworn upon the destruction of Israel and the US on countless occasions
True, but for the moment only propaganda.
Quote: and have embarked on a nuclear weapons program
Source? Don't tell me Fox News please. They have yet to build a working nuclear power plant...
Quoting MCIGuy (Thread starter): ? Iran is the single largest state sponsor of terrorism.
Please remember that 15 of the 19 9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia, a long time ally of the US. NONE came from Iran.
I have a question for you: why the US government attacked Iraq (that had nothing to do with 9/11) instead of Saudi Arabia (from witch the money came to finance the 9/11 attacks)?
Quoting MCIGuy (Thread starter): Also, the chances are very good that they'd supply their terrorist allies with one of these weapons (e.g. Al Queda).
Still a theory, in fact the connection with Al-Qaeda is quite unlikely: they are far for being buddy-buddy.
MCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1128 times:
Quote: Source? Don't tell me Fox News please. They have yet to build a working nuclear power plant...
I don't have access to that intelligence. However, if you piece everything together, the evidence overhwhelmingly points in that direction.
Quote: remember that 15 of the 19 9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia, a long ally of the US. NONE came from Iran.
That's as may be, but much of the support and financing does come out of Iran. At one point it was speculated that Osama Bin Laden might be hiding there as a "guest" of the Iranian government.
Quote: I have a question for you: why the US government attacked Iraq (that had nothing to do with 9/11) instead of Saudi Arabia (from witch the money came from to finance the 9/11 attacks)?
Because it's the Muslim "Holy Land" and we'd have immediately been fighting the entire Muslim world, and the president knows that. At least half of Bin Laden's justification for 9/11 was simply the troops we had stationed there. If Saudi becomes enough of a problem, we will. It's not about oil, we won't even need their oil in less than 20 years.
As for Iraq, they were giving asylum to terrorists. Abu Abbas was hiding in Baghdad and that was enough for me. But then, I remember Achille Lauro like it was yesterday and that human garbage Abbas pushing a man in a wheelchair (Leon Klinghoffer) overboard just because he was a Jew.
Connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3897 posts, RR: 13 Reply 13, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1108 times:
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 6): In Iran, what the rank and file thinks is irrelevant. Their leaders are fanatics and that's all that matters there.
The same could be said about the US government leadership -- the non-elected people who really run the show, or have done the past 6+ years. The neo-con/Christian right warp in the US government has caused your nation great damage. Ideological purity trumping political practicality is usually a bad recipe.
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 8): Well I'm sorry, given their previous actions, I take them at their word when they say they "imagine a world without Israel or the USA".
Yes, an extreme statement from Mr Ahmedinajad, who fortunately does not actually represent the supreme power in Iran. The Supreme Council is a whole lot more conservative than him and is p*ssed at much of his antics -- for confirmation check back issues of "The Atlantic" or "Harper's", or check "The Independent" newspaper website. Also the people are not happy, and Mr A may pay the ultimate political price for this.
How is his statement different in its' impact than when Ronnie R said on a live mike back in the 1980s "The bombing begins in 10 minutes" (referring to the USSR, which he had recently described as an Evil Empire) ? People all over the world thought, with some justification, that a nutbar was POTUS.
MCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1097 times:
Quote: Yes, an extreme statement from Mr Ahmedinajad, who fortunately does not actually represent the supreme power in Iran. The Supreme Council is a whole lot more conservative than him and is p*ssed at much of his antics -- for confirmation check back issues of "The Atlantic" or "Harper's", or check "The Independent" newspaper website. Also the people are not happy, and Mr A may pay the ultimate political price for this.
You don't really think Iran is a democracy, do you? Mr. Ahmadenijad is president only at the the pleasure of the Ayatollahs (The Supreme Council) and as soon as he truly does something to displease them, he's out.
Quote: How is his statement different in its' impact than when Ronnie R said on a live mike back in the 1980s "The bombing begins in 10 minutes" (referring to the USSR, which he had recently described as an Evil Empire) ? People all over the world thought, with some justification, that a nutbar was POTUS.
