Iran Finally Comes Clean with the World -- It Sponsors Terrorism
151 replies, posted
[IMG]http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/424675_288783734518678_213228565407529_826113_1490532355_n.jpg[/IMG]
Picture says all.
[QUOTE=gamefreek76;34602704]Don't be silly. The only reason it was justified was because we won.
Also, we used two.[/QUOTE]
I know we used two, Fat Man and Little Boy, and it's justified because of projected casualties and other reasons, not because we won, it would be justified regardless due to millions of potential casualties on both sides from continues conflict.
[QUOTE=Sickle;34594983]Israel killed some civillian Iranian scientists with magnet bombs, so they officially sponsor terrorism too.[/QUOTE]
That is pretty much the exact opposite of terrorism.
That is a targeted attack against a specific strategic asset. Terror wasn't the point, it was the removal of the scientist himself.
At the end of the day, Iran isn't built like Israel. Israel is designed from the ground up to defeat terrorism because the attacks were so common. Iran does not suffer from anywhere near the same amount of terrorism. Israel has the assets and training necessary to actually destroy strategic targets, rather than playing the media as is necessary with terrorist actions.
Both are idiots and need to stop. Nobody is going to win in a conflict. A huge number of people are going to die and nothing will be resolved.
[editline]8th February 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Bucketboy;34605869][IMG]http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/424675_288783734518678_213228565407529_826113_1490532355_n.jpg[/IMG]
Picture says all.[/QUOTE]
The picture is also lying. A hangar on an allied airbase where we park some drones does not constitute a "US military base."
[editline]8th February 2012[/editline]
Turkmenistan: The Mary base is a form soviet facility that was suggested by the Russians be used as a refueling depot for aircraft flying supplies into Afghanistan. The base still wouldn't have been military as only non-lethal goods come through that corridor by request of the government of Turkmenistan. We have something like seven guys there who refuel aircraft at a civilian airport.
Eritrea: Best I can tell, the last base we had there outside of an embassy was closed in 1977. It was a listening station.
Pakistan: They let us park drones there, but not a lot else. They are not US military bases and we do not own or operate the land.
Bahrain: The US has one base there. But we are close military allies, so we can land at their other bases. The stuff marked on the map is the one US base, plus all of the Bahranian bases, because apparently being allowed to land somewhere makes it belong to us.
Kuwait: Kuwait still exists because of the US and is again a close ally. Yet again all of their bases are marked on the map because we can land there. Herp derp.
Iraq: We are trying to fucking leave, but some dickbag country keeps trying to block our water exit by threatening to blockade the strait.
Oman: Again, we can park at some of their places and so now they are magically US military. A port is included in there too because we repaired a frigate there after Iran mined the strait the last time. Also an international airport is included for no reason.
I imagine I can keep going, but really this picture is just fucking ridiculous.
[QUOTE=GunFox;34610050]
Oman: Again, we can park at some of their places and so now they are magically US military. A port is included in there too because we repaired a frigate there after Iran mined the strait the last time. Also an international airport is included for no reason.[/QUOTE]
We do have at least one base in Oman, though, my step-brother was stationed there.
[QUOTE=GunFox;34610050]That is pretty much the exact opposite of terrorism.
That is a targeted attack against a specific strategic asset. Terror wasn't the point, it was the removal of the scientist himself.
At the end of the day, Iran isn't built like Israel. Israel is designed from the ground up to defeat terrorism because the attacks were so common. Iran does not suffer from anywhere near the same amount of terrorism. Israel has the assets and training necessary to actually destroy strategic targets, rather than playing the media as is necessary with terrorist actions.
Both are idiots and need to stop. Nobody is going to win in a conflict. A huge number of people are going to die and nothing will be resolved.
[editline]8th February 2012[/editline]
The picture is also lying. A hangar on an allied airbase where we park some drones does not constitute a "US military base."
