Iranian military officials described the latest virus attack as an "act of war".

old_aussie

Iranian military officials have described the latest virus attack to hit central systems as an "act of war".



The country last year suffered damage to its nuclear programme following the infamous Stuxnet virus that is widely believed to have been a state-sponsored operation aimed at destabilising Iran's nuclear capabilities.
The newly discovered “Stars” virus was targeting specific government systems, according to officials, but they have not detailed whether the networks were military or civilian.

“Certain characteristics about the Stars worm have been identified, including that it is compatible with the (targeted) system and it is likely to be mistaken for executable files of the government,” Iran's senior cyber defence official, Gholam-Reza Jalali, told the local Mehr News agency.

The official went on to issue a warning to the country's network operators to be on the alert for further attacks related to the worm, which could include more dangerous variants.
“Although we have dealt with Stuxnet, it doesn't mean that the threat has been completely eliminated, since worms have specific life cycles and can continue their activities in other forms,” Jalali said.
“The country should prepare itself to tackle future worms, as they could be more dangerous than the first ones,” he said.

The official went on to say the country might seek redress under international law for the attacks, which Iran has blamed on US and Israeli operations against the country.

“The Foreign Ministry might not have paid due attention to pursuing this issue legally,” he said. “But it seems that our diplomatic apparatus should pay attention to legally pursuing cyber attacks against the Islamic Republic of Iran more than before. Many countries regard any cyber attack as an official (act of) war.”

http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/255557,iran-threatens-legal-action-after-second-virus-attack.aspx?eid=19&edate=20110427&utm_source=20110427&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=daily_newsletter&eaddr=machine@exemail.com.au

Why would they have have their network attached to the net?

If their nuclear system is not attached to the net, then it must be sabotage by one of their "trusted" workers.

---

Guaranteed that Stuxnet was US/Israeli.. What bored hacker attacks nuclear systems.

Orando Broom

Deleted User wrote: »

Guaranteed that Stuxnet was US/Israeli.. What bored hacker attacks nuclear systems.

Those who seek nuclear lolz.

Predator_

No doubt it was the meddling Yanks/Jews. When will they stop attacking sovereign states?

sensibleken

Virus attack? Quick, call Dustin Hoffman!!!

Wheelie King

Predator_ wrote: »

No doubt it was the meddling Yanks/Jews. When will they stop attacking sovereign states?

Never

rednik

Iranian military officials are a virus.

Orando Broom

Orando Broom wrote: »

Those who seek nuclear lolz.

Actually yea.. If I could, I might. But I can't, so I won't.

orourkeda

Why is the Iranian Nuclear so feared when it cant even nuke a computer virus

It wasn't me!

sensibleken wrote: »

Virus attack? Quick, call Dustin Hoffman!!!

I wondered whether I was the only one who had that thought...

wes

If the US or any other country is behind the virus, then it would most certainly be an act of war.

The Iranians also suspect the US, of supporting Jundallah (a terrorist group), who have launched several terrorist attacks in Iran.

Now, of course the Iranians would need to prove these things of course, and if they had definitive proof, I am sure they would be shouting about it from the roof tops. Still, the Iranian claims are not without merit, as the US has pulled all kinds of crap in the past.

Orando Broom

wes wrote: »

If the US or any other country is behind the virus, then it would most certainly be an act of war.

The Iranians also suspect the US, of supporting Jundallah (a terrorist group), who have launched several terrorist attacks in Iran.

Now, of course the Iranians would need to prove these things of course, and if they had definitive proof, I am sure they would be shouting about it from the roof tops. Still, the Iranian claims are not without merit, as the US has pulled all kinds of crap in the past.

Maybe they should check teh google. Oh wait...

Biggins

I suspect this is not the first time a virus has been created (by a government) to delve into others systems.

Freddie59

wes wrote: »

If the US or any other country is behind the virus, then it would most certainly be an act of war.

The Iranians also suspect the US, of supporting Jundallah (a terrorist group), who have launched several terrorist attacks in Iran.

Now, of course the Iranians would need to prove these things of course, and if they had definitive proof, I am sure they would be shouting about it from the roof tops. Still, the Iranian claims are not without merit, as the US has pulled all kinds of crap in the past.

And, of course, the Iranians themselves are whiter than white. Don't sponsor terror at all.:rolleyes:

wes

Freddie59 wrote: »

And, of course, the Iranians themselves are whiter than white.

