Doesn't Iran Matter?

[GaryC 7]

What do you think the price of oil would do if Isreal and Iran traded nukes? What do you think the world terrorism situation would do if Iran attacked Israel and they responded?

Even if both were nuclear, I've got three letters for you: M A D. Sound familiar?

It's not a pretty picture but it does guarantee a good degree of stability.

It sure has done that for decades during the cold war.

mad only works if both sides want to live. The nutjob in Iran wants to start WW3. He thinks that will herald the coming of the hidden Imam.

[GaryC 7]

Like I said, Iran can stop this whole thing right now. All they have to do is let the UN have full access to every facility and this whole thing would go away.

Yeah, that's what they told Saddam. Didn't work for him. Once the maniac at 1600 Penn Ave is replaced we might stand a chance at getting things back on track. The current occupant is a liability on foreign relations - not the least trustworthy.

Your selctive memory is breathtaking. Please butt out of the conversation if all you want to do is blame Bush.

My selective memory? Rather your selective recognition of well documented historical data. The inspectors were working unfettered in Iraq until Bush told them to get out. I backed that up with the transcript of the report of the guy in charge of the inspections just yesterday. Your refusal to acknowledge this simple, well documented fact doesn't make it go away.

You believe what you want to believe. I know now that I can't change that. Saddam kicked out the inspectors for years and had all that time to hide anything they didn't want found. The fact that the inspectors were allowed access to abandond buildings does not constitute cooperation. But it seems that is good enough for you. So you just go on thinking that Saddam was the good guy all you want. I feel sorry for you really.

No Gary, you're the guy with the beliefs. I've been the one with the actual documentation backing up what I say. Not opinion pieces, not propaganda but firsthand, original documentation backing up what I say. You have your belief to the contrary with no actual back-up that I've seen. As such, I documented yesterday that the chief inspector reported to the Security Council just 12 days prior to our illegal invasion that the inspectors were able to perform unfettered, no-notice inspections across the country. You choose to ignore this but the facts remain and prove your claim wrong.

Cherry picked and selective documentation isn't proof. That is what you accuse Bush of. Your only seeing the side you want to see, not the whole truth. Your buying into the lies of the left and eating it up with a spoon. There is no talking to you about this. Believe what you want.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I don't understand why you don't want to protect ourselves and our allies. I really don't.

Oh but I do. Not dragging this country into another needless war and not shoving the entire Mid-East and Persia into the abyss as you'd like to see done will go a long way to protect the US and it's ally in the region. You think Israel would be any better off if we were to illegally attack Iran? You think Iran would be remotely as easy a cakewalk as Iraq is - comparatively speaking? Attacking Iran without cause - note that paranoia is no cause - would do more harm to our security than good.

Like I said, Iran can stop this whole thing right now. All they have to do is let the UN have full access to every facility and this whole thing would go away.

Yeah, that's what they told Saddam. Didn't work for him. Once the maniac at 1600 Penn Ave is replaced we might stand a chance at getting things back on track. The current occupant is a liability on foreign relations - not the least trustworthy.

Your selctive memory is breathtaking. Please butt out of the conversation if all you want to do is blame Bush.

My selective memory? Rather your selective recognition of well documented historical data. The inspectors were working unfettered in Iraq until Bush told them to get out. I backed that up with the transcript of the report of the guy in charge of the inspections just yesterday. Your refusal to acknowledge this simple, well documented fact doesn't make it go away.

You believe what you want to believe. I know now that I can't change that. Saddam kicked out the inspectors for years and had all that time to hide anything they didn't want found. The fact that the inspectors were allowed access to abandond buildings does not constitute cooperation. But it seems that is good enough for you. So you just go on thinking that Saddam was the good guy all you want. I feel sorry for you really.

No Gary, you're the guy with the beliefs. I've been the one with the actual documentation backing up what I say. Not opinion pieces, not propaganda but firsthand, original documentation backing up what I say. You have your belief to the contrary with no actual back-up that I've seen. As such, I documented yesterday that the chief inspector reported to the Security Council just 12 days prior to our illegal invasion that the inspectors were able to perform unfettered, no-notice inspections across the country. You choose to ignore this but the facts remain and prove your claim wrong.

Cherry picked and selective documentation isn't proof. That is what you accuse Bush of. Your only seeing the side you want to see, not the whole truth. Your buying into the lies of the left and eating it up with a spoon. There is no talking to you about this. Believe what you want.

I presented the full report. That's not cherry picking.

What did you present to back up your claim?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

What do you think the price of oil would do if Isreal and Iran traded nukes? What do you think the world terrorism situation would do if Iran attacked Israel and they responded?

Even if both were nuclear, I've got three letters for you: M A D. Sound familiar?

It's not a pretty picture but it does guarantee a good degree of stability.

It sure has done that for decades during the cold war.

mad only works if both sides want to live. The nutjob in Iran wants to start WW3. He thinks that will herald the coming of the hidden Imam.

The nutjob in Teheran hasn't raised the specter of WWIII.

