War with Iran?....

[gribbon]

I'm pleased to see that there are a number of American people who are prepared to hold back and recognise the gross injustices done in their name, but I have some concerns about another group of individuals who believe they have some god given right to spread "manifest destiny". Be it in Vietnam, Cuba, Iraq or any other country that disagrees with the U.S.

 

Let me just warn those people, be they in Israel, the U.S, or any other ally of the current right-wing U.S. administration: Iran is not like Iraq. For a start, Iran has fully trained troops, and should you enter foolishly thinking that you will topple the governement in a few weeks, you will be wrong, and shall find yourselves locked in a particulalarly sticky situation, comaparable to Vietnam.

 

A warning to Israel's current government and it's supporters: Iran has pledged to pin all consequences of any strike you take upon your country, and so should you do anything as foolish as you have done in the past, you will regret it.

 

Hopefully, the Israeli/U.S governments will recognise this, and not do anything stupid....

 

Unfortunately, the U.S has a stupid president, and so does Israel.

[gribbon]

Let's just hope that the Israeli and American governemnts don't do anything stupid....

 

But unless we can turn around electoral results, what else can we do?

[Michaelangelica]

Is the 'possible' war in Iran predicated on them developing a nuclear bomb?

 

Why shouldn't they?

Everyone else has?

 

But they are religious zealots a theocracy?

Israel and Pakistan and China are not? Perhaps including the USA for that matter.

 

It would be far cheaper and more effective to help Iran build a thorium reactor , that uses up rather than produces weapons grade plutonium, than go to war.

A war America could never win anyway.

[Mercedes Benzene]

Is the 'possible' war in Iran predicated on them developing a nuclear bomb?

Basically. Our government may say that there's more to it, but that's really what it comes down to.

 

Why shouldn't they?

Everyone else has?

The other countries that have them aren't prone to random acts of terrorism, funding of terrorist organizations, and aren't comprised of religious extremists who would be willing to destroy most of the people on this earth because of their beliefs.

 

But they are religious zealots a theocracy?

Israel and Pakistan and China are not? Perhaps including the USA for that matter.

Iran is BOTH. They are run by a religious leader (which makes them theocratic) but they take those ideologies to an extreme.

The above mentioned countries are NOT theocracies. It's just that these countries cater to a certain demographic where majority has voted the same way for a long time.

We don't however take religion by any means to an extreme.

 

It would be far cheaper and more effective to help Iran build a thorium reactor , that uses up rather than produces weapons grade plutonium, than go to war.

A war America could never win anyway.

Where are they going to get the materials to build this reactor? Who's going to give them ANY radioactive materials that could be used to build a dirty bomb?

[Michaelangelica]

They are going to build areactor anyway why not help them build apeaceful thorium one.

Then nobody has any arguments

 

rense.com

 

Operation Bite - April 6 Sneak Attack

By US Forces On Iran Planned

- Russian Military Sources Warn

 

General Ivashov Calls For Emergency Session Of

UN Security Council To Ward Off Looming US Aggression

By Webster G. Tarpley

3-25-7

 

WASHINGTON DC -- The long awaited US military attack on Iran is now on track for the first week of April, specifically for 4 AM on April 6, the Good Friday opening of Easter weekend, writes the well-known Russian journalist Andrei Uglanov in the Moscow weekly "Argumenty Nedeli." Uglanov cites Russian military experts close to the Russian General Staff for his account.

Operation Bite - April 6 Sneak Attack On Iran By Bush

[Mercedes Benzene]

Oh Gosh. I really hate it when foreign journalists think they always know exactly what is going on in our government.

If this "attack" actually happens, I'll take back everything I just said and will make fun of myself (somehow) here on Hypography.

 

 

Interesting tidbit of gossip though Michaelangelica! It will certainly be interesting to see what happens.

[Michaelangelica]

U.S. winds up biggest war games in Gulf since 2003

Thu Mar 29, 2007 9:52AM EDT

 

MANAMA (Reuters) - The U.S. navy said on Thursday it had ordered an aircraft carrier to the Gulf to replace one of two patrolling the region, as the United States winds down naval war games on Iran's doorstep.

