Why Iran? - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-23-2007, 05:05 AM   #1
Refugee
 
CrashedCarDriver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Turkmenbashin'
Posts: 1,607
Local Time: 04:58 PM
Why Iran?

i personally dont understand why on earth the americans have lined iran up as their next target in the 'axis of evil'

for one there is absolutely nothing wrong with their people, ok they arent as glamourously dressed as americans, there are a few americans that arent very tolerant and think every place in the world has to be like west virginia

if there is one country which is obtuse and has all kinds of problems with tolerance; treatment of women and all that it is SAUDI ARABIA, but you dont see anyone saying anything about them now do we?
__________________

__________________
CrashedCarDriver is offline  
Old 10-23-2007, 07:11 AM   #2
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,272
Local Time: 11:58 PM
Actually, I don't think too many Americans are all that keen on going to Iran-they're sick to death of our still being mixed up in Iraq, so that makes the Bush administration's push for Iran even more nonsensical. Why push for something that won't get you much support, if any?

No, it's mainly just our government who wants to go to Iran. 'Cause they're just stupid like that. I particularly want to know where Bush intends on getting the money and means to go there-we can't afford to give children healthcare, but we can blow our (nonexistent) money on wars we don't need to be involved in. Yep. That's logical .

And I've got no issues with the people of Iran in general-I'm quite sure that they're a decent group of people overall.

It's a mystery, this whole "war with Iran" idea. And a scary one at that. WE DON'T NEED MORE VIOLENCE.

Angela
__________________

__________________
Moonlit_Angel is online now  
Old 10-23-2007, 08:44 AM   #3
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 17,415
Local Time: 12:58 AM
America always needs an enemy.

Before Iran, it was "the insurgents".
Before "the insurgents", it was Saddam Hussein.
Before Saddam, it was Osama bin Laden.
Before Osama, it was Saddam.
Before Saddam, it was Slobodan Milosevic.
Before Milosevic, it was Saddam.
Before Saddam, it was the USSR, Ho Chi Minh, Noriega, the Sandinistas, the Ayatollah, all the way back to King George the Third.

We'll see Kim-Jung Il creeping higher and higher on this list too if the Iranian "threat" goes away or backs off.

America always, always needs an enemy. And the government is always more than happy to provide one.
__________________
DaveC is offline  
Old 10-23-2007, 08:46 AM   #4
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 17,415
Local Time: 12:58 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel
WE DON'T NEED MORE VIOLENCE.
But we'll keep getting it until people in power begin to realize this.
__________________
DaveC is offline  
Old 10-23-2007, 04:03 PM   #5
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 06:58 AM
FYI, we did have another thread recently about this.

http://forum.interference.com/t180070.html
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 10-24-2007, 02:50 AM   #6
Refugee
 
Muldfeld's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,882
Local Time: 12:58 AM
Very glad to see healthy scepticism about desire to wage war on Iran. I hope you persuade other Americans to not listen to bullies in the Bush administration who go on and on about Iran's transgressions but mention nothing about interfering in Iran's democratic processes and backing the Shah to take on full and brutal control just because they didn't want a neutral Iran.

This led to the Iranian revolution, which was the only opposing faction in civil society radical enough to overthrow the Shah and it sadly took American hostages, but Reagan funded an 8-year war against Iran by supplying Saddam with conventional weapons and chemical/biological weapons to use against Iranians. Behaviorally, that's terrorism, if I've ever heard a rational definition.

Whatever tenuous links Iran might have with enabling Al Qaeda, the US has supported Israel's state oppression and violence against Palestinians for decades and supervises a biased peace process, and has grown more biased under Clinton and now George W. Bush.

Despite all this, Iranians were quite pro-American in the '90s and over a million Iranians took to the streets of Tehran after 9/11 in mourning and solidarity. Bush responds, as only a fool seeing only obstacles to his superficial ambition for glory and empire can, by frightening Iranians with his Axis of Evil speech. Ahmadinejad's election is very much tied to these fears. And the fear of American invasion has allowed fundamentalist, rightist elements to gain strength in crushing much of the progress made in creating liberal civil society.

