Iran Has Rights Too

So what if the Iranians develop nuclear technology? They are absolutely right to stand up to the Bush Administration’s megalomania. After all, how many conflicts have the Iranians started since the Revolution compared to the USA?

None.

The Iranians should be afraid of the loony in the White House. He’s a loony. Ahmadinejad on the other hand seems a fairly decent bloke.

BroonAzadi

In Germany a press guy is sued by the state because he published confident secret service material indicating Iran was supporting Sarkawi.
As a radical muslim state they are certainly a danger for all others in the region - and with nuclear weapons even to a larger extend.

A limited millitary strike on their nuclear capabilities could be the language even their radicals understand.

BobNukem

EDIT: Sarkawi is the Iraq top terrorist sitting their since the country was freed from Saddam…

[quote]So what if the Iranians develop nuclear technology? They are absolutely right to stand up to the Bush Administration’s megalomania. After all, how many conflicts have the Iranians started since the Revolution compared to the USA?

None.

The Iranians should be afraid of the loony in the White House. He’s a loony. Ahmadinejad on the other hand seems a fairly decent bloke.[/quote]

Ladies and Gentleman

Is Iran with nuclear weapons more dangerous to the U.S. than North Korea with nuclear weapons?

[quote=“bob_honest”]In Germany a press guy is sued by the state because he published confident secret service material indicating Iran was supporting Sarkawi.
As a radical muslim state they are certainly a danger for all others in the region - and with nuclear weapons even to a larger extend.

A limited millitary strike on their nuclear capabilities could be the language even their radicals understand.

BobNukem

EDIT: Sarkawi is the Iraq top terrorist sitting their since the country was freed from Saddam…[/quote]

Yeah thanks for the education on who Zarkawi is ( a Jordanian ) but I don’t follow your last sentence: How do you know where he is? It is widely held that he is in Iraq and who else is in Iraq? The US.

Can’t see what Zarkawi has to do with Iran’s nuclear programme. Persians are Shia, Zarkawi is a Sunni. The Iranian mullahs have standards and would be unlikely to enter into an alliance with an unholy Sunni supporter of Saddam. Let’s not forget that Saddam started the war with Iran seeking to capitalise on Iran’s post revolutionary turmoil with his plans for expansionist pan-Arabism. This was more than paid lip-service to by consecutive US administrations. Perhaps the US might like to determine exactly where the shit lies before attempting to mop it up.

I suspect that Iran is more benign than the hysterical war-mongering, historical legacy seeking diversionists in Washingturd care to have us believe.

You just don’t understand Persian culture!

BroonAbbasi

[quote=“BroonAle”]You just don’t understand Persian culture!

BroonAbbasi[/quote]
I do, and I think what you’ve posted is basically worthless drivel.

The mullahs are an oppressive bunch of bastards. I don’t want a U.S. invasion, but I sure would love it if the U.S. would give clandestine help to stir up trouble in the hope that the theocracy would collapse.

[quote=“MaPoSquid”][quote=“BroonAle”]You just don’t understand Persian culture!

BroonAbbasi[/quote]
I do, and I think what you’ve posted is basically worthless drivel.

The mullahs are an oppressive bunch of bastards. I don’t want a U.S. invasion, but I sure would love it if the U.S. would give clandestine help to stir up trouble in the hope that the theocracy would collapse.[/quote]

Quite the contrary. The mullahs (you ever met any?? have the potential to be a stabilising force in the region if properly engaged instead of treated like a bunch of outcasts.

BroonAllah

I would think the Mullahs simply need a name change and a bit of positive publicity.

Maybe the Mullallahs or even Mulla-allahs or Mullakas. The stick beating thing has to end though. They should force people to play revolting sexually explicit videogames for hours on end to numb their minds while preparing them for jihad at the same time. :slight_smile:

jdseesthelight

[quote=“jdsmith”]I would think the Mullahs simply need a name change and a bit of positive publicity.