 

The Eisenhower and fellow carrier John C. Stennis took part in this week's U.S. war games, the largest in Gulf waters since 2003, when the U.S. led an invasion of Iraq.

Article | Reuters

from care2

 

George Galloway: Resist the war drive against Iran

 

Respect MP George Galloway writes on the lies that prepare the way for missiles

 

The capture by Iranian forces of 15 British sailors in the Gulf brought shrill, bellicose headlines last weekend and calls for retribution.

 

The anti-war movement has done a superb job in winning a clear majority against the war and occupation in Iraq.

 

But no one should believe that because the case against the “war on terror” is so overwhelming then no British government can garner support for another military misadventure.

 

The capture of the British sailors has all the hallmarks of the kind of incident that has been used in the past as a reason either for war or for escalating confrontation

George Galloway: Resist war drive against Iran|31Mar07|Socialist Worker

[LaurieAG]

The overthrow of Iran's democratic government was followed by more than two decades of dictatorship under the Shah. IMO, the anti-American backlash that toppled the Shah in the 1979 Islamic Revolution was the direct result of Operation Ajax.

 

Good points Edella,

 

Don't forget Chile and the rest. Do global political leaders just have short attention spans or what?

 

It seems that, over relatively short periods of time; all of their friends are enemies and all of their enemies are friends; democracy is preferrable to totalitarian dictatorship only when a totalitarian dictatorship is preferrable to democracy; people are innocent until proven guilty unless it is decided that they are guilty until proven innocent; and all men are born equal but some are born more equal than others and some are born less equal than others.

 

One thing is for certain, if Israel OR the US bombs Iran, everybody on the entire planet will be paying the price for oil going through US$100 per barrel.

[maikeru]

Yes, I think Bush is going for another invasion or war with Iran. I am strongly opposed to it.

 

Fight extremists abroad and at home.

[maikeru]

I suspect that US Pres. G. W. Bush wishes to invade Iran.

 

Although many have suggested that Bush professes to be a “born again” Christian and a “fundamentalist” only to win the votes of a large constituency, my assessment is that his beliefs are genuine, heartfelt, and were acquired in their present form around 1986. In keeping with a particular kind of Christian thinking, I believe he expects “Armageddon”, the end-of-days as described in the Christian Bible’s book of Revelations, to occur within his lifetime. As such, I think his long term policy goals are to further conflict and tension in the Middle East consistent with the interpretations of various recent Armageddonists (eg: Hal Lindsey).

 

This Hal Lindsey sounds like the Antichrist himself from what I read in the Wiki article.

 

This is not, I’m confident, a belief and desire held by the majority of Americans. I hope I am wrong in believing that they are held by Bush. In any case, I will be relieved when he is not longer president.

 

I too think most Americans, apart from some of those in the Bible Belt, don't want doomsday wishes.

[silverslith]

No-ones mentioned that 90% of Iran's Oil is in the 10% of its territory right across the Tigris from Iraq.

 

Did anyone notice how surprised and dissapointed Tony Blair looks in interviews today about the sailors being handed back. They've been trying to make an incident by flouting Iran's territorial limits repeatedly.

 

the "wipe israel off the map" one is a spun quote. He actually said that the world would have been a far better place if the west hadn't created Israel out of stolen arab lands.

 

Another spin is the Islamic concept of Jihad. Jihad is "the struggle to end all violence". Only in the most extreme situations is violence allowed by islam and only in the resistance of violence.

 

You can't really blame the world of Islam for not liking the 1200 odd years right up to the present day of Western religeous fanatics bringing armys to rape and pillage their population and culture. Bush will probably be seen by history as just another crusades monarch.

[Michaelangelica]

No-ones mentioned that 90% of Iran's Oil is in the 10% of its territory right across the Tigris from Iraq.

 

Did anyone notice how surprised and dissapointed Tony Blair looks in interviews today about the sailors being handed back.

Funny you should say that.

I posted this on another thread yesterday

"Seems Saudi Arabia is getting a bit tetchy about the USA and Bush Foreign policy these days too. A bit concerned we might end up with Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni sates 'a la Yugoslavia'.

The whole Middle East is looking more like a racial civil war zone all the time.