I made no such claims either way, and I saw no need considering the context of what I was talking about.

Freddie59 wrote: »

Don't sponsor terror at all.:rolleyes:

Sure, they probably do, but again considering the context, of what I was talking about, I saw no need to bring up, well known accusations about backing terrorist groups by Iran.

Raging_Ninja

old_aussie wrote: »

Why would they have have their network attached to the net?

If their nuclear system is not attached to the net, then it must be sabotage by one of their "trusted" workers.

As I understand it, the nuclear whatever system the Iranians were not using was not connected to the internet

The theory of how the virus was spread is as follows. The Stuxnet virus was spread almost globally, the hope being that eventually workers' and scientists' home computer would be affected, unknown to the owners.

Some of these people would do work on their computers, save it to a memory stick. The virus would infect the memory stick. People would then bring their memory sticks into work with them, and so the computer systems in the research facilities would become affected.

The virus and the concept behind it are quite brilliant.

dlofnep

It's pretty clear to everyone that the US and Israel is involved. Stuxnet is a fine piece of work, but it smacks of hypocrisy that Israel and the US would attack Iran for pursuing nuclear technology. Israel sold nuclear weapons to an apartheid South African Government, and US holds the great claim of being the only country on the planet to ever nuke another sovereign nation.

I think the Iranian regime is a shower of archaic morons. But at the same time, they have every right to pursue nuclear technology as a signatory of the NPT. There is obvious issues of how Iran is conducting their business which the IAEA isn't all too pleased about, but I think this is due to threats from the US and Israel. It smacks of a rat trapped in the corner, and it's it fight or flight mode that are the only options.

Bearing in mind that the US is only involved in this for Israel's interests, Israel isn't even a signatory of the NPT. I can't stand hypocrisy.

ScumLord

Just tell them to upgrade to Windows 7 and download Microsoft security essentials, that should do the trick.

wes wrote: »

The Iranians also suspect the US, of supporting Jundallah (a terrorist group), who have launched several terrorist attacks in Iran.

They're not a terrorist group if the Americans are supporting them, then their called rebels. They won't become terrorists until the Americans leave them high and dry at some stage making them hate America and turn into terrorists.

Celly Smunt

if only iran knew about linux

Einhard

I think the Iranian regime is a shower of archaic morons. But at the same time, they have every right to pursue nuclear technology as a signatory of the NPT.

But they don't have the right to pursue nuclear weapons as signatories to the NPT.

There is obvious issues of how Iran is conducting their business which the IAEA isn't all too pleased about, but I think this is due to threats from the US and Israel. It smacks of a rat trapped in the corner, and it's it fight or flight mode that are the only options.

Oh come off it! The IAEA is an independent body, and there has been no evidence of threats, veiled or otherwise, levelled against it. Russia also has concerns about Iran's nuclear ambitions, so much so that she backed some sanctions on the state. Are we to believe that she too was bent to the will of the US and Israel?

And Iran is no rat trapped in the corner. Tehran actively funds terror groups dedicated to the destruction of other states within the region. She cintinuously meddles in the affairs of other Arab and Gulf states, and those futther afield. Not that that is unique to Iran, but the way you protray it, one would sear that Iran was an innocent bystander, caught up in thhings against her will.

Bearing in mind that the US is only involved in this for Israel's interests, Israel isn't even a signatory of the NPT. I can't stand hypocrisy.

Well if she's not a signatory of the NPT, then it's not exactly hypocritical of her to ignore its provisions!!;)

dlofnep

Einhard wrote: »

Oh come off it! The IAEA is an independent body, and there has been no evidence of threats, veiled or otherwise, levelled against it.

I never stated that there was.

chin_grin

Two pages in and no reference to the name being STARS?

All I can think of now is that Nemesis from Resident Evil 3 running around their comms rooms (that outhouse shed) eating the wires and going "STARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRS".

dlofnep

Einhard wrote: »

But they don't have the right to pursue nuclear weapons as signatories to the NPT.

Who said anything about nuclear weapons?

Mark200

dlofnep wrote: »

It's pretty clear to everyone that the US and Israel is involved. Stuxnet is a fine piece of work, but it smacks of hypocrisy that Israel and the US would attack Iran for pursuing nuclear technology. Israel sold nuclear weapons to an apartheid South African Government, and US holds the great claim of being the only country on the planet to ever nuke another sovereign nation.

