Iran to be invaded by end of year?

davoxx

iran has said the worst thing it could ever have said: "oil for gold"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17203132

so what will be the reason for the war this time?

stuar

The reason for a war will be the same old same old boll0x, nuclear bombs, treating their people badly, a little freedom to be spread or whatever the chicken hawks think up.

I don't think Iran is invadable to be honest, what they couldn't do in Afghanistan or Iraq, they certainly wont do in Iran.
I think both Israel and the US know this so they'll go with the easier nuke option under some made up bullsh1t that they pull out of a hat.

It's a sin, punishable by death, genocide and destruction to be so brazen as sell oil if it's not sold in US dollars, thats just the way it is, but a ground invasion of Iran would be a death warrant to the invader, although I would prefer to live in a world of love, harmony and peace, I don't and when the US/Israel get a licking I'll celebrate it.

Although the real perpetrator's won't see justice, the joesoap US/Israeli soldier will be the fallen hero's at home and countless Iranians will simply be collateral damage, the war machine must push on regardless.

I expect a war sometime this year, but it wont be like any before, it will be a very bad experience for all involved, well all wars are really but I see this one as much worse in destruction, suffering and down right destruction.

enfant terrible

davoxx wrote: »

iran has said the worst thing it could ever have said: "oil for gold"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17203132

so what will be the reason for the war this time?

The US won't invade, they could destroy Iran if they wanted without putting a boot on the ground but they won't invade.

bpb101

well iran are right on this one , this is not about oil or gold
iran said we want nuclear power and the usa said no and somehow iranian nuclar scientist got assassinated.
They cant sell in us dollar they have to sell another way.

iran are treating to close off a stretch of water that a larger precent of oil comes throught , if closed by iran it would have to be manually open by the yanks

long story short , america will invade , i wouldnt be supprised if the eu said we must fight as well because germany own us . and the end result iran wins

jackiebaron

enfant terrible wrote: »

The US won't invade, they could destroy Iran if they wanted without putting a boot on the ground but they won't invade.

This isn't about the destruction of Iran, it's about controlling Iran's oil and cutting off Iranian oil and gas supplies to China. In order to do that the US has to OCCUPY Iran hence they HAVE to invade.

davoxx

jackiebaron wrote: »

This isn't about the destruction of Iran, it's about controlling Iran's oil and cutting off Iranian oil and gas supplies to China. In order to do that the US has to OCCUPY Iran hence they HAVE to invade.

i agree, and the dangerous precedent of accepting gold for oil could make the usa dollar worthless.

kryogen

No, this is an election year, will be no new conflicts till next year

seanmacc

kryogen wrote: »

No, this is an election year, will be no new conflicts till next year

That depends. In the state of national emergency in the US the President can apply Executive Directive 51 which puts the country under the control of the President, Department of Homeland Security and Fema until the emergency is over. It also doesn't specify who can declare the emergency over. So theoretically if the Obama administration wanted to be particularly evil they need not worry about an election.

kryogen

seanmacc wrote: »

That depends. In the state of national emergency in the US the President can apply Executive Directive 51 which puts the country under the control of the President, Department of Homeland Security and Fema until the emergency is over. It also doesn't specify who can declare the emergency over. So theoretically if the Obama administration wanted to be particularly evil they need not worry about an election.

But he is in no danger of not getting re elected so no need to do anything like that.

old_aussie

Iran will be invaded as long as the religious loonies running the country deny democracy to the Iranian people.

''Legitimacy to rule comes from God, and not from the people,'' the Shiite cleric and parliamentary candidate Mahmoud Nabavian told an audience of mainly conservative students during a recent debate. ''A democracy does not befit our country, but a theocracy does … the people are there to help those chosen by God.''

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/more-power-to-clerics-as-iran-goes-to-the-polls-20120302-1u894.html#ixzz1o1Ktvedw

These loonies really believe that they have been chosen by God to rule Iran. WTF

These same loonies will gladly sacrifice Iran and their own lives by doing jihad as this (they believe) will get them some virgins and a ticket to heaven.

Bring on freedom for the people of Iran.

Duiske

old_aussie wrote: »

Iran will be invaded as long as the religious loonies running the country deny democracy to the Iranian people.

''Legitimacy to rule comes from God, and not from the people,'' the Shiite cleric and parliamentary candidate Mahmoud Nabavian told an audience of mainly conservative students during a recent debate. ''A democracy does not befit our country, but a theocracy does … the people are there to help those chosen by God.''

