• Iran threatens preemptive action against "enemy."
    56 replies, posted
Source: [url]http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/21/world/meast/iran-warning/index.html?hpt=hp_t3[/url] [quote] Iran warned Tuesday it would strike against an "enemy" threatening it if needed to protect its national interests -- even if the enemy didn't attack first. Gen. Mohammad Hejazi, a deputy head of Iran's armed forces, said his country "will no more wait to see enemy action against us," according to the semi-official Fars News Agency. "Given this strategy, we will make use of all our means to protect our national interests and hit a retaliatory blow at them whenever we feel that enemies want to endanger our national interests," Hejazi said. Fars added that in November, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had "warned enemies about Iran's tough response to any aggression or even threat." "Iran is not a nation to sit still and just observe threats from fragile materialist powers which are being eaten by worms from inside," Khamenei told students at a military college in Tehran, according to Fars. "Anyone who harbors any thought of invading the Islamic Republic of Iran -- or even if the thought crosses their mind -- should be prepared to receive strong blows and the steel fists of the military, the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), and the Basij (volunteer) force, backed by the entire Iranian nation," Khamenei said, according to the report. Hejazi's remarks come amid high tensions between Iran and much of the world. The United States, European powers, and Israel have helped lead efforts to pressure Iran into taking part in serious negotiations over its nuclear program. Iran insists its program is for civilian purposes, but numerous countries are concerned Tehran is working to build a nuclear weapons arsenal. Israel has made clear it is considering an attack on Iran's nuclear program. Both countries often openly antagonize each other. On Sunday, Tehran cut off crude exports to British and French companies in retaliation for a new round of sanctions imposed on the regime. Officials with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, began a second round of talks Monday with Iranian officials. The IAEA said the talks were an opportunity to get more clarity about the "possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear program." [/quote] Seriously Iran, just fuck off. I also hear that they could directly increase US gas prices to $5/gallon. Iran needs to unbunch their panties and shut the fuck up.
It's like they constantly revision their statements to be just a little different from the previous ones. The core of this statement was already stated by them a bazillion times If there's nothing new about it then it shouldn't be called [b]news[/b].
Oh boy here we go.
Preemptively striking Iran has been the rhetoric the U.S./Israel has been emitted for literally two decades (there's an article in the 1990s) which is funny considering each are pre-emptively gearing against each's pre-emptive strikes making it an endless cycle of preemption. But yeah, they clearly aren't going to put their money where their mouth is (which is good) and launch an initial attack. Just a few days ago, Lt. Gen. Ronald Burgess, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency stated to the [URL="http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/16/10427563-iran-unlikely-to-provoke-conflict-us-official-says"]US Congress that Iran may launch missiles if it is attacked but was unlikely to initiate or intentionally provoke a conflict.[/URL]
Great, more of this bullshit, just what the world needs.
[QUOTE=Starpluck;34803768]Preemptively striking Iran has been the rhetoric the U.S./Israel has been emitted for literally two decades (there's an article in the 1990s) which is funny considering each are pre-emptively gearing against each's pre-emptive strikes making it an endless cycle of preemption. But yeah, they clearly aren't going to put their money where their mouth is (which is good) and launch an initial attack. A few days ago, Lt. Gen. Ronald Burgess, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency [URL="http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/16/10427563-iran-unlikely-to-provoke-conflict-us-official-says"]stated[/URL]: [release]"told the US Congress that Iran may launch missiles if it is attacked but was unlikely to initiate or intentionally provoke a conflict."[/release][/QUOTE] They're planning a preemptive strike against a preemptive strike. Clearly this is a sign of aggression, and the US needs to respond with a preemptive strike
Not sure wether to rate winner for Iran or dumb for OP's opinion.
[QUOTE=Glorbo;34803792]They're planning a preemptive strike against a preemptive strike. Clearly this is a sign of aggression, and the US needs to respond with a preemptive strike[/QUOTE] sounds like cold war rhetoric
Charred beef on the table with dijon mustard.
The US (and allies) would steamroll Iran.
[QUOTE=nivek;34804056]The US (and allies) would steamroll Iran.[/QUOTE] us Americans are a little bit sick of war. We will send plenty of drones, aircraft, and naval support though.
Israel has a huge consider over their "deterrence capacity". This means that they wish to invoke fear in their enemies. If NATO and or Israel attack Iran, it is not because of human rights, it's not because of morals, it's because they probably wish to make an example out of Iran to show what happens if someone doesn't do what they say. Also their "deterrence capacity" would greatly suffer if Iran develops the alleged nuclear weapons (even though there hasn't yet been any evidence of their existence). So pour cold water on your war boner and stay calm. When national leaders start citing fiery speeches on the media, tell them to fuck off. Iran has severe flaws but it's not really a reason to start another gruelling war.