I think the Iranian regime is a shower of archaic morons. But at the same time, they have every right to pursue nuclear technology as a signatory of the NPT. There is obvious issues of how Iran is conducting their business which the IAEA isn't all too pleased about, but I think this is due to threats from the US and Israel. It smacks of a rat trapped in the corner, and it's it fight or flight mode that are the only options.

Bearing in mind that the US is only involved in this for Israel's interests, Israel isn't even a signatory of the NPT. I can't stand hypocrisy.

Of course Iran has the right to pursue nuclear technology. No country has ever denied that. But they don't have the right to pursue nuclear weapons. There's no reason to believe that they're not trying to create nuclear weapons. Over and over they have lied to the UN about their nuclear programme.

If the US (or any other country) can slow down or stop Iran's nuclear programme to ensure they don't get their hands on nukes, then I don't see why they shouldn't.

Of course it's a bit hypocritical with Israel also having Nukes, but the west can control Israel. If Iran got nukes, things would change big time.

Until Iran's nuclear programme is completely transparent, it should be slowed down by any peaceful means possible.

pmcmahon wrote: »

if only iran knew about linux

If Iran knew about linux then the virus would have been made for linux!

dlofnep

Einhard wrote: »

Tehran actively funds terror groups dedicated to the destruction of other states within the region. She cintinuously meddles in the affairs of other Arab and Gulf states, and those futther afield. Not that that is unique to Iran, but the way you protray it, one would sear that Iran was an innocent bystander, caught up in thhings against her will.

I never portrayed Iran as an innocent bystander.

dlofnep

Mark200 wrote: »

Of course Iran has the right to pursue nuclear technology. No country has ever denied that. But they don't have the right to pursue nuclear weapons.

I'm not in favour of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons, just as a point of note. However, there is no credible evidence as I understand that they are pursuing nuclear weapons.

"“The international community so far has no information that Iran is building nuclear weapons,” -Dmitry Medvedev, January 2011

LondonIrish90

Predator_ wrote: »

No doubt it was the meddling Yanks/Jews. When will they stop attacking sovereign states?

Couldn't make it any more obvious you were anti-Jewish could you?

What about the half a million jews in Britain, or the half a million jews in France? Were they all in on this, or are you saying in a very childish and offensive way you believe the state of Israel was involved?

Maybe people in the UK could say it was clearly the Irish who were behind the speech in by the IRA in Derry? Will you ever stop meddling in our sovereign state.....

Or maybe, would that be totally inaccurate and offensive to large amounts of people?

dlofnep

Mark200 wrote: »

Of course it's a bit hypocritical with Israel also having Nukes, but the west can control Israel. If Iran got nukes, things would change big time.

The West can control Israel? Since when has Israel ever obeyed any of the West's requests? They routinely ignore UN SR condemnations. The west did nothing to stop it in arms dealings with an apartheid South African Government, providing it with nuclear weapons. They cannot stop Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian territory. They cannot stop it's illegal settlements.

If Israel wants to do something, it will do it - and won't give a toss about what the international community has to say about it. They are safe in knowing that the US will always be there to veto them out of trouble.

Einhard

dlofnep wrote: »

I never stated that there was.

There is obvious issues of how Iran is conducting their business which the IAEA isn't all too pleased about, but I think this is due to threats from the US and Israel.

Ah, you meant threats to Iran from the US and Israel...

dlofnep wrote: »

Who said anything about nuclear weapons?

If you're going to deny that nuclear weapons are what's being discussed in this matter, then there's not point in even having the argument!

dlofnep wrote: »

I never portrayed Iran as an innocent bystander.

You portrayed her a cornered rat, which implies that she is lashing out to protect herself against outside aggression. Which is not the case. Indeed, if anything, Iran is far more the aggressor in the region, than victim of aggression.

Also, the threat America poses to Iran is overblown. IIRC, America refused demands from other nations in the region for strikes against Iran.

Einhard

dlofnep wrote: »

"“The international community so far has no information that Iran is building nuclear weapons,” -Dmitry Medvedev, January 2011

The IAEA begs to differ:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/02/18/us-nuclear-iran-iaea-idUSTRE61H4EH20100218

If Russia doesn't believe Iran has ambitions to build nuclear weapons, why exactly would she support sanctions against Iran?