Iranian's are being denied democracy ? Was I dreaming that elections were held yesterday in Iran ? And before you call "fraud and vote rigging" early results show Ahmadinejad's party are way down and his sister has already lost her seat. If he's rigging the election he's doing a pretty crap job.

These loonies really believe that they have been chosen by God to rule Iran. WTF

Again, why the Elections so ? And if they are so adament that only God has the right to choose who rules Iran, why would they allow non-muslims to stand for election. Under Iranian law, seats are reserved in the parliament for candidates of Jewish and Christian faith.

These same loonies will gladly sacrifice Iran and their own lives by doing jihad as this (they believe) will get them some virgins and a ticket to heaven.

What does "doing Jihad" mean ? Do you mean Jihad as defined in the Islamic faith, or Jihad as defined by the western media ?

Bring on freedom for the people of Iran.

Just lol. Yes, lets free the Iranians from their constitutional rights to shelter, food and healthcare. Lets free every Iranian, be they Muslim, Christian or Jew, man, women or child, of their monthly share of the countrys oil profits. Lets destroy their economy first, and then rain cruise missiles down on them. I'm sure they will be queueing up to thank you for wishing America's idea of "Freedom" on them.

Jonny7

Duiske wrote: »

Iranian's are being denied democracy ? Was I dreaming that elections were held yesterday in Iran ? And before you call "fraud and vote rigging" early results show Ahmadinejad's party are way down and his sister has already lost her seat. If he's rigging the election he's doing a pretty crap job.

The opposition are under house arrest.

Again, why the Elections so ? And if they are so adament that only God has the right to choose who rules Iran, why would they allow non-muslims to stand for election. Under Iranian law, seats are reserved in the parliament for candidates of Jewish and Christian faith.

Its a theocracy, the Supreme Leader can overrule the president.

Just lol. Yes, lets free the Iranians from their constitutional rights to shelter, food and healthcare. Lets free every Iranian, be they Muslim, Christian or Jew, man, women or child, of their monthly share of the countrys oil profits. Lets destroy their economy first, and then rain cruise missiles down on them. I'm sure they will be queueing up to thank you for wishing America's idea of "Freedom" on them.

It's been repeated frequently that no one wants to "invade" Iran.

Penn

The video which started this arguing was posted by a re-reg, and the video was not relevant to this discussion. As such, the whole argument which I've deleted stemmed from something which wasn't relevant in the first place.

Therefore, let me make this perfectly clear:
DO NOT accuse anyone of racism/anti-semitism. Report it and let a mod deal with it.
DO NOT ask people to take back their comments. Report it and let a mod deal with it.
If there has been no mod action in a reasonable amount of time, either report it again or PM a mod.

davoxx

obama saying no hesitation in using force:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17251279

the window to invasion is closing, and it seems like obama is stalling for time before starting the war.

weisses

davoxx wrote: »

obama saying no hesitation in using force:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17251279

the window to invasion is closing, and it seems like obama is stalling for time before starting the war.

Yeah the poor man had to deal with a powerful lobby group that looks after Israeli interest (and everyone living there) over the weekend and Netanyahu being around doesn't help either ... Makes you wander who's running the states :rolleyes:

Penn

weisses wrote: »

Yeah the poor man had to deal with a powerful Jewish lobby group over the weekend and Netanyahu being around doesn't help either ... Makes you wander who's running the states :rolleyes:

They were an Israeli lobby group, not a Jewish lobby group. I suggest you word your posts more carefully in the future.

weisses

Penn wrote: »

They were an Israeli lobby group, not a Jewish lobby group. I suggest you word your posts more carefully in the future.

Ahhh see it now ..sorry for that .... not intended to be antisemitic in any way

I'll refrase

jackiebaron

old_aussie wrote: »

Iran will be invaded as long as the religious loonies running the country deny democracy to the Iranian people.

''Legitimacy to rule comes from God, and not from the people,'' the Shiite cleric and parliamentary candidate Mahmoud Nabavian told an audience of mainly conservative students during a recent debate. ''A democracy does not befit our country, but a theocracy does … the people are there to help those chosen by God.''

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/more-power-to-clerics-as-iran-goes-to-the-polls-20120302-1u894.html#ixzz1o1Ktvedw

These loonies really believe that they have been chosen by God to rule Iran. WTF

These same loonies will gladly sacrifice Iran and their own lives by doing jihad as this (they believe) will get them some virgins and a ticket to heaven.