The nutjob in DC, on the other hand, has.

And the Iranian people do want to live. Many of them are still pro-Western. I hope that they hang on to that until after we send Bush into retirement. We should foster that sentiment in the region not kill it by dropping bombs on it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What do you think the price of oil would do if Isreal and Iran traded nukes? What do you think the world terrorism situation would do if Iran attacked Israel and they responded?

Even if both were nuclear, I've got three letters for you: M A D. Sound familiar?

It's not a pretty picture but it does guarantee a good degree of stability.

It sure has done that for decades during the cold war.

mad only works if both sides want to live. The nutjob in Iran wants to start WW3. He thinks that will herald the coming of the hidden Imam.

Outside of what he says in public I doubt that Ahmadinejad is some sort of apocalypse nut. Nor do I think that the country is otherwise run by suicidal lunatics. I think they have a very definite and specific vision for transforming the political landscape of the middle-east.

IMO its more that Iran sees itself as a regional power and wants to neutralise outside influences that threaten it. We may disagree with that - but its not that difficult to understand. We're doing much the same thing in Iraq right now. That was about securing a permanent power-base in the Persian Gulf.

[GaryC 7]

What do you think the price of oil would do if Isreal and Iran traded nukes? What do you think the world terrorism situation would do if Iran attacked Israel and they responded?

Even if both were nuclear, I've got three letters for you: M A D. Sound familiar?

It's not a pretty picture but it does guarantee a good degree of stability.

It sure has done that for decades during the cold war.

mad only works if both sides want to live. The nutjob in Iran wants to start WW3. He thinks that will herald the coming of the hidden Imam.

The nutjob in Teheran hasn't raised the specter of WWIII.

The nutjob in DC, on the other hand, has.

And the Iranian people do want to live. Many of them are still pro-Western. I hope that they hang on to that until after we send Bush into retirement. We should foster that sentiment in the region not kill it by dropping bombs on it.

All I can say is I am glad your not running things. We would all be in trouble. Do me a favor, just ignore anything I talk about when it comes to the mid-east. It is obvious we will never agree. I will see you in a illegal alien post. We get along much better there.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

The nutjob in Teheran hasn't raised the specter of WWIII.

No, but...

For those who believe, the devotion is real. Tears stream down the cheeks of 2,000 men ripe for the return of the Mahdi, the 12th Imam they expect will soon emerge to bring justice and peace to a corrupt world.

Eyes stare upward and arms open wide to receive God's promised salvation. The storyteller's lyrical song speaks of tragedy on the path to salvation, prompting cries of anguish and joy.

As at a Christian revivalist meeting that promises healing and redemption, many weep as they pray for the Shiite Muslim version of the second coming of the Messiah. "Sometimes I feel they don't need me," says Mahdi Salashur, the religious storyteller, after leading congregants on an emotional late-night journey. "They are wired to God in their hearts."

Among the true believers is Iran's hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who predicted with "no doubt" his June election victory, months in advance, at a time when polls gave him barely 1 percent support. The president also spoke of an aura that wreathed him throughout his controversial UN speech in September.

"O mighty Lord," Mr. Ahmadinejad intoned to his surprised audience, "I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the promised one, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace."

...

From redressing the gulf between rich and poor in Iran, to challenging the United States and Israel and enhancing Iran's power with nuclear programs, every issue is designed to lay the foundation for the Mahdi's return.

...

The Mahdi's eventual return is an article of faith for Shiite Muslims that taps deeply into Persian consciousness and mystical tradition. Signs began to appear in Tehran three years ago, announcing that "He's Coming." But only a portion of Iranians actively prepare for that moment.

Part of the tradition holds that the Jamkaran mosque was ordered built by the Mahdi himself, during a dream revealed to a "righteous man" some 1,000 years ago. It is here that believers are closest to the Mahdi. Written prayers dropped into the adjacent well (which, local guides point out has no religious basis) are thought by pilgrims to be divinely answered.

Officials deny rumors that Ahmadinejad, as mayor last year, secretly tasked the Tehran City Council with reconfiguring the capital to prepare a suitable route for the Mahdi's return.

...

Sayed Hadi Hashemi, a black-turbaned senior cleric in Qom, says that "The Mahdi will rise, and it's a reality that needs [study] by religious science. But if you say, as Ahmadinejad says, 'We should construct an avenue in Tehran for the Mahdi to arrive,' this is only fooling the public."

But few doubt the sincerity of Ahmadinejad's belief. Some point to his seemingly impossible prediction of electoral success, three months before the June vote.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1221/p01s04-wome.html

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

####### is a war DRUM? A Euphemism? Puttin the word WAR in front of your comment is so leading! Oh, one more thing what if your wrong? Bein late to this PARTY doesnt work. Hmmmmmm maybe bein safe than sorry works here.

Your HATRED for Bush is all consuming for some of you, Its so obvious.

Whats comical is that the nut job is in Iran not here, your obsessions are obvious!