[editline]8th February 2012[/editline]
Turkmenistan: The Mary base is a form soviet facility that was suggested by the Russians be used as a refueling depot for aircraft flying supplies into Afghanistan. The base still wouldn't have been military as only non-lethal goods come through that corridor by request of the government of Turkmenistan. We have something like seven guys there who refuel aircraft at a civilian airport.
Eritrea: Best I can tell, the last base we had there outside of an embassy was closed in 1977. It was a listening station.
Pakistan: They let us park drones there, but not a lot else. They are not US military bases and we do not own or operate the land.
Bahrain: The US has one base there. But we are close military allies, so we can land at their other bases. The stuff marked on the map is the one US base, plus all of the Bahranian bases, because apparently being allowed to land somewhere makes it belong to us.
Kuwait: Kuwait still exists because of the US and is again a close ally. Yet again all of their bases are marked on the map because we can land there. Herp derp.
Iraq: We are trying to fucking leave, but some dickbag country keeps trying to block our water exit by threatening to blockade the strait.
Oman: Again, we can park at some of their places and so now they are magically US military. A port is included in there too because we repaired a frigate there after Iran mined the strait the last time. Also an international airport is included for no reason.
I imagine I can keep going, but really this picture is just fucking ridiculous.[/QUOTE]
Well, this is how i see it, When you park your car, you usually park it in a garage or on a parkling lot, you can say its a [B]parking base[/B] for cars! Well, you dont park a military drone outside a pub or something, you park it inside a military [B]Base[/B]. maybe this sounds stupid but its how i see it.
But sure, lets remove 5 dots from the map, then we got 40 bases left. Does it make the situation any diffrent? I think not.
[QUOTE=Bucketboy;34610486]Well, this is how i see it, When you park your car, you usually park it in a garage or on a parkling lot, you can say its a [B]parking base[/B] for cars! Well, you dont park a military drone outside a pub or something, you park it inside a military [B]Base[/B]. maybe this sounds stupid but its how i see it.[/QUOTE]
So... if you park the car in a "parking base", does that mean you own and run it? If something sounds stupid it's probably because it's stupid.
[QUOTE=Bucketboy;34610486]
But sure, lets remove 5 dots from the map, then we got 40 bases left. Does it make the situation any diffrent? I think not.[/QUOTE]
Actually I think you'd have to remove a little more than five. Considering that every single military base belonging to our allies and even a fucking airport are listed as U.S. military bases. Face it, that picture is a steaming pile of shit.
Gunfox, you're my favorite poster.
Disagree x 1
Ogopogo
He disagree's because he's just jealous that Gunfox is smarter than him.
I give five years. They will hit Israel with a nuke, then cease to exist as Israel and the US place a nuke on every ten square miles of Iranian soil
[QUOTE=OrionChronicles;34612805]I give five years. They will hit Israel with a nuke, then cease to exist as Israel and the US place a nuke on every ten square miles of Iranian soil[/QUOTE]
I really doubt we'd nuke Iran under any circumstances.
Most likely, we'd just roll out the B-52's and other strategic bombers.
[QUOTE=teslacoil;34613064]I really doubt we'd nuke Iran under any circumstances.
Most likely, we'd just roll out the B-52's and other strategic bombers.[/QUOTE]
If they used a nuke, we would, or Israel would definitely at least.
To give you an idea: if Saddam had used chemical warfare in desert storm, EVERY country involved would have nuked him. chemical warfare is a step below nuclear warfare.
[QUOTE=OrionChronicles;34613613]If they used a nuke, we would, or Israel would definitely at least.
To give you an idea: if Saddam had used chemical warfare in desert storm, EVERY country involved would have nuked him. chemical warfare is a step below nuclear warfare.[/QUOTE]
I still really doubt it.
[QUOTE=OrionChronicles;34613613]If they used a nuke, we would, or Israel would definitely at least.