Bring on freedom for the people of Iran.

Funny how the US is adamant to "bring democracy" to the rest of the world yet are doing their level best to destroy it at home. Tell us all how "democratic" Iraq is with that Al-Maliki in power?

Places like Iraq need to have secular governments in order to stop the population (different sectarian groupings) from killing each other. Iraq was cobbled together by European power and in their galactic stupidity they lumped sworn enemies together into the same nation state. Saddam kept them from each other's throats.

Democracy, to the US, means the total destruction of a country and the installation of a puppet dictator. Assad had elections in Syria, a vote for a new constitution that set term limits on future presidents and abolished the monopoly on power that the Ba'ath Party held. Voter turnout was just under 60% (matching voter turnout for Obama in 2008) and the constitution was approved by 89%. Of course the US immediately cried foul because Assad outmaneuvred them by actually holding internationally ratified elections. But that's not what the US wants. They don't give a toss about democracy or the Syrian, Libyan, Iranian people or anyone else for that matter. They just want to control these countries. Take a look at their "allies" in the region...unelected oil monarchies like Saudi and Qatar and autocratic thugocracies like Bahrain and Egypt. When Bahraini police units accompanied by Saudi armour mowed down Bahraini protesters, Washington didn't say a word.

So please, don't insult our intelligence with your fake concern about the Iranian people.

Only the colossally stupid would believe the hypocrisy and lies vomiting forth from the Washington megaphone.

davoxx

apparently having “ultra-high performance concrete” (UHPC) and making facilities earthquake proof means you are making nukes, sorry (they changed the article) that you probably are making nukes ... http://www.economist.com/node/21548918

this shows just how technologically 'backwards' the people of iran are compared to the how 'forward' the educated western citizens are who swallow the scaremongering ... i like irony :pac:

Jonny7

jackiebaron wrote: »

Assad had elections in Syria, a vote for a new constitution that set term limits on future presidents and abolished the monopoly on power that the Ba'ath Party held.

You are quoting figures from state television (not something I ever thought conspiracy theorists would do) The vote is pretty much stalling tactic and universally condemned as a sham whilst the country is on the brink of a civil war.

Conveniently placed within the constitution is the possibility that Assad can rule for the next 14 years - something that is pretty much guaranteed if he crushes this uprising.

As soon as his leadership was threatened Assad pulled the emergency law that had been in place for almost 50 years.

As typical with the wider region and recent events - anything to stay in power.

In Iran, the opposition can't run, they've basically been dismantled and crushed. It would be akin to the Republicans dismantling the Democrat party in the States and then offering
a choice between supreme leader Santorum or Rick Perry. Oh and rig the elections anyway.

jackiebaron

Jonny7 wrote: »

You are quoting figures from state television (not something I ever thought conspiracy theorists would do) The vote is pretty much stalling tactic and universally condemned as a sham whilst the country is on the brink of a civil war.

Conveniently placed within the constitution is the possibility that Assad can rule for the next 14 years - something that is pretty much guaranteed if he crushes this uprising.

As soon as his leadership was threatened Assad pulled the emergency law that had been in place for almost 50 years.

As typical with the wider region and recent events - anything to stay in power.

In Iran, the opposition can't run, they've basically been dismantled and crushed. It would be akin to the Republicans dismantling the Democrat party in the States and then offering
a choice between supreme leader Santorum or Rick Perry. Oh and rig the elections anyway.

Maybe Assad allows himself and his family to be in power forever. So what? What business is that of your's or Washington's?
You haven't addressed anything else I've said, you just cherrypicked one point and tried to smear it with your time-honoured blurb about the elections being a scam. You childishly call the Democratic Party the Democrat Party. Does that give you some kind of a little giggle?
If electoral integrity is so high on your list of priorities then what do you have to say about the Vienna team monitoring the 2004 US elections and quitting the country before counting polls closed calling it a farce and corrupt hoax of monumental proportions? Surely you must have some opinion on this.

And you still haven't explained why you are so concerned about the quality of Syria's elections yet have nothing to say about Saudi's total lack of voting. You haven't explained why you are outraged at the Assad regime crushing an armed uprising yet are defeningly silent about the Bahraini crackdown on unarmed protesters.