I think that's an invalid analogy. Mr. Reagan was joking when he said that and everyone knew it. Mr. Ahmadenijad is absolutely not joking when he talks about the destruction of Israel and the US.
Connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3897 posts, RR: 13 Reply 15, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1044 times:
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 14): You don't really think Iran is a democracy, do you?
Is America? (at the federal level) Seems to me the choice are the Dumber Party and the Dumberer Party. There is not much to differentiate the Dems from the GOP (in that order). Pretty much what the US is stuck with is a two-headed
Status Quo Party. If th US had a truly viable 3rd party I think it would be way better off.
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 14): I think that's an invalid analogy. Mr. Reagan was joking when he said that and everyone knew it. Mr. Ahmadenijad is absolutely not joking when he talks about the destruction of Israel and the US.
Many people gave R-R the benefit of the doubt there. I know Maggie Thatcher did.
The point is, currently Mr Ahmedinajad has _zero_ ability to "wipe Israel and America from the face of the earth" -- and we all know that. And that situation will not change, IMHO as a nuclear researcher, for probably at least 3 years and likely more. But, as we all know, the US _is_ a nuclear threat to anyone that opposes it, and that imposes on the POTUS a certain responsibility. Everyone knows a tiger has fangs that kill, but does the tiger need to show them all the time? Surely R-R, if he had had any common sense about him, would never have uttered anything like that in a studio. Off-line, perhaps, in a closed situation among confidants, but not before a national broadcast.
I am not defending Ahmedinajad or his zealous supporters. AFAICS he's a bigot, smart like a fox, though. At the end of their path is destruction. I pray the Supreme Council or the street will put an end to his idiocy. And that is why the West as a whole, and the US in particular, needs to engage Iran, not ostracise it.
MCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1018 times:
Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 15): If th US had a truly viable 3rd party I think it would be way better off.
I won't argue that point. Contrary to appearances, I'm not a Republican, I'm a right-leaning Independent. There are points at which I seriously part ways with both parties. I'd like to see someone like Joe Leiberman get in, but it's like a self-fulfilling prophecy, "he can't win, so why vote for him". That's the trouble with third-party candidates.
HAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31228 posts, RR: 58 Reply 17, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1007 times:
Remember there is always a speech for Domestic Audience consumption.It happens in Pakistan too against India.
Carryin out such a deed by a Government is very near Impossible.
regds
MEL
they, at least at present, do NOT have nuclear weapons
Quoting MCIGuy (Thread starter): their terrorist allies with one of these weapons (e.g. Al Queda).
they HAVE terrorist allies, but elQaeda is NOT among their allies, but among their enemies
Quoting MCIGuy (Thread starter): They have sworn upon the destruction of Israel and the US on countless occasions
no, they never did. They on countless times have sworn that a "disappearance" of Israel ought to be engineered, but of course by somebody else.
Quoting MCIGuy (Thread starter): They have embarked on a nuclear weapons program,
No, they have not, or at least not yet. Their program at present is nuclear energy for civilian use. That everybody in the world suspects them to be enroute for the bomb of course has some reasons !
-
What is wrong with your deductions and conclusions ? Simply that you put your "findings" at the start and then try to fit facts to your "final conclusion", instead of putting facts together to arrive at serious conclusions. Are you working with Halliburton ?
-
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 4): In their minds, if we lay waste to Tehran with a nuclear weapon, they'll simply end up in paradise with 72 virgins. They're fanatics and fanatics are dangerous.
this is both generalisation and gross exaggeration. They in real fact care very very much about whatever danger might come up for Tehran and the other Iranian cities. They since 1979 have for 28 years now constantly gone into extreme rethorics but in reality always acted rather carefully. They WERE fanatics but now just are a bunch of conservative zealots trying to keep in power
-
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 6): In Iran, what the rank and file thinks is irrelevant. Their leaders are fanatics and that's all that matters there.
again, the present leadership of Iran is a bunch of restrictive conservative religious stubborn zealots, but the days of fanatic fervour are long past. Far more dangerous may, in the longer term even more than now, be the old inherent Persian - Iranian longing for a dominant role .
