|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted October 10, 2007 09:52 PM |
|
|
Part of it is almost a direct quote of Ron Paul, yes.
Anyway, look at it this way. We have the following options:
1. We stay in Iraq for a while. Iran is allowed to get nuclear weapons.
Iran: Hey, terrorist group! Get this nuclear weapon into the US and blow them up!
Terrorist Group: k.
*boom!*
Chaos erupts.
2. We stay in Iraq for a while. We bomb Iran's nuclear facilities and invade it. Thus, we oppress even more people and create another reason to hate America.
Oppressed person: I hate the US! I'm going to blow them up!
Millions of oppressed people: Me too!
*massive amount of bombings and terrorist attacks*
Chaos erupts.
3. We get out of Iraq. It quickly falls to sectarian violence backed by foreign interests. Iran gets nuclear weapons.
Iran: We have nuclear weapons! Now we can deal with everyone as equals!
Insane guy: I can't find anyone who wants to destroy the US. Whatever. I HATE THEM! Hey, what's this? *steals Iranian nuclear weapon*
*boom!*
Chaos erupts.
4. We get out of Iraq. It quickly falls to sectarian violence backed by foreign extremists. We negotiate with Iran and make a deal in which they get something like food or medicine and they stop making nuclear weapons.
Insane guy: I can't do any damage!
Chaos does not erupt.
So, you see that Option 4 is clearly the best.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Geny
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted October 10, 2007 10:19 PM |
|
|
Quote:
We negotiate with Iran and make a deal in which they get something like food or medicine and they stop making nuclear weapons.
Please tell me you're joking.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
SwampLord
Supreme Hero
Lord of the Swamp
|
|
posted October 10, 2007 10:24 PM |
|
|
Yeah, that's not naive at all. It's not like they'd keep the medicine and supplies and then keep making nukes...
And if they give a nuke to a terrorist group, and they're found out, which is a distinct possibility, as nukes don't just fall out of the sky, they would be in deep, deep snow.
Your total lack of caring whether or not Iraq is totally engulfed in sectarian violence is also a bit disturbing. Option 4 is not the best, because Iran will not stop making nukes. Also, you don't need nukes to carry out suicide-bomber attacks. If we pull out, the global terrorism will continue.
____________
They can take my swamp, they can take my town, but they will never take my FREEDOM!
|
|
roy-algriffin
Supreme Hero
Chocolate ice cream zealot
|
|
posted October 10, 2007 11:17 PM |
|
|
Yeah it is a little disturbing how little caring you have for anyone else assuming the US gets safe for the next several months.
And Well you may think neither sides want to fix the conflict. but it probably wouldnt take that much time to fix everything up if all the politicians in iraq wanted peace. but theres definatly some who dont or want to delay it.
Remember , its too late. If you wanted to be totally uncaring and having a lack of empathy you should have done it earlier. youve gotten involved now (america that is) you would be the first target for a nuke from a madman now.
And in the end even if you left nothing would be solved. We keep getting bombed, iraq keeps fighting, you admit everything is a mistake and then maybe years and years later find out that it might have actually been a good idea not to pull out so quickly
Oh and medicine? food? the people your dealign with on to develop anuke or not are rich enough. its the general population that needs food and medicine.
____________
"Am i a demon? No im a priest of the light! THE BLOODY RED LIGHT"
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 10, 2007 11:37 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
We negotiate with Iran and make a deal in which they get something like food or medicine and they stop making nuclear weapons.
Please tell me you're joking.
That would be the condition of them getting medicine and food.
Quote:
Yeah, that's not naive at all. It's not like they'd keep the medicine and supplies and then keep making nukes...
Well, they'd have to also let UN inspectors in to make sure that they're keeping their part of the deal.
Quote:
And if they give a nuke to a terrorist group, and they're found out, which is a distinct possibility, as nukes don't just fall out of the sky, they would be in deep, deep ****.
By which time it would already be too late and the US would be engulfed in chaos and looting.
[qote]Your total lack of caring whether or not Iraq is totally engulfed in sectarian violence is also a bit disturbing. Option 4 is not the best, because Iran will not stop making nukes. Also, you don't need nukes to carry out suicide-bomber attacks. If we pull out, the global terrorism will continue.
