Reports of Iran's missle tests...ask some quetions.

Are we denegrating them so we can call a resounding clap of war with them without really understanding what may transpire like we did with Iraq? Do you really believe another preemptive war with Iran will be anymore successful than the one in Iraq?

Wise up people!

Think about it they don't have a Collin Powell to sell porta potties as WMD to the UN, now they want to sell us on an easy war. with Iran..don't be stupid again. Want hgher gas and heating prices let them pull this off. It won't benefit you or I, or the Iran civilians but it will make a small porton of multinationals very rich.

 

Yeah. It was a laugh. That test were very funny and in fact only showed how screw up are ...
Bush and Condonella ...
Poor guys they shot only one rocket yesterday so they had to cheat with foto and inserted the same missile 4x. Ha ha ha.
The longest flight was 2000km. Enough to Iran.

So lets put a question. Are they crazy with that shield in Poland 7000km far?

How the heck Iranians could be able to build super space missiles full of plutonium ?

By the way. They are running Uranium, better rather to power plants than the missiles.

In my opinion they are doing a lot of shout around them because they guilty of 9/11.

 

I read an article discussing that messages like this, a strong show of arms, are often used by nations before they agree to meet for diplomatic negotiations.

They don't want to come across as weak, so they test fire missiles then agree to diplomacy. You can see North Korea did the same thing two years ago.

 

I think it was more in response to Israel stepping up their cries for war. And frankly I can't blame them (Iran).

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/24/eveningnews/main4206201.shtml?source=mostpop_story

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a2f72732-4862-11dd-a851-000077b07658.html

 

Of course.:hurray:


Iran's timing couldn't have been better, probably sealed the US Missile Shield Deal.:cheers2:

 

In what way are they degenerating the country?

Imo, the trouble with your theory is, everybody was pretty much singing from the same hymn sheet (not just CP).
UN members all considered Iraq to be a threat and thought there were WMDs.
Yes, the Americans, like everybody else put their own spin on the issues and raised some concerns on an individual basis.
The only major difference was, certain countries chose to not act, which is fair enough.

You can't brush aside the actions of countries such as Iran, and accuse the US or any other nation, of some how degenerating the country.
When it really just boils down to personal prejudice.
IMO people like you, and others here, are slightly blinkered in your quest to put an "antiwar" (and all the cliched arguments that go along with that) stamp on every war that the US gets involved in or could possibly get in.

People say: " They are running Uranium, better rather to power plants than the missiles" "it will make a small portion of multinationals very rich" (or words to that effect).
That is your/others prejudices, not our governments.
Your angling your argument to the point that any conflict would be wrong and must be for the persuit of large portions of money.
You can do that, but don't be surprised if others angle their argument for some form of military intervention.

So to answer you, personally I think the US and Iranian government are going a well trodden path, but there is not degeneration of Iran by the US government. It would be counter productive.

 

no doubt jehovah's little merrymakers will be smiling when america launches the surprise attack? the american people have lost all control over their government its just a case of letting the ball roll now. if america is going to attack who is going to stop them? the UN right? despite the cost america still has money and is willing to spend it fighting someone else's war. never mind about a healthcare scheme or making sure the american people have a manufacturing industry. i'm not too sure if obama is going to be much better than the other idiot in charge. the key to understanding all american politics is to find out where they base their troops as all US diplomacy is done at the barrel of the gun. if you want to know who they will attack next you need only look at where their military goes to. watching hours of presidential campaigning is a red herring, no doubt the iranians understand this better than anyone.

 

The only real worry about Iran is who is going to get the oil once the government is toppled yet again. By westerners. Again.

It's also a handy place to have a base to finish the fence we're building around Russia.

Iran is posturing when it launches missles like this. While it demonstrates an ability to hit targets like Isreal, it's mostly for show. Iran will fight an urban guerilla war with small groups of people instead of an all out military assault. They will most like bring the war right to American soil.

It will probably take that kind of shock to wake us up that maybe we are doing things in the world we shouldn't be.

We can't count on the government to tell us what they do in our name.



x

 

i'd say the attack on iran won't be much better than iraq

i'd say that there will be much more of a counter strike waiting in the wings this time though. iraq had been weakened by UN sanctions for a decade before the "allies" attacked. iran will never let sanctions come into effect, they understand that sanctions are the prelude to war one step leads to another, knowing this the americans might launch a strike without the usual drums of the media. i think when they do strike it will have to involve syria and possibly pakistan, indeed it will have be a strike to take out the islamic world because by this time most islamic governments will have woken up and started arming furiously.

building up the american army to the north, west and east of iran will be the sign, more troops in afghanistan signals the plan to attack, they need to open up two or three fronts on iran.

iran instinctively understands that no negotiations are possible, look at iraq. its a case of first strike policy now - whoever does it wins but must be prepared for major loss.

i don't see the americans making the same mistakes as iraq, i think the major damage will be done by icbms, cruise, tanks and artillery. the army won't be drawn into the cities they will either starve the cities or flatten them, they have will have learnt that the cities represent casualties, it will be much easier to just flatten iranian cities block by block.

of course by this time iran will have already launched their missiles at their designated targets and many people will have died, the american will probably win but not without major loss. the only silver lining will be that there will be nothing to fight over in the middle east the problem will have been solved, it will be uninhabitable.

 

Iran will not be attacked:
1) There is no power on the Earth that could pacificate this country (small strenght of UN cannot even put order amoung Pasztur tribe in Afghanistan). Spreading more chaos is not a resolution. Irak for example will be a great thread for next 50 years, USA created ourself new country ruled by AL Kaida. Saddam was Irak's God. Once God is killed the land belongs to demons.
2) Iran is clear. Current political situation pushed government for liberal changes. Tomorrow there will be first US musican performing in Iran from 1970. They are not so stupid to create atomic missiles. They still don't have technology to do it and there is strong need for athomic power plants in Iran. As as I think this is the biggest nation without athomic energy on the Earth.