Iran's desire for nuclear energy and even nuclear defense is rational, since the US proved it was likely to invade any country without nukes (as it did Iraq) and negotiate with any country that had them (North Korea). It is also the US which has talked for the past several years about resurrecting the Star Wars program (Strategic Defensive Initiative). Given this administration's record, I don't think it's inconceivable that an American leader would arise that would obliterate anyone it wants to, while protecting itself and its "allies" with a nuclear shield. I wish I weren't so cynical and pessimistic about America, but I've been very disillusioned these last years.

Despite Bush's proclammations, he doesn't give a damn about Muslim peoples or even those outside of his social circle. America's actions in Iraq are shameless, as many collaborators promised safety have not been given it, and now risk death from insurgents. Bush has refused to swear off permanent bases and refused to promise that Iraq's oil profits will go to Iraqis; instead, it would allow American corporations to go in and profit. I never believed the radical leftists who said it was all about oil or those who said Americans WEREN'T morally superior.

I now see they were mostly right. It took me a long time to acknowledge America's hypocrisy, but I finally did, and I fear America's politicians will go the same old path. Hilary Clinton is again bullying Iran. John Edwards is violently pro-Israeli. The GOP is a joke.

The only people I'd trust on the Middle East would be Chuck Hagel -- the only one to decry the carte blanche given to Israel's 2006 massacre of 1000 innocent Lebanese civilians -- and he's leaving the Senate. Even those who portray Iran correctly, such as Ron Paul and especially Mike Gravel -- are silenced by arrogant media elites like George Stephanopoulis and worse. This is all so depressing.
__________________
Muldfeld is offline  
Old 10-25-2007, 10:39 AM   #7
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 17,415
Local Time: 12:58 AM
Here we go again...

Quote:
U.S. slaps new sanctions on Iran

* Story Highlights
* U.S. names Iran group as proliferator of weapons of mass destruction
* Sanctions will help U.S. block financial assets of Iran's Revolutionary Guard
* Sanctions announced Thursday by secretaries of State, Treasury

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson on Thursday announced new economic sanctions against Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its Quds Force.

The Revolutionary Guard Corps is being designated by the United States as a proliferator of weapons of mass destruction and the Quds force as a supporter of terrorism.

The sanctions mean that no "U.S. citizen or private organization will be allowed to engage in financial transactions with these persons and entities," Rice said. "In addition, any assets that these designees have under U.S. jurisdiction will be immediately frozen."

The United States also designated three Iranian state-owned banks for sanctions, two of them "for their involvement in proliferation activities" and the other "as a terrorist financier," Rice said.

"Iran funnels hundreds of millions of dollars each year through the international financial system to terrorists," Paulson said. "Iran's banks aid this conduct using a range of deceptive financial practices intended to evade even the most stringent risk management controls."

"The Iranian government continues to spurn our offer of open negotiations, instead threatening peace and security by pursuing nuclear technologies that can lead to a nuclear weapon; building dangerous ballistic missiles; supporting Shia militants in Iraq and terrorists in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories; and denying the existence of a fellow member of the United Nations, threatening to wipe Israel off the map," Rice said.

The Quds Force is blamed by the U.S. military for training and arming Shiite militias in Iraq and smuggling highly lethal explosives into Iraq, where they are used to attack coalition forces. Iran denies the charge.

Previous sanctions imposed by the United States have been tied to Iran's nuclear program. The United States believes Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon, a claim that the Islamic republic denies, saying its program is for peaceful purposes only.

Last month, representatives of world powers announced that unless a November report shows a "positive outcome" of talks with Iran about its uranium enrichment program, they will move ahead with plans for a resolution imposing additional sanctions on the country.

The announcement came out of a meeting of what the participants termed the "P5 plus two." The meeting included Rice and the foreign ministers of the other four permanent members of the U.N. Security Council -- Britain, China, France and Russia -- along with the foreign minister of Germany and Javier Solana, the European Union foreign policy chief who has held nuclear talks with Iran.