Maybe the Mullallahs or even Mulla-allahs or Mullakas. The stick beating thing has to end though. They should force people to play revolting sexually explicit videogames for hours on end to numb their minds while preparing them for jihad at the same time. :slight_smile:

jdseesthelight[/quote]

There are a lot of things wrong with Iran and atrocities have been committed in the past and even now there are some aspects of Iran that we would find less than palatable. However, I find the gun culture of America unpalatable and many aspects of the yob culture of the UK unpalatable but why is it that almost evrything Iran does is vilified by the US. There is litlle or no balance in the US view. It’s just that the US shouts louder than everyone else but simply being loud does not betow omnixcience on the United States, especially not under this bloody administration. My own chat with a mullah about mobile phones while strolling along to a demonstration in Teheran was a pleasant if not slightly odd experience and the one Iranian government minister I met and drank tea with was a pleasant chap although I regret not being able to accept his offer of a helicopter tour of Shiraz.

I am afraid that the propaganda machine of the Bush xenophobes merely exacerbates and re-inforces entrenched views on both sides but sadly, each time some dipshit American politician makes a smart-ass comment about Iran, he panders only to that stereotype, his own ego and it is always unhelpful. The idiots in Washington love to posture and ponce about like the hard men they aren’t for the benefit of their easily persuaded and largely ignorant domestic constituency.

Both sides should back off. I am sure a more positive appraoch from Bushfuck would yield a move from Teheran and concessions could be wrought from them.

But hey, if you all want to follow Georgie boy into the abyss an invasion or attack on Iran would lead to, then go ahead. I am no American; you all free to die following that idiot Bush if you want to but this time, unlike Iraq you would really be on your own and very few would have much sympathy with yet another Bush attempt to show off the size of his penis, which given the time submersed in the New Orleans floodwaters is shrivelling up fast.

Allow the Brits and the Europeans to sort it out. The Iranian government has just started advertising tourism to Iran on the BBC so there might be a sign here that the Iranians are more flexible than the Bush administration would like us to believe.

BroonAkhbar

This whole issue is extremely interesting, as it looks like today The US negotiated a masterful deal with the North Koreans in terms of allowing UN inspectors to return to that country, and in placing some contraints on North Korean nuclear development.

What a masterful way to isolate Iran on the international scene, resolving the issue with one the other renegade (or would-be) nuclear enriched powers. After the inflamatory rhetoric of Iran’s President Ahmadinejad (A Mad In A Jam?) recent UN speech, this could turn out to be wizard move.

That said, I wonder just how serious the whole Iranian nuclear enriched program actually is. If they have been running some sort of secret program for the last 20 years or so, then surely the Israeli’s Mossad have known something about it. Whether they would share that info with the west is another story altogether. But why is this info only coming out now?

And as for the Iranian. or any other 2nd or 3rd world country’s inalienable right to have a nuclear enriched program, that’s just sheer oratory. Admirable in a way, but doomed to failure. I don’t believe the E3 and the US will allow that to happen, and for understandable reasons. Strategy doesn’t work that way.

Perhaps they have an inalienable right from the point of view of their own personal interests, and if they feel that way, then they should feel free to devote precious resources to a secret enriched program (the results of which would definitely be military, or else the cost of maintaing security alone would not be justified). If they want to spend $ on a secret program, when it should be used to lift the yolk of oppression, then I guess that’s their dubious choice. But if and when they get caught they should also feel free to prepare for some heavy international pressure.

[quote=“TheGingerMan”]This whole issue is extremely interesting, as it looks like today The US negotiated a masterful deal with the North Koreans in terms of allowing UN inspectors to return to that country, and in placing some contraints on North Korean nuclear development.

What a masterful way to isolate Iran on the international scene, resolving the issue with one the other renegade (or would-be) nuclear enriched powers. [/quote]

[color=blue]Incorrect. North Korea has agreed to give up its nuclear weapons program but not its right to its nuclear fuel cycle. This is precisely the Iranian position.[/color]

"On the question of civilian uses of nuclear power, today’s agreement states that North Korea claims the right to pursue “peaceful uses of nuclear energy.” It went on to say, “The other parties expressed their respect and agreed to discuss at an appropriate time the subject of the provision of light-water reactor to the DPRK.”

Mr. Hill said he expected that a light-water reactor would cost $2 billion to $3 billion and would take a decade to build. While a light-water reactor does not produce fuel for atomic weapons as efficiently as the North’s existing modified-graphite reactors do, American officials have said that it still raises proliferation risks . . . ."
– NYT, 19Sept05

Good. Let’s get North Korea isolated and calmed cuz there’s nothing we can do about them anyway, but IRan… Oh yes, Iran… come home to pappa. heh heh heh.