To give you an idea: if Saddam had used chemical warfare in desert storm, EVERY country involved would have nuked him. chemical warfare is a step below nuclear warfare.[/QUOTE]
No they wouldn't. Nuclear escalation is a pretty big deal
For much of the war there were reports of chemical weapons attacks, the same thing happened in the earlier hours of the 2003 edition. No nuclear attacks
The US would not risk its rather strong relationship with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the UAE (exposing all of these nations and many more to fallout and EMP) by randomly nuking Iraq
I really doubt that Iran would use a nuke upon Israel, if they got their hands on one. Why? Palestinians and the historical portions of the land.
MEANWHILE...
fox news tonight
researchers have discovered that attending school actually makes you [i]smarter?[/i]
more at 11
Should buy some popcorn next time, this is getting interesting.
It's like watching a fight between two chickens :v:
[QUOTE=Starpluck;34602830]And cut it out with the "its their homeland!" crap, it hasn't been Jewish since the 1500s and even then, the Jews prior to that expelled the original inhabitants and then declared it [I]their[/I] homeland. If you're still going to use the "but they lived there half a millennium ago" argument, then nearly every single ethnicity has claim to most parts of the world.[/QUOTE]
You could use this argument against anyone. I suppose what I'm saying is: where else do you put a Jewish country?
That said, the UN could have done more to negotiate something with the arab nations before plopping Israel in there and pissing everyone off. Not one of their better ideas...
I hope there isn't a war but if one does erupt, I doubt it's going to be the catalyst for WW3 or time to play nuclear volleyball or anything like that.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;34614747]You could use this argument against anyone. I suppose what I'm saying is: where else do you put a Jewish country?
That said, the UN could have done more to negotiate something with the arab nations before plopping Israel in there and pissing everyone off. Not one of their better ideas...[/QUOTE]
Away from an Arab country. Or you just don't put it anywhere, and reintegrate the people into a mixed society.
Iran's gonna chew some jews
So uh. Does this actually make Israel kinda the good guys?
[QUOTE=Jetblack357;34625193]So uh. Does this actually make Israel kinda the good guys?[/QUOTE]
As someone else posted, you can't simply label every country as 100% "good" or "evil". Israel has made it clear they're not against a preemptive (such as they call it) strike on Iran, and the Iranian government has made it clear they would happily see Israel, or its government at least, be destroyed.
[QUOTE=LiquidNazgul;34625370]As someone else posted, you can't simply label every country as 100% "good" or "evil". Israel has made it clear they're not against a preemptive (such as they call it) strike on Iran, and the Iranian government has made it clear they would happily see Israel, or its government at least, be destroyed.[/QUOTE]
That basically sums up what I was asking, just poorly worded my question.
Many countries with international stakes sponsor terrorism. Countries included in this list are the USA, the UK, Russia, Pakistan, Libya, Ireland, France, Morocco, and Afghanistan.
[QUOTE=archangel125;34654063]Many countries with international stakes sponsor terrorism. Countries included in this list are the USA, the UK, Russia, Pakistan, Libya, Ireland, France, Morocco, and Afghanistan.[/QUOTE]
Doesn't make it any better.
[QUOTE=Glorbo;34654123]Doesn't make it any better.[/QUOTE]
No, it doesn't. But morality has no place in global political power struggles. Nice guys lose.
[QUOTE=Ogopogo;34613753]I really doubt that Iran would use a nuke upon Israel, if they got their hands on one. Why? Palestinians and the historical portions of the land.[/QUOTE]
Pffftt
You think anyone in the Iranian government gives a shit about the Palestinians? The Palestinians are just another leverage card for Iran against Israel.
[QUOTE=Glorbo;34654157]Pffftt
You think anyone in the Iranian government gives a shit about the Palestinians? The Palestinians are just another leverage card for Iran against Israel.[/QUOTE]
They care about the Palestinians because they need to to have any support against Israel. And they can't win alone, with or without nuclear weapons.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.