Libya is now in chaos and the charming rebels that you cheered on are merrily torturing black migrant workers. And while you're at it let us know what you think about these NTC rebels that your beloved Nato helped to power desecrating graves in broad daylight.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2109923/Libya-graves-Disturbing-attacks-Commonwealth-War-Graves-Benghazi.html

You've gotten it wrong on Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya. You've got it all wrong on Syria and Iran. You've it wrong EVERYWHERE pal. You just can't admit it.

Jonny7

jackiebaron wrote: »

You childishly call the Democratic Party the Democrat Party. Does that give you some kind of a little giggle?

I don't get this part.

If electoral integrity is so high on your list of priorities then what do you have to say about the Vienna team monitoring the 2004 US elections and quitting the country before counting polls closed calling it a farce and corrupt hoax of monumental proportions? Surely you must have some opinion on this.

Well I had reservations about the vote in 2000, with entire sections of black voters allegedly struck off the list because of one criminal association, problems with voting machines, etc. Bit of a random point though.

And you still haven't explained why you are so concerned about the quality of Syria's elections yet have nothing to say about Saudi's total lack of voting.

I am very concerned about the Syrians themselves. Same with other countries around the world, North Korea, Congo, Somalia, etc. I don't think we can even comprehend the situation these people find themselves in.

You haven't explained why you are outraged at the Assad regime crushing an armed uprising yet are defeningly silent about the Bahraini crackdown on unarmed protesters.

The scale of the situation is much more severe in Syria right now.

Libya is now in chaos and the charming rebels that you cheered on are merrily torturing black migrant workers. And while you're at it let us know what you think about these NTC rebels that your beloved Nato helped to power desecrating graves in broad daylight.

Yup there's a lot of revenge and reprisals, but no one expects the country to turn into Sweden overnight. They have a chance now as opposed to no chance before. You of all people should be the last to support state control, media control, oppression, totalitarianism, and absence of elections.

You've gotten it wrong on Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya. You've got it all wrong on Syria and Iran. You've it wrong EVERYWHERE pal. You just can't admit it.

?? as I said I marched against war in Iraq and was very much opposed to military action in Afghanistan.

kryogen

The whole situation is a joke. The mere fact that it is so widely accepted that the US can go around invading and interfering in other independent states/nations business shows that there is something seriously wrong.

They have no right, no more then the Iranian government has any right to tell Ireland what to do.

Be like Nutella

Latest comments by IAEA

http://www.nti.rsvp1.com/gsn/article/serious-concerns-persist-over-possible-iranian-nuclear-arms-efforts-amano/?mgh=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nti.org&mgf=1

Jaafa

Be like Nutella wrote: »

Latest comments by IAEA

http://www.nti.rsvp1.com/gsn/article/serious-concerns-persist-over-possible-iranian-nuclear-arms-efforts-amano/?mgh=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nti.org&mgf=1

Firstly nothing Amano has to say should be taken seriously as he has already declared himself to be firmly on the side of the US in this matter.

Secondly Iran has just announced it will allow inspectors into Parchin.

Be like Nutella

Jaafa wrote: »

Be like Nutella wrote: »

Latest comments by IAEA

http://www.nti.rsvp1.com/gsn/article/serious-concerns-persist-over-possible-iranian-nuclear-arms-efforts-amano/?mgh=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nti.org&mgf=1

Firstly nothing Amano has to say should be taken seriously as he has already declared himself to be firmly on the side of the US in this matter.

Secondly Iran has just announced it will allow inspectors into Parchin.

Very good hope that calms things down a bit. They won't find any traces of nuclear material there... but I'm sure the press will produce lovely diagrams of the explosion chamber there and run comments such as 'possible nuclear device test chamber found by inspectors'

Be like Nutella

http://www.nti.rsvp1.com/gsn/article/israel-us-seen-boosting-unity-iranian-nuclear-threat/?mgh=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nti.org&mgf=1

What annoys me are the quotes from IAEA guys saying that Parchin is kind of suspicious... it could have a military aspect to it sort of thing... IT'S A FUKING MILITARY EXPLOSIVES FACTORY AND TEST SITE... of course it's got a military angle... the chamber is clearly an explosion testing chamber... whether its was built for the 'research into diamond production' thing or for testing a possible nuclear detonator nobody knows... and it's very unlikely a visit by the IAEA guys will clarify that...otherwise they wouldn't let them near the place ever but hey they asked to go there and now they're allowed so... I wonder what's going to be the next request... this thing could get 'Iraq style' silly very quickly. The remaining issue, the next hurdle is the big one - stopping the enrichment. Iran will not want to do this obviously, but they really won't want to halt enrichment because the way this thing is going it could be years before they get going again and that is not a small issue to them, that would be a major issue even in the 'Iran that isn't really after the bomb model'. It's bullsh1t, this approach of let's agree on the outcome before we even sit down crap.

verifiably stop their long range missile efforts,
agree on a schedule of IAEA visits,
and an enrichment quantity verification method,
and get Iran to agree to find a way to ship in its short half life medical isotopes from Russia or France which would mean they have no need to enrich to 20% any more.