I live in America. In most cases, what makes America better makes my life better. They're not going to suicide-bomb America if America isn't bothering them.
Quote:
Yeah it is a little disturbing how little caring you have for anyone else assuming the US gets safe for the next several months.
You notice how America was never threatened when it followed the Monroe Doctrine? Then we had September 11, and recently bombing attempts on several of our embassies in Europe. If that's not connected to our agressive foreign policy, I don't know what is.
Quote:
And Well you may think neither sides want to fix the conflict. but it probably wouldnt take that much time to fix everything up if all the politicians in iraq wanted peace. but theres definatly some who dont or want to delay it.
I completely agree with you here, except that you have to consider that there are external forces who don't want peace, either.
Quote:
Remember , its too late. If you wanted to be totally uncaring and having a lack of empathy you should have done it earlier. youve gotten involved now (america that is) you would be the first target for a nuke from a madman now.
Are you saying that Ahmedinejad is a madman? He could be, but I seriously doubt it. He is acting in the interests of Iran's ruling clerics, and it is in their interest to try to appease Iran's populace. And enforcing their sovereignty is a good way to show the populace that they live in a country, not a colony or protectorate. They don't want us there. We have no need to be there.
Quote:
And in the end even if you left nothing would be solved. We keep getting bombed, iraq keeps fighting, you admit everything is a mistake and then maybe years and years later find out that it might have actually been a good idea not to pull out so quickly
We don't know what history will be like until long after we're gone. Who knows? Maybe it would be a mistake to pull out. But, judgeing by what I know and think, it would be a bigger mistake to stay. And America has no business being Israel's protector. Israel has nuclear weapons. They can defend themselves just fine.
Quote:
Oh and medicine? food? the people your dealign with on to develop anuke or not are rich enough. its the general population that needs food and medicine.
If they refuse, we will broadcast propoganda to the general populace so that they would know exactly why they aren't getting medicine and food.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
roy-algriffin
Supreme Hero
Chocolate ice cream zealot
|
|
posted October 10, 2007 11:47 PM |
|
|
Quote:
If they refuse, we will broadcast propoganda to the general populace so that they would know exactly why they aren't getting medicine and food.
Umm Sorry but doesnt pulling out imply that your going to leave? Putting propoganda there would most likely make it a definate civil war.
And well even if you propably dont mind a reveloution doesnt neccasarily mean no nukes. It may just mean someone else with his finger on the button.
____________
"Am i a demon? No im a priest of the light! THE BLOODY RED LIGHT"
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 10, 2007 11:50 PM |
|
|
We would pull out after we successfuly make a deal with Iran, either with Ahmedinejad or their next President, who will be elected after the propoganda is broadcast. And Iran having nukes isn't the problem. The problem is what they're going to do with the nukes. If Iran suddenly becomes a stable and prosperous nation, then, by all means, let them pursue nukes. But they can't be allowed to have them under the current situation.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
roy-algriffin
Supreme Hero
Chocolate ice cream zealot
|
|
posted October 11, 2007 12:26 AM |
|
|
But the whole point of my post was to say that if your pulling out they can just cheat you, Since you no longer have a presence in the area
Oh, And iran wont become a stable and prosperious nation overnight. if your waiting for that you might as well say your waiting several years
____________
"Am i a demon? No im a priest of the light! THE BLOODY RED LIGHT"
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 11, 2007 02:06 AM |
|
|
If we have UN inspectors with full access (and CIA spies), they won't be able to cheat us. And I know that Iran won't become a prosperous nation overnight.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted October 11, 2007 02:28 AM |
|
Edited by Binabik at 02:31, 11 Oct 2007.
|
Quote:
If we have UN inspectors with full access (and CIA spies), they won't be able to cheat us
LOL, Iraq cheated for more than ten years.
The rest of the world has a real bad track record on inspections. Iran can do just like Iraq did.
Iraq must have done the same thing at least 20 times. They stopped the inspectors. The UN passed yet another resolution "DEMANDING" that Iraq comply. In the meantime Iraq has moved everything. The inspectors return until the next time they get near something Iraq isn't supposed to have. And the cycle starts all over again.