Edited December 6, 2007 by CarolsMarc

[Marc and Olga 0]

Is everyone familiar with that photo and why these 2 are together?

and you still think Bush/CHENEY didn't have a different reason for wanting to take Saddam out?

Funny thing is, we invaded Iraq when we did because we wanted to avoid the summer, that was how many summers ago? My point being that BUSH could have waited, he did not WANT to!

All this talk about Iran reminds me of the talk about Iraq in 2002...and it worries me!

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Is everyone familiar with that photo and why these 2 are together?

and you still think Bush/CHENEY didn't have a different reason for wanting to take Saddam out?

Funny thing is, we invaded Iraq when we did because we wanted to avoid the summer, that was how many summers ago? My point being that BUSH could have waited, he did not WANT to!

All this talk about Iran reminds me of the talk about Iraq in 2002...and it worries me!

Just one thing your leavin out (Im a nut job=Ama fck head) out of your perspective which shows your obsession with Bush!

Oh by the way things are lookin good in Iraq. Of course your denial is obviously driving your comments.

Not to much Death and DESTRUCTION in Iraq to report on the news, therefore no mention of the AWSOME JOB your BRETHRAN are doing there.

The regurgitation of six months ago will surely taste awful in the future! Oh shite were in the future NOW!

The burning in your throat, is the puke you heaved months ago.

To eat the VOMIT from months ago has got to infuriate the tools that cant let go! VICTORY IS OURS!

[Marc and Olga 0]

Is everyone familiar with that photo and why these 2 are together?

and you still think Bush/CHENEY didn't have a different reason for wanting to take Saddam out?

Funny thing is, we invaded Iraq when we did because we wanted to avoid the summer, that was how many summers ago? My point being that BUSH could have waited, he did not WANT to!

All this talk about Iran reminds me of the talk about Iraq in 2002...and it worries me!

Just one thing your leavin out (Im a nut job=Ama fck head) out of your perspective which shows your obsession with Bush!

Oh by the way things are lookin good in Iraq. Of course your denial is obviously driving your comments.

Not to much Death and DESTRUCTION in Iraq to report on the news, therefore no mention of the AWSOME JOB your BRETHRAN are doing there.

The regurgitation of six months ago will surely taste awful in the future! Oh shite were in the future NOW!

The burning in your throat, is the puke you heaved months ago.

To eat the VOMIT from months ago has got to infuriate the tools that cant let go! VICTORY IS OURS!

Nope, what I left "out" is right where it belongs, IN YOUR POST!

funny how the past few post are about what brought us into Iraq in 2003 and you mention how Iraq is all gumdrops and unicorns NOW...I also mentioned how, considering all the summers we have spent there, we probably could have waited until the UN inspectors did their job as they asked but (for some reason) YOUR president Bush said nah we gotta be in before THIS summer (2003).

funny how I mentioned that all the talk about Iran being "evil" sounds (to me and dare I say a few others) like that talk about Iraq before we invaded

But then again, other Marc, most of what you post is attacks, not facts.

EDIT: Dang typos

Edited December 6, 2007 by Marc and Olga

[Ban Hammer 13,643]

the writers are intentionally vague - that way no one is on the hook for "but you said absolutely positively...."

let's take another look at the paragraph in question:

In 2007, they "judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program. Judge with high confidence that the halt lasted at least several years. . . . Assess with moderate confidence Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007, but we do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons."

replace "high confidence" with "fairly certain"

replace moderate confidence with "we think" or "we believe"

and you get

In 2007, they "judge with high confidence fairly certain that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program. Judge with high confidence fairly certain that the halt lasted at least several years. . . . Assess with moderate confidence we think/believe Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007, but we do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons."

in layman's terms, they are fairly certain that tehran halted the program in 2003 but it took them until 2007 to make that assessment, perhaps based on information that became available in 06 or 07. they also believe the halt lasted for several years, but have not much intel indicating that they have restarted said program or if the program is geared in that direction.

In other words they are guessing. And this is what we are basing our policy on? I still find it odd that we went to war on intel based in part from these guys and when it didn't work out the way they said it would that somehow it's all Bush's fault. But now that the NIE is saying what the pacifists agree with Bush should follow that assesment. The double, triple and quadrupal standards are making my head spin.

gary, pretty much all intel has some guesswork in it due to someone having to interpret the raw data. example: got a picture from a recon flight and it shows a tank battalion. but is it really? it could be decoys: a deception plan at work. the one doing the interpretation of that pic is affected by experience/inexperience, prejudices, stress, work load, and many other things. that's why you'll see so many statements in intel reports that lean in a certain direction but won't come out and say "that's the deal with absolute certainty."

[Ban Hammer 13,643]

Even if both were nuclear, I've got three letters for you: M A D. Sound familiar?

It's not a pretty picture but it does guarantee a good degree of stability.

It sure has done that for decades during the cold war.

while several nukes would render israel uninhabitable for centuries, the same can't be said of iran due to iran have more land. plus the nukes would affect neighboring countries and greatly influence oil prices.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]