The Security Council has repeatedly demanded that Iran suspend enrichment of uranium and has imposed limited sanctions on Tehran for refusing to comply. The United States has been trying to cut Iran off from the international financial system and the European Union is weighing its own unilateral sanctions.

CNN's Kathleen Koch and Elise Labott contributed to this report.
It's like 2002 all over again!


__________________
DaveC is offline  
Old 10-25-2007, 06:40 PM   #8
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,504
Local Time: 12:58 AM
Some yes or no questions to consider...

Would you consider the Iranian government to be Islamic Fundamentalist?

Would you consider them to have a Jihadist point of view?

Do you think they really would wipe Isreal off the face of the earth as proposed by their President?

Do you think they are developing nuclear weapons?

Do you think we should stop them from developing nuclear weapons?

Is it any of our business?
__________________
MadelynIris is offline  
Old 10-25-2007, 07:34 PM   #9
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,272
Local Time: 11:58 PM
I'm not sure some of these can be answered with a simple "yes" or "no". I'm not familiar enough with the Iranian government to say for certain whether or not they are Islamic fundamentalists and are Jihadist in their views, but I dunno, I would guess that some Iranians follow that line of thinking and some don't.

But regarding that third question, I think one thing that might help is if we acknowledge that both sides have done some horrific things and try and work on bringing both sides together to compromise. Yes, there are people on both sides that want to see the other one gone completely, but there are also those who just want to go about their lives in peace-you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone. Let's try to work with the latter group of people for once instead of just completely siding with one group of people, and see what happens.

As for the other stuff...

Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
Do you think they are developing nuclear weapons?
Possibly. Who knows?

Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
Do you think we should stop them from developing nuclear weapons?
We have nuclear weapons, too. Why is it okay for us to have them but nobody else can? If the U.S. wants to stop Iran from making them, fine, but then we have to stop funding money towards making our own fancy war toys, too.

And I know this is incredibly idealistic thinking, but I'd like to think there's a way we could stop a country from making nuclear weapons without getting ourselves into another war to do so (or at the very least, let's try and maybe actually get, you know, some hard PROOF that they made or are making nuclear weapons before going in and starting a war with them). I guess I'd just say, "Well, we thought Iraq had those, too, and look how well that mission turned out!"

How does the old saying go, "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it"? That's what was going through my mind as I read that article DaveC posted.

Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
Is it any of our business?
Once it becomes a real threat to people, yeah. But just building weapons alone isn't really enough reason to start a war, because once again, lots of countries have weapons. I'd worry once they started actually using them or there was sufficient evidence that they were plotting to do so, myself.

On the other hand, do people really want America to be the world police?

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is online now  
Old 10-25-2007, 08:27 PM   #10
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 06:58 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
Do you think they really would wipe Isreal off the face of the earth as proposed by their President?
Discredited. Questionable translation.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 10-25-2007, 09:11 PM   #11
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,504
Local Time: 12:58 AM
I'm sorry, I meant to say "
Quote:
"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."
As quoted from the website you posted.
__________________
MadelynIris is offline  
Old 10-26-2007, 12:48 AM   #12
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 10:58 PM

I don't know guys.


When I hear "Death To Israel" led by Iran's President: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in front of thousands and thousands of Iranians similar to a Nazi Rally -I get a little concerned.

__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 10-26-2007, 01:02 AM   #13
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 10:58 PM
Here's an even scarier one:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...29661094485040
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 10-26-2007, 01:16 AM   #14
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 11:58 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
Some yes or no questions to consider...
Anyone living in this obvious, dynamic world of variables, who views the world through the prism of absolutes, black and white, good/evil, is simply a fundamentalist of a different stripe.
__________________
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 10-26-2007, 01:23 AM   #15
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 11:58 PM
If you honestly want to know "why Iran?"
watch this, it's right on the front page:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/

Free to watch.
__________________

__________________
U2DMfan is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com