-
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 8): their previous actions, I take them at their word when they say they "imagine a world without Israel or the USA".
what "actions" ?
can't you imagine a world without Israel ?
-
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 10): most Iranians would happily wave goodbye to the regime. The question is, can they do something about it before their leaders do something stupid and get them in trouble?
yes&no. Most Iranians indeed would happily see the regime gone, but NOT due to them possibly up to do something stupid somewhere in the future, BUT due to their DOING something stupid ALL THE TIME, and that is the conservative restrictive religiously minded way of governing. THAT is what the people care about !
-
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 12): if you piece everything together, the evidence overhwhelmingly points in that direction.
no evidence "points in that direction", it is just assumptions
-
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 12): much of the support and financing does come out of Iran
none of the support and none of the financing for elQaeda comes out of Iran, and you above clearly referred to elQaeda. elQaeda, to say it again, is an adversary of Iran, and NOT an ally
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 12): At one point it was speculated that Osama Bin Laden might be hiding there as a "guest" of the Iranian government.
an idiotic speculation
-
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 12): As for Iraq, they were giving asylum to terrorists. Abu Abbas was hiding in Baghdad and that was enough for me. But then, I remember Achille Lauro like it was yesterday and that human garbage Abbas pushing a man in a wheelchair (Leon Klinghoffer) overboard just because he was a Jew.
BlueElephant From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 1809 posts, RR: 6 Reply 20, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 950 times:
Being from America, i feel that many of your remarks are quite offensive. And i honestly feel you are making some ignorant remarks.
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 4): they'll simply end up in paradise with 72 virgins. They're fanatics and fanatics are dangerous.
I don't think that this is a very good statement. There is no way you can say this, as not all muslims are so fanatic. I have many muslim friends (and some of them are from IRAN too) who are among the most peaceful people I have ever met.
I know what you're going to say....its the Government...and not the people...
Yah that might be true, but unfortunatly they might not have the priviledge or ability to stand up to their government. Making a statement that All Muslims are fanatics and are dangerous is an insult to millions of people around the world.
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 6): It was encouraging to see a terrorist attack against their own military however.
I don't believe it is a good thing if Anyone is harmed in a terrorist attack. Terrorism is bad...simply put. There is no reason to feel "encourage" by a terrorist attacks...Period.
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 6): Their leaders are fanatics and that's all that matters there.
Did it ever occur to you, that maybe people from other parts of the world thinks that of Our government...the US government?...This possibly could be because we invaded Iraq...and found out that they didn't have WMDs....and then went on to say that we did it cause they were harboring terrorists. In the end, we really didn't have much of a reason to go in there in the first place. And now, the Pentagon is drawing up plans to attack a country that wouldn't even be able to produce a Nuclear bomb for at least 3 years. I honestly don't think this is fair.
I am not anti America at all...i just feel that what the government is doing is not right.
My apologies to all those out there who think that becuase of this person's ignorant remarks, that all American people are this way. Because truthfully...they are not.
Cedars747 From Norway, joined Dec 2005, 2716 posts, RR: 23 Reply 21, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 914 times:
Quoting BlueElephant (Reply 20): Being from America, i feel that many of your remarks are quite offensive. And i honestly feel you are making some ignorant remarks.
Being from Planet Earth,I feel that many of your country's attitudes are quite offensive .And I honestly feel you should learn more about the world
Lamedianaranja From Venezuela, joined Nov 2004, 1246 posts, RR: 23 Reply 22, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 879 times:
and now this guy is best friends with president Chávez of Venezuela, proven by the weekly IR flight between the two countries. This really doesn't bode well for Venezuela.
TheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2012 posts, RR: 6 Reply 23, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 864 times:
Quoting Scorpio (Reply 7): There is one thing Iran wants more than anything: power. Iran doesn't want to set off a nuke over the U.S., it wants to become the dominant power in the Middle East. Getting nukes is one of the ways in which they can achieve that. Actually using it is a surefire way of completely and immediately losing all that power they have been striving for for so long. And they know that.
In short: the best way of having power is having a nuke. The best way of losing power is using one.
I agree; Iran has bigger fish to fry in the long term. They are just using the current state of affairs to boost their power base.
Quoting Rammstein (Reply 11): I have a question for you: why the US government attacked Iraq (that had nothing to do with 9/11) instead of Saudi Arabia (from witch the money came to finance the 9/11 attacks)?
What does that have to do with this thread?
Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 13): Ideological purity trumping political practicality is usually a bad recipe.
Reminds you of home, eh? It is a common tool, used by many.
Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 15): Is America? (at the federal level) Seems to me the choice are the Dumber Party and the Dumberer Party. There is not much to differentiate the Dems from the GOP (in that order). Pretty much what the US is stuck with is a two-headed
Status Quo Party. If th US had a truly viable 3rd party I think it would be way better off.
It is up to the US citizens to form a 3rd party, or stick with the two that they have. Therefore, that falls into the democratic process.
Quoting Cedars747 (Reply 21): Being from Planet Earth,I feel that many of your country's attitudes are quite offensive .And I honestly feel you should learn more about the world
Being from planet Earth, I feel that your attitude is quite offensive. More education would do you good as well.
No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
Cedars747 From Norway, joined Dec 2005, 2716 posts, RR: 23 Reply 24, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 858 times:
Quoting TheCol (Reply 23): Being from planet Earth, I feel that your attitude is quite offensive. More education would do you good as well.
Being from planet Earth,I feel it's not your business since I am not talking about Canada.Anyway All my sympathy goes to the great Canadian People "except you of course"
Alex!!!
Fly every mile with a smile !
25 TheCol: Quoting Cedars747 (Reply 24): All my sympathy goes to the great Canadian For what? Having the US as our neighbor? Quoting Cedars747 (Reply 24): Being
26 Cedars747: Vive le QUEBEC libre Vive la revolution Francaise Alex!!!
27 N1120A: Iran Air is the state carrier of Iran and carries dignitaries abroad. The UN is headquartered in New York. Get it? You have got to be freaking kiddin
28 QANTAS077: i'm surprised the thread has made it this far...MCI your arguments are so pathetic it's nauseating.
29 PLANAR: In the end history has always shown us - Hatred only produces more hatred. Tit for tat never leads to an ultimate peace. Its either US vs Iran or West
30 MCIGuy: Well, it's good to know who's for squelching speech they don't agree with. I'm so glad I live here and you there. Well, here's your (peace) sign. Wow
31 ME AVN FAN: THAT is what a good alliance ought to be all about. To be real and reliable allies, even at times NOT agreeing - - As it is a "name" in a way it ough
32 MCIGuy: Being from Switzerland, do you really want to discuss WW2?
33 ME AVN FAN: Winston Churchill was Prime Minister also in the early 50ies, which was AFTER WW-II , and Neville Chamberlain "secured peace in our time" and that wa
34 Baroque: I was lost in admiration for MAFs persistence in the face of great odds, and it seems I was not alone. To MAFs opposition, if you want to understand
35 A332: Time to step outside that big bubble you call home in Kansas City and get a better understanding of the world as a whole... I've always wondered why t
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, 
From China, joined Jan 2004, 5751 posts, 
). They were college age and very much struck me as "hippie" types (one man, one woman), college kids with no real world exeperience.
From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8394 posts, 
From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4934 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3897 posts, 
From India, joined Jan 2001, 31228 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined May 2002, 13875 posts, 
From Norway, joined Dec 2005, 2716 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 1809 posts, 
From Venezuela, joined Nov 2004, 1246 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