The dotted lines the Allies and Britain drew on the map after WW1 and WW2 don't seem to be holding any more."

YES Islamics seem to have long memories; but holding a grudge for the crusades is a bit over-the-top don't you think?

 

Quote:

Second, there is Saudi Arabia.

King Abdullah has been watching the Sunni versus Shiite sectarian violence in Iraq and the formation of a Shiite government in Baghdad with increasing concern.

Ten percent of the Saudi population is Shiite. The Saudi Shiites haven't shared in the riches of the Saudi economy fueled by petro dollars and have no say in the Sunni controlled monarchy.

However, these Shiites happen to be the main population group in the eastern part of the kingdom which is where the oil is. If King Abdullah, head of the Arab Sunni world, isn't sleeping soundly these days, there's a reason.

He has to be worried about a scenario in which the Shiites in his country, inspired by the example of the Iraqi Shiites, rise up and say "goodbye Abdullah," and start their own oil rich state.

The Saudi King and his entourage will be back riding camels.

 

Even if that doesn't occur, Abdullah has to worry about sabotage by Shiites aimed at his oil infrastructure. The Saudis may be able to defend against attacks on the ground, but missiles from Tehran are another matter.

 

Then there's Israel. Since Israel's creation in 1948, the Saudis have been bitterly opposed to the existence of the Jewish state in the Middle East.

Prior to Saddam's overthrow, no Saudi ruler ever uttered the "I" word in public. But all that changed recently.

Last week, King Abdullah publicly declared that the Arabs are willing to have normal relations with Israel once it makes peace with its neighbors.

Unintended Consequences

[Michaelangelica]

Yes, I think Bush is going for another invasion or war with Iran. I am strongly opposed to it.

It can't really happen can it?

Fight extremists abroad and at home.

Yes by spending the money on health, diplomacy, education and welfare .

[silverslith]

YES Islamics seem to have long memories; but holding a grudge for the crusades is a bit over-the-top don't you think?

 

Not really. They view Iraq as a racist and religiously intolerant war. As CraigD has pointed out this is not at all an illogical view. 1200 years is a long time and with no indication that this is any different to other crusades they've suffered, who can really blame them.

 

Other noble and sophisticated directives of Islam:

- Every muslim has a responsibility to seek knowledge and education "not just in the areas of personal or business interests, but in all areas" until the day they die.

- Muslim women have had equal voting rights and the right to work and earn money for themselves with no obligation to contribute it to the family for 1300 years. (We were told NZ was the first to give women the vote 90 years ago- Ha!)

- The universe is a diverse system of cycles within cycles, all with the ability to coexist peacefully and to mutual benefit.

Islam is quite an evolved religion compared to Judeo-christian theologies, which were largely formulated by the romans when they realised how badly they'd screwed up by martyring the Christians (refered to a the time as "just another oriental mystery cult (pot smoking free love hippies).

[Buffy]

Not really. They view Iraq as a racist and religiously intolerant war. As CraigD has pointed out this is not at all an illogical view. 1200 years is a long time and with no indication that this is any different to other crusades they've suffered, who can really blame them.

This is certainly the popular view. Without too much cynicism however, one can point out that the Muslims *won* the crusades, and proceeded to dominate the entire middle east and much of northern Africa and south Asia for the hundreds of years thereafter. Arguably, with the exception of the Iberian Penninsula and bits and pieces of northern Africa, Muslims continued to dominate this territory until the mid-19th century when continued western imperialism caused conflicts in Afghanistan, Persia and ultimately Arabia itself, all of which were fought mostly to stand-stills in spite of being unevenly matched technologically. If anything, it can be argued that the only reason that the western powers were able to do anything at al was that this period was basically Islam's "decline and fall of empire:" Their inept leaders *let* their civilization fall behind and become conquerable.

 

Based on this, I look at claims of "Muslim persecution" somewhat specious. You really have to have funky glasses to get this history to correspond with the mostly stateless and constantly persecuted Jews and Blacks.

Other noble and sophisticated directives of Islam:

- Every muslim has a responsibility to seek knowledge and education "not just in the areas of personal or business interests, but in all areas" until the day they die.