Iraq made total fools of the rest of the world. They must have gotten a good laugh out of it.
____________
|
|
SwampLord
Supreme Hero
Lord of the Swamp
|
|
posted October 11, 2007 03:00 AM |
|
|
Also, Mvass, one nuke going off in say, DC, is not going to throw the entire country into chaos. Sure, most of the higher-ups in the government will most likely be dead, but some will be away, and thus survive. There is also a clear line of succession, and a bomb going off in DC doesn't stop the cops in New York from functioning. So the country would not be plunged into chaos. Sure, it'd be problematic, but we'd survive it.
Also, the whole "As long as America's fine I don't care if all of Iraq dies" is part of the reason the whole Middle East hates us.
If we pull out, there seems to be a real danger that Iran would move in in our stead. They probably haven't forgotten the Iran-Iraq war.
____________
They can take my swamp, they can take my town, but they will never take my FREEDOM!
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 11, 2007 03:34 AM |
|
|
Quote:
LOL, Iraq cheated for more than ten years.
We would be far more forceful than the UN was. We wouldn't "DEMAND" that Iran comply. We would blockade them and broadcast propoganda.
Quote:
Iraq made total fools of the rest of the world. They must have gotten a good laugh out of it.
Iraq was in a very difficult position. It had to convice Iran that it had WMDs while convincing the US that it actually hadn't. It failed.
Quote:
Also, Mvass, one nuke going off in say, DC, is not going to throw the entire country into chaos.
The bomb itself is bad enough. But the bomb is only the tip of the iceberg. It would start massive looting. Did you see what happened in New Orleans around Hurricane Katrina? It would be millions of times worse. It would happen on a national scale as people would panic and start fighting. I wouldn't rule out a civil war.
Quote:
Also, the whole "As long as America's fine I don't care if all of Iraq dies" is part of the reason the whole Middle East hates us.
The Middle East doesn't care what we think about them as much as it cares about what we do to them. Actions>words>thoughts. We engage in an imperialistic policy, and much of our populace doesn't trust them because of massive fearmongering (Muslim=America-hating terrorist, according to some propoganda). If we think that while improving our policy, it would improve our relations with the Middle East.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
SwampLord
Supreme Hero
Lord of the Swamp
|
|
posted October 11, 2007 03:40 AM |
|
|
Mvass, one nuke going off in DC is not going to stop the cops and Army in the rest of the country from maintaining order. People won't panic and start a civil war, that's just stupid.
And trust me, our propaganda wouldn't even get in. The government controls everything that it wishes.
Also, what if the rest of the world objects rather strongly to us blockading Iran?
____________
They can take my swamp, they can take my town, but they will never take my FREEDOM!
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 11, 2007 03:50 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Mvass, one nuke going off in DC is not going to stop the cops and Army in the rest of the country from maintaining order. People won't panic and start a civil war, that's just stupid.
The cops? The army? They'll be just as divided as everyone else.
Quote:
And trust me, our propaganda wouldn't even get in. The government controls everything that it wishes.
If our propoganda could get into the Soviet Union, then it can get into Iran.
Quote:
Also, what if the rest of the world objects rather strongly to us blockading Iran?
Who's going to object? Russia? They have no reason to object other than simply out of spite, and I'm sure that we could come to some sort of trade agreement with them. After all, they have a lot of oil. China? They wouldn't want to jeopardize our relations with them. The EU? They have no reason to complain. India? They would welcome it. The Muslims? We would be blockading the only Shi'ite nation besides Azerbaijan. They wouldn't complain about what we're doing to someone they hate so much.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
texcaboose
Known Hero
|
|
posted October 11, 2007 03:51 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
LOL, Iraq cheated for more than ten years.
We would be far more forceful than the UN was. We wouldn't "DEMAND" that Iran comply. We would blockade them and broadcast propoganda.
yes, we should effectively become the new dictators of Iran.....
are you serious?
we have no control over the brodcasting in other countries.
blockade them to piss off all the people that trade with them, and get attacked by their allies......
there is not an easy way to get out of this situation... period.
but, pulling out immediately is the worst solution, as the entire middle east would collapse.
|
|
SwampLord
Supreme Hero
Lord of the Swamp
|
|
posted October 11, 2007 03:55 AM |
|
|
Mvass, please provide support for the statement that a bomb destroying one of our country's cities will plunge it into massive factional civil war.