Also, haven't you contradicted yourself, by claiming that Iran is developing nuclear technology as a result of threats from the US and Israel? You mean they're responding to the threats by building up their x-ray and cat scan capabilities? Come on!

dlofnep

Einhard wrote: »

Also, haven't you contradicted yourself, by claiming that Iran is developing nuclear technology as a result of threats from the US and Israel? You mean they're responding to the threats by building up their x-ray and cat scan capabilities? Come on!

No, I never stated Iran was building nuclear technology in response to threats from the US and Israel. I stated that how Iran operated it's progression of nuclear technology (IE: under the radar), is because of the US and Israeli aggression. Iran would pursue nuclear technology regardless of whether the threat existed or not. It's how they are going about it, is because the less the US and Israel know about their operations, the better it is internally for Iran. Because of this, obviously the IAEA is going to be left standing in the rain wondering what's really going on.

So Iran's intentions to be secretive is probably an act of progressive defense, rather than an act of sticking it to the IAEA .

dlofnep

Einhard wrote: »

Ah, you meant threats to Iran from the US and Israel...

Correct.

Einhard wrote: »

If you're going to deny that nuclear weapons are what's being discussed in this matter, then there's not point in even having the argument!

It is certainly a portion of the basis of discussion. I've already stated that I do not aspire to see Iran with nuclear weapons. However, I do support their right to create nuclear energy.

Einhard wrote: »

You portrayed her a cornered rat, which implies that she is lashing out to protect herself against outside aggression.

Well it's quite clear that Iran is overly secretive of it's operations because of threats from the US and Israel. The less they know, the better it is for the security of Iran. Iran knows that at any given moment, the US and Israel could launch a joint-strike on Iranian nuclear facilities.

Einhard wrote: »

Also, the threat America poses to Iran is overblown. IIRC, America refused demands from other nations in the region for strikes against Iran.

Israel is the real worry for Iran. The US's roll in all of this is that it will offer media support for Israel in terms of a propaganda campaign, and will ensure that the UN security council gives Israel a free pass on it's own program.

One must ask itself why Israel, a non-signatory of the NPT has received a free pass on it's nuclear program, given Israel's role in recent history with regards to conflict in the Middle-East.

Einhard

dlofnep wrote: »

No, I never stated Iran was building nuclear technology in response to threats from the US and Israel. I stated that how Iran operated it's progression of nuclear technology (IE: under the radar), is because of the US and Israeli aggression. Iran would pursue nuclear technology regardless of whether the threat existed or not. It's how they are going about it, is because the less the US and Israel know about their operations, the better it is internally for Iran. Because of this, obviously the IAEA is going to be left standing in the rain wondering what's really going on.

So Iran's intentions to be secretive is probably an act of progressive defense, rather than an act of sticking it to the IAEA .

Other nations have developed peaceful nuclear tech without any problems. The fact that Iran seeks to conceal it, and the fact that both Russia and China are also concerned about their programme, and the fact that the IAEA has concerns about it, would indicate that there's is not that peaceful in scope.

bleg

Oh those poor innocent Iranians!

dlofnep

Einhard wrote: »

The IAEA begs to differ:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/02/18/us-nuclear-iran-iaea-idUSTRE61H4EH20100218

A former IAEA Director said 2 months after that, that he did not think Iran was building nuclear weapons. I'm not saying either way. Iran could very well be building nuclear weapons. I'm humble enough to admit that I don't know. They may, or may not be. But it isn't the role of Israel to interfere with them, without talks at an international level.

Einhard wrote: »

If Russia doesn't believe Iran has ambitions to build nuclear weapons, why exactly would she support sanctions against Iran?

Because Iran is not being forthright with it's disclosure of it's nuclear facilities. Russia would rather Iran was more open about it's projects. Iran wishes to remain secretive to protect itself against any pending attacks.

dlofnep

Einhard wrote: »

Other nations have developed peaceful nuclear tech without any problems. The fact that Iran seeks to conceal it, and the fact that both Russia and China are also concerned about their programme, and the fact that the IAEA has concerns about it, would indicate that there's is not that peaceful in scope.

There may or may not be. You could very well be right. My point is that it isn't the role of Israel to interfere with Iran's internal matters. Let the international community resolve it.

Let's say for the sake of argument that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. I don't really believe for one that if they did, they would actually use them. I believe it would be akin to military posturing, like the rest of the nuclear-armed states around the world. If Iran did seek them, it would be purely as a deterrent against attack, rather than to use them in a pre-emptive strike.

We all know that if Iran nuked Israel tomorrow, Israel would hit them back with nukes, and the US and Israel would both invade Iran. That's not for the benefit of Iran.