- Muslim women have had equal voting rights and the right to work and earn money for themselves with no obligation to contribute it to the family for 1300 years.

- The universe is a diverse system of cycles within cycles, all with the ability to coexist peacefully and to mutual benefit.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if the Wahabs and Madrassas actually tought Islam this way? What they teach is Arab *culture* not Islam!

Islam is quite an evolved religion compared to Judeo-christian theologies, which were largely formulated by the romans when they realised how badly they'd screwed up by martyring the Christians (refered to a the time as "just another oriental mystery cult (pot smoking free love hippies).

Careful, its just as easy to throw this at Islam. At its height, Islam was just as corrupt as turn of the first millenium Christianity (which had far more to do with its political structure than any "Romans")...

 

History is complex and subtle,

Buffy

[Michaelangelica]

Not really. They view Iraq as a racist and religiously intolerant war. As CraigD has pointed out this is not at all an illogical view. 1200 years is a long time and with no indication that this is any different to other crusades they've suffered, who can really blame them.

.

O come on, this is silly. I know the Christians were barbarians compared to the Islamic culture of the time; but Hey, what happened to 'forgive and forget'

Islamics aren't winning too many brownie points either in the ideological war at the moment. Why blow up Bali? a peace loving non--Christian state.(The few really nice people in Indonesia ;) )

 

I am not really convinced that Islamic women are as emancipated as you say.

I think they are brainwashed into servitude. (As they are in many Christian, African and other cults/societies)

SEE

Dhimmi Watch: Sharia alert: Muslim women and the vote

Muslim world requires a dose of girl power | Janet Albrechtsen | The Australian

Last year, Kuwait gave women the vote.

. . .

half the women in the Arab world are illiterate and in all but four Arab countries less than 80 per cent of girls go to secondary school (the exceptions are Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar and the Palestinian territories.)

It's about lack of health care: the maternal mortality rate in Arab countries is about 270 per 100,000 live births, almost 20 times higher than in the US.

 

It's about lack of political engagement.

Although more women in Arab countries now vote, women's participation is largely symbolic.

Few women wield real power. In Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, women are still waiting for the right to vote.

 

It's about Arab women being economically marginalised, with work force participation the lowest in the world at 33 per cent.

Where half the population is relegated to "girl jobs" such as nursing and teaching, unable to work without their husbands' consent, forbidden from associating with men in the workplace, it's clear that women are excluded from basic freedoms that we take for granted.

 

And it's about violence. The report reveals that the family "has been transformed from a place of safety and security to one where any type of violence against women may be practised".

Pointing to World Health Organisation statistics, it tells us that 97 per cent of women in Egypt have been circumcised, even though the barbaric practice was outlawed in 1997.

An that is from an Arab/islamic report!

 

I have no time for fanaticism of any ilk; but a 1000 year old grudge!- grow up!

 

The war is wrong; but it looks like turning into a massive civil war between various sects of Islam. What would Muhammad think of that?

[silverslith]

The people are not the religion.

I saw a poll of arabs reported on BBC world. 80% said it was a racially and religiously motivated war. Thats why I mentioned it is all.

The war is wrong; but it looks like turning into a massive civil war between various sects of Islam.

 

Didn't you read about the divide and conquer strategy employed by western imperialists in my links? Remind me to tell you about the massacre of Glencoe sometime.

Do you recall the british SAS in arab dress in the Toyota with bombs in the boot busted out of an Iraq jail by a tank? The US registered cars turning up in Baghdad car bombings? The "salvadorian option" being implemented in Iraq? Indonesia? the NZ Maori? sth+central America? Vietnam?

Do you have a problem with a highly educated, and regularly intermarrying population in Iraq getting so het up at each other all of a sudden?

 

Hope they don't pull a "gulf of Tonkin"

Washington, D.C., 4 August 2004 - Forty years ago today, President Johnson and top U.S. officials chose to believe that North Vietnam had just attacked U.S. destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin, even though the highly classified signals intercepts they cited to each other actually described a naval clash two days earlier (a battle prompted by covert U.S. attacks on North Vietnam), according to the declassified intercepts, Johnson White House tapes, and related documents posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University.

 

 

The Gulf of Tonkin Incident, 40 Years Later