That just seems ridiculous to me.
____________
They can take my swamp, they can take my town, but they will never take my FREEDOM!
|
|
texcaboose
Known Hero
|
|
posted October 11, 2007 03:57 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Mvass, please provide support for the statement that a bomb destroying one of our country's cities will plunge it into massive factional civil war.
That just seems ridiculous to me.
yes, please explain this...
It definitely would hurt the country tremendously, but i dont see the nation randomly dividing and fighting...
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 11, 2007 03:58 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
LOL, Iraq cheated for more than ten years.
We would be far more forceful than the UN was. We wouldn't "DEMAND" that Iran comply. We would blockade them and broadcast propoganda.
Quote:
yes, we should effectively become the new dictators of Iran.....
are you serious?
I do not propose that we rule Iran. That wouldn't work. I just hope that we can come to some sort of mutually beneficial agreement. They get food, we get safety. And if their leaders don't like it, we go over their heads directly to the Iranian people. After all, there was a recent protest in Tehran.
Quote:
we have no control over the brodcasting in other countries.
That's why we broadcast from outside the country.
Quote:
blockade them to piss off all the people that trade with them, and get attacked by their allies......
Who trades with them? They are hated worldwide. The Sunnis hate them. The Israelis hate them. The Americans don't like them. The Russians have nothing to give them. They're too poor to trade with the Chinese. Who's going to get angry?
Quote:
but, pulling out immediately is the worst solution, as the entire middle east would collapse.
We're demolishing the Middle East as we speak. It's highly unstable. It was a lot more stable before we went in. We broke the Middle East, and now we're smashing the remains with a sledgehammer. We are paying for it with our soldiers' blood, and we might have to pay for it with civillian blood if we don't fix our mistake and just come home.
Quote:
Mvass, please provide support for the statement that a bomb destroying one of our country's cities will plunge it into massive factional civil war.
America isn't as stable as it looks. The looters would come out and start looting. The military would be either frozen in inaction (confused) or dashing about trying to do everything at once (conduct foreign policy, try to figure out what's going on, etc.). The private citizens with guns would come out and start shooting, and someone would claim that it's racially based, and it goes downhill from there.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
texcaboose
Known Hero
|
|
posted October 11, 2007 04:08 AM |
|
|
Quote:
we have no control over the brodcasting in other countries.
That's why we broadcast from outside the country.
sure, that seems likely that the government couldn't stop that...
Quote:
blockade them to piss off all the people that trade with them, and get attacked by their allies......
Who trades with them? They are hated worldwide. The Sunnis hate them. The Israelis hate them. The Americans don't like them. The Russians have nothing to give them. They're too poor to trade with the Chinese. Who's going to get angry?
Quote:
but, pulling out immediately is the worst solution, as the entire middle east would collapse.
We're demolishing the Middle East as we speak. It's highly unstable. It was a lot more stable before we went in. We broke the Middle East, and now we're smashing the remains with a sledgehammer. We are paying for it with our soldiers' blood, and we might have to pay for it with civillian blood if we don't fix our mistake and just come home.
we are the only thing holding that hellhole up... We pull out immediately, we kill off an entire section off the planet, You think us leaving is going to make all of them stop and say " hmmmm, Lets make a democracy."??? Hell no it isnt... it is going to make them feel like they have accomplished something, like they forced us out... If that happens, what makes you think they wont try something else with the terrorists boost of morale?
I think it is obvious that we are not wanted there, but we are needed.
and the people that arent involved with fighting for our country, should not speak down on anything that is going on...
|
|
SwampLord
Supreme Hero
Lord of the Swamp
|
|
posted October 11, 2007 04:13 AM |
|
|
Ah yes, we broadcast it in on the government-controlled radio and TV networks. That'll work.
Mvass, it's unlikely that the military would be paralyzed as they would still have many high-ranking officers elswhere. And, as I stated, not all senators would be present, and the line of succession is clear enough that they'd find a survivor to be President relatively quickly.
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