The_Thing

Steve Gibson of 'Security Now' fame has done a really good analysis of Stuxnet.

A list of all his podcasts is available here - http://www.grc.com/securitynow.htm

And here's a direct link to a download (43 MB) of his Stuxnet podcast in *.mp3 format - Stuxnet podcast - it's the best in-depth discussion of it you're likely to find.

Einhard

dlofnep wrote: »

It is certainly a portion of the basis of discussion. I've already stated that I do not aspire to see Iran with nuclear weapons. However, I do support their right to create nuclear energy.

As do I. However, I don't believe that the Iranian programme is purely for medical purposes, as they claim. And neither do the IAEA. Or the EU. Or, for that matter, Russia and China.

Well it's quite clear that Iran is overly secretive of it's operations because of threats from the US and Israel. The less they know, the better it is for the security of Iran. Iran knows that at any given moment, the US and Israel could launch a joint-strike on Iranian nuclear facilities.

This is odd logic. The more they keep their plans secretive, the more paranoid Israel will become. Also, it's not just the US and Israel, but other Muslim nations in the region that are terrified of a nuclear capable Iran.

If Iran wanted to dispel all doubts, she would have an open and transparent process. The fact that she has gone down the labyrinthine route that she has, frustrated the IAEA, and basically tore up her obligations under the NPT, doesn't seem like the actions f a nation building centrifuges to service her hospitals.

Israel is the real worry for Iran. The US's roll in all of this is that it will offer media support for Israel in terms of a propaganda campaign, and will ensure that the UN security council gives Israel a free pass on it's own program.

The threat that Israel poses to Iran is a direct result of Iran's nuclear programme, which Israel suspects, rightly IMO, of being weaponised. The Israeli threat to Iran has grown very much from the programme, rather than the other way around, as you claim.

One must ask itself why Israel, a non-signatory of the NPT has received a free pass on it's nuclear program, given Israel's role in recent history with regards to conflict in the Middle-East.

One could ask the same of India and Pakistan...

Einhard

dlofnep wrote: »

A former IAEA Director said 2 months after that, that he did not think Iran was building nuclear weapons. I'm not saying either way. Iran could very well be building nuclear weapons. I'm humble enough to admit that I don't know. They may, or may not be. But it isn't the role of Israel to interfere with them, without talks at an international level.

I never claimed it was Israel's role. But neither is it Iran's role to fund terrorist groups against other states...

Also, I think I'll take the word of the IAEA itself rather than anonymous former employees.

Because Iran is not being forthright with it's disclosure of it's nuclear facilities. Russia would rather Iran was more open about it's projects. Iran wishes to remain secretive to protect itself against any pending attacks.

Ah now. The secrecy surrounding the programme is driving Israeli paranoia which has driven up the threat of attack! If the IAEA had full access, and could state that Iran had no discernible ambitions for weapons, then that threat would be reduced. How can you state that Iran is being secretive about its nuclear ambitions in order to protect itself, when the opposite is happening in effect. She has been slapped with sanctions, and faces attack from Israe...funny way to protect oneself!

dlofnep wrote: »

There may or may not be. You could very well be right. My point is that it isn't the role of Israel to interfere with Iran's internal matters. Let the international community resolve it.

But Iran won't let them. It's obstructed the IAEA, and spurned international obligations that she freely signed up for.

Let's say for the sake of argument that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. I don't really believe for one that if they did, they would actually use them. I believe it would be akin to military posturing, like the rest of the nuclear-armed states around the world. If Iran did seek them, it would be purely as a deterrent against attack, rather than to use them in a pre-emptive strike.

I don't think they'd use them either. However, one doesn't have to use nuclear weapons to benefit from their offensive potential...

dlofnep

Einhard wrote: »

The threat that Israel poses to Iran is a direct result of Iran's nuclear programme, which Israel suspects, rightly IMO, of being weaponised. The Israeli threat to Iran has grown very much from the programme, rather than the other way around, as you claim.

Israel's nuclear weapons program existed long before Iran's nuclear ambitions. Israel has attacked nuclear targets before - Operation Opera springs to mind.

Einhard wrote: »

One could ask the same of India and Pakistan...

One could, but that would be deflecting from the issue at hand. A cyber attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, suspected to be orchestrated by Israel and the US.

Mark200

dlofnep wrote: »

I'm not in favour of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons, just as a point of note. However, there is no credible evidence as I understand that they are pursuing nuclear weapons.