When it comes down to it there's no way to absolutely know whether a country is going for the bomb or not as in you can't know for certain IF a country has some underground centerfuge operation going on but you CAN know the amount of low enriched Uranium that's coming out of their reactors at least during this early stage of mass enrichment and you CAN know if they're testing a medium or long range delivery system and you CAN know if they're preparing a test site and there's many years to work all this out seeing as everyone says Iran is at least 5-8 years away from reaching a 'working deliverable nuke'. I wonder if the media focused more on these kind of practical realities would people be so interested in reading the articles or watching the segments (and ads) if they knew that under no circumstances will Iran have the ability to launch a working nuclear weapon at anyone within the next 5 years... unless you're one of those that think Iran will 1. build a bomb ASAP 2. Put it in a leather suitcase and 3. Give it to a radical islamic group starting with 'al' along with a one way ticket to NYC and if so then there's nothing anyone can say to shut you up.

Jonny7

Be like Nutella wrote: »

http://www.nti.rsvp1.com/gsn/article/israel-us-seen-boosting-unity-iranian-nuclear-threat/?mgh=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nti.org&mgf=1

What annoys me are the quotes from IAEA guys saying that Parchin is kind of suspicious... it could have a military aspect to it sort of thing... IT'S A FUKING MILITARY EXPLOSIVES FACTORY AND TEST SITE... of course it's got a military angle... the chamber is clearly an explosion testing chamber... whether its was built for the 'research into diamond production' thing or for testing a possible nuclear detonator nobody knows... and it's very unlikely a visit by the IAEA guys will clarify that...otherwise they wouldn't let them near the place ever but hey they asked to go there and now they're allowed so... I wonder what's going to be the next request... this thing could get 'Iraq style' silly very quickly. The remaining issue, the next hurdle is the big one - stopping the enrichment. Iran will not want to do this obviously, but they really won't want to halt enrichment because the way this thing is going it could be years before they get going again and that is not a small issue to them, that would be a major issue even in the 'Iran that isn't really after the bomb model'. It's bullsh1t, this approach of let's agree on the outcome before we even sit down crap.

verifiably stop their long range missile efforts,
agree on a schedule of IAEA visits,
and an enrichment quantity verification method,
and get Iran to agree to find a way to ship in its short half life medical isotopes from Russia or France which would mean they have no need to enrich to 20% any more.

When it comes down to it there's no way to absolutely know whether a country is going for the bomb or not as in you can't know for certain IF a country has some underground centerfuge operation going on but you CAN know the amount of low enriched Uranium that's coming out of their reactors at least during this early stage of mass enrichment and you CAN know if they're testing a medium or long range delivery system and you CAN know if they're preparing a test site and there's many years to work all this out seeing as everyone says Iran is at least 5-8 years away from reaching a 'working deliverable nuke'.

As it stands at the moment, they are closer than 5 or 8 years - enrichment-wise they could produce bomb grade material in 6 months to a year. The tech (detonators, reflectors, etc) is the unknown factor.

I wonder if the media focused more on these kind of practical realities would people be so interested in reading the articles or watching the segments (and ads) if they knew that under no circumstances will Iran have the ability to launch a working nuclear weapon at anyone within the next 5 years... unless you're one of those that think Iran will 1. build a bomb ASAP 2. Put it in a leather suitcase and 3. Give it to a radical islamic group starting with 'al' along with a one way ticket to NYC and if so then there's nothing anyone can say to shut you up.

Maybe tabloids, rags and Fox produce those kind of alarmist stories.

weisses

Jonny7 wrote: »

Maybe tabloids, rags and Fox produce those kind of alarmist stories.