[QUOTE=Falchion;34804170]Israel has a huge consider over their "deterrence capacity". This means that they wish to invoke fear in their enemies. If NATO and or Israel attack Iran, it is not because of human rights, it's not because of morals, it's because they probably wish to make an example out of Iran to show what happens if someone doesn't do what they say. Also their "deterrence capacity" would greatly suffer if Iran develops the alleged nuclear weapons (even though there hasn't yet been any evidence of their existence). So pour cold water on your war boner and stay calm. When national leaders start citing fiery speeches on the media, tell them to fuck off. Iran has severe flaws but it's not really a reason to start another gruelling war.[/QUOTE] For anyone wanting an expanded version: [url]http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20100702.htm[/url] Highly reccomended reading, its by chomsky
[QUOTE=Falchion;34804170]Israel has a huge consider over their "deterrence capacity". This means that they wish to invoke fear in their enemies. If NATO and or Israel attack Iran, it is not because of human rights, it's not because of morals, it's because they probably wish to make an example out of Iran to show what happens if someone doesn't do what they say. Also their "deterrence capacity" would greatly suffer if Iran develops the alleged nuclear weapons (even though there hasn't yet been any evidence of their existence). So pour cold water on your war boner and stay calm. When national leaders start citing fiery speeches on the media, tell them to fuck off. Iran has severe flaws but it's not really a reason to start another gruelling war.[/QUOTE] I agree with all of your points, however if we did have evidence of nuclear weapons, we probably would keep it classified.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;34809021]I agree with all of your points, however if we did have evidence of nuclear weapons, we probably would keep it classified.[/QUOTE] Im glad someone is realizing this. If you were to let word get out that they had nuclear weapons everyone would flip the fuck out. But honestly, if Iran does start shit they are going to get an ass kicking like no other.
Nuke from orbit, problem solved.
[QUOTE=nivek;34804056]The US (and allies) would steamroll Iran.[/QUOTE] Why are you including 'and allies'. No other country wants war except that Israel.
[QUOTE=Starpluck;34804468]For anyone wanting an expanded version: [url]http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20100702.htm[/url] Highly reccomended reading, its by chomsky[/QUOTE] Pretty much it.
[QUOTE=faze;34803577]Source: [url]http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/21/world/meast/iran-warning/index.html?hpt=hp_t3[/url] Seriously Iran, just fuck off. I also hear that they could directly increase US gas prices to $5/gallon. Iran needs to unbunch their panties and shut the fuck up.[/QUOTE] Yes, they should just leave us alone. We're only regularly blowing up their facilities, their scientists, and things not even related to their government (there was an article on a lovely airstrike that blew up an oil refinery or something). It's totally their problem, right? We are clearly not provoking an already unstable situation.
[QUOTE=faze;34803577]Source: [url]http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/21/world/meast/iran-warning/index.html?hpt=hp_t3[/url] Seriously Iran, just fuck off. I also hear that they could directly increase US gas prices to $5/gallon. Iran needs to unbunch their panties and shut the fuck up.[/QUOTE] I'm sure the US and Israel are doing everything they can to help, eh?
[QUOTE=Scrimp;34803950]Charred beef on the table with dijon mustard.[/QUOTE] How does this restaurant stay in business?
They've been saying this shit for a while. And look, they still haven't done anything.
This is a Middle Eastern cold war. If Iran pulls a Cuba crisis I hope Obama pulls a JFK
[QUOTE=mac338;34814610]This is a Middle Eastern cold war. If Iran pulls a Cuba crisis I hope Obama pulls a JFK[/QUOTE] and get assassinated?
[QUOTE=mastfire;34814761]and get assassinated?[/QUOTE] I knew that was coming. Rated rainbow for predictability.
[QUOTE=faze;34803577]Source: [url]http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/21/world/meast/iran-warning/index.html?hpt=hp_t3[/url] Seriously Iran, just fuck off. I also hear that they could directly increase US gas prices to $5/gallon. Iran needs to unbunch their panties and shut the fuck up.[/QUOTE] US Gas prices are already going to hit $5 a gallon. It's the companies that dictate the price, really. They could sell it for $2 a gallon and still make billions in profits, but not as many billions as they do at $4.50 and up, knowing people are going to buy it anyway. Because we have to.
Iran you make me laugh.. you are not match for us and our allies...
What is it with all the "Iran you are no match for us" stuff. Since the US was that fearful of the development of nuclear weapons they sabotaged the facility and assassinated some scientists, and they didn't like it one bit. Its just like if someone were provoked enough, they would fight back, even though the other is much bigger. So, Iran won't 'back the fuck down' since they feel that they were pushed into it.
[QUOTE=nivek;34804056]The US (and allies) would steamroll Iran.[/QUOTE] just like we steamrolled the insurgency in iraq right?
[QUOTE=muesli23;34817391]just like we steamrolled the insurgency in iraq right?[/QUOTE] we wouldn't go in for a nation building effort like we did in Iraq Also, IAEA inspectors have said that there is [b]significant[/b] suspicion of nuclear weapons in iran.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.