"“The international community so far has no information that Iran is building nuclear weapons,” -Dmitry Medvedev, January 2011

Until Iran are transparent about their programme, we can't know for sure. I'd rather not have the whole world wait in confusion until the day when Iran says "Surprise! We have nukes now!"

dlofnep wrote: »

The West can control Israel? Since when has Israel ever obeyed any of the West's requests? They routinely ignore UN SR condemnations. The west did nothing to stop it in arms dealings with an apartheid South African Government, providing it with nuclear weapons. They cannot stop Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian territory. They cannot stop it's illegal settlements.

If Israel wants to do something, it will do it - and won't give a toss about what the international community has to say about it. They are safe in knowing that the US will always be there to veto them out of trouble.

"Can" is different to "are". They have the power and ability to control Israel - they just aren't using it yet. We'll see what Israel says if the west (particularly America) threatens to stop bankrolling their defence forces.

Just because the west aren't controlling them doesn't mean they can't. It just means that they have decided not to do so.

Iran is just looking for anything to make their middle finger to the west even bigger. Whereas the west can cut off Israel's middle finger whenever they choose to.

SamHarris

Silly stuff. Havent they been technically at war since the embassy seige (an overt and clear "act of war") ? Typical third world whinning. Put up or shut up.

RichieC

Mark200 wrote: »

Of course Iran has the right to pursue nuclear technology. No country has ever denied that. But they don't have the right to pursue nuclear weapons. There's no reason to believe that they're not trying to create nuclear weapons. Over and over they have lied to the UN about their nuclear programme.

If the US (or any other country) can slow down or stop Iran's nuclear programme to ensure they don't get their hands on nukes, then I don't see why they shouldn't.

Of course it's a bit hypocritical with Israel also having Nukes, but the west can control Israel. If Iran got nukes, things would change big time.

Until Iran's nuclear programme is completely transparent, it should be slowed down by any peaceful means possible.




If Iran knew about linux then the virus would have been made for linux!

lol!

when was the last time Iran invaded a sovereign nation?

SamHarris

dlofnep wrote: »

Israel's nuclear weapons program existed long before Iran's nuclear ambitions. Israel has attacked nuclear targets before - Operation Opera springs to mind.



One could, but that would be deflecting from the issue at hand. A cyber attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, suspected to be orchestrated by Israel and the US.

You do realise the hypocrisy in your own opinions, that some must abide by international law but others do not? It is just your opinion is reveresed from the Israeli one. As is often the case, those who insist that having a consistent policy towards all nations should be central to US policy can't even eliminate inconsistencies in their own opinions.

SamHarris

RichieC wrote: »

lol!

when was the last time Iran invaded a sovereign nation?

If they had they know full well they would be quickly slapped down al la Saddam and Kuwait. Nothing to do with their peaceloving policies, everything to do with ability.

ejmaztec

SamHarris wrote: »

If they had they know full well they would be quickly slapped down al la Saddam and Kuwait. Nothing to do with their peaceloving policies, everything to do with ability.

It's less troublesome for Iran to sponsor from a distance, like a few other countries.

SamHarris

ejmaztec wrote: »

It's less troublesome for Iran to sponsor from a distance, like a few other countries.

Like nearly every other country - true.

But they do it according to their ability and sitatuition (surrounded by enemies of a different brand of Islam. It really has nothing to do with Iran's peaceloving ways that the revolutionary regime did not attack anyone overtly. This is what RichieC was implying, and what I took issue with.

Their rhetoric on many issues makes this clear enough to anyone looking at it objectivley.

old_aussie

dlofnep wrote: »

It's pretty clear to everyone that the US and Israel is involved.

What a load of crap, the US would not do such a thing.

Show me ya proof or it's just you throwing mud.

wandatowell

Iranian Military never heard of Nortons no???

twinytwo

dlofnep wrote: »

The West can control Israel? Since when has Israel ever obeyed any of the West's requests? They routinely ignore UN SR condemnations. The west did nothing to stop it in arms dealings with an apartheid South African Government, providing it with nuclear weapons. They cannot stop Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian territory. They cannot stop it's illegal settlements.

If Israel wants to do something, it will do it - and won't give a toss about what the international community has to say about it. They are safe in knowing that the US will always be there to veto them out of trouble.

91 when the iraqis were landing scuds in tel aviv... Your going to tell me the americans didnt have something to do with isreal not attacking iraq