How convenient when you have a government looking for any excuse to invade

Those outlets are used to soften or anger public opinion imo

I was always wandering what kind of spin the people who wants to attack Iran would give to justify their actions. In other words ... Who's gonna be the next Colin Powell ...maybe a poll would be nice on this one

davoxx

weisses wrote: »

I was always wandering what kind of spin the people who wants to attack Iran would give to justify their actions. In other words ... Who's gonna be the next Colin Powell ...maybe a poll would be nice on this one

i would seriously like a poll on this, it would be fun to see


also funny: http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/iran%27s-nuclear-facilities-inspected-by-alex-james-201203074980/

Be like Nutella

This a segment of a piece by Stratfor today.


".....Each actor is actively managing perceptions to serve their interests on the matter, and those perceptions don’t always line up with reality.
Israel

The narrative Israel seeks to project is of a country that feels increasingly existentially threatened, one barely able to keep itself from carrying out an airstrike on Iran’s nuclear reactors. This, of course, is the perception Israel has sought to create at varying levels of intensity during much of the past several years. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak was in Washington this week, ahead of a planned visit by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is scheduled to arrive March 5. A leak published Wednesday in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz claimed that Netanyahu planned to demand in a meeting with U.S. President Barack Obama that he get on board with an Israeli-approved series of red lines on Iran. Were Tehran to cross them, Netanyahu’s demand allegedly went, the United States would publicly agree to work with Israel on a strike against Iranian nuclear facilities.
Someone from the Netanyahu government likely issued the leak to Haaretz to help solidify the perception that Israel desperately wants to take action against Iran. The reality -- as U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey pointed out in late February -- is that the Israeli military lacks the capability to conduct a successful operation on its own. Israel could always launch the first strike, but it would be betting that the United States would come to its defense and finish the job, especially if Iran resorted to mining the Strait of Hormuz. Seeing how Israel cannot afford to lose American support, this is a big bet. Israel cannot miscalculate on this assumption, and this significantly constrains its ability to act.
The United States

The United States has little appetite for a war with Iran right now, for a variety of reasons. For one, the specter of a conflict in the Persian Gulf sending crude prices skyrocketing is unappealing, especially as Obama campaigns for re-election. Washington, however, also has a strategic interest in stemming the spread of Iranian power. It will therefore keep its military options on the table, while remaining open to the prospect of negotiations with Tehran as a means to keep tensions from escalating.
Washington is seeking to spread the perception that a war with Iran right now is simply not worth the cost. Its publicly stated intelligence assessments do not put Tehran close to obtaining a deliverable nuclear device with which it can threaten its neighbors, sapping the sense of urgency for any action. The United States has recently sought to dampen public support for military action by creating the expectation that such a move would increase the risk for Iranian retaliation elsewhere on the globe. The day after Haaretz published the report on Netanyahu’s planned ultimatum to Obama, a report in The New York Times -- a publication known to be a favored target for leaks from the current administration -- stated that participating in a strike on Iran would generate retaliatory actions abroad that would likely target U.S. citizens.
More than anything, however, Washington is wary of the war's impact on the price of oil. That edginess plays directly into Iran’s hands when considering the perception Tehran wants to create.
Iran

Iran shares Washington's primary goal: to popularize the notion that attacking Iran isn’t worth the cost. Iran uses the threat of retaliation as a foreign policy strategy unto itself, articulated by Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and clarified in recent comments made by IRGC Commander Mohammed Ali Aziz Jaafari. Jaafari told state media that Iran had “entered a new phase and now it is our threats which are affecting the enemy.”
Iran’s biggest leverage to deter an attack is its ability to impact the price of oil on global markets. Its most obvious card is the Strait of Hormuz. Merely threatening to mine the Strait has in the past been enough to dominate world headlines. Iran is extremely reluctant to use this card, of course, because once played, it cannot be played again -- it is Iran's so-called “nuclear option.”
Iran of course can do more than issue threats. Its formidable land army can project power beyond its borders; it has covert capabilities in eastern Arabia, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and -- though proven rather ineffective in recent instances -- in Asia as well. But its main deterrent is Tehran's ability to impact the price of oil in its own backyard, something that Thursday’s incident in Saudi Arabia proved effectively. "
________________________________________________

http://www.stratfor.com/geopolitical-diary/perceptions-game-israel-iran-and-us?utm_source=freelist-f&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20120307&utm_term=engage3&utm_content=link6&elq=0ec1c854e6bc4e50aa8c8de8eae1fc7a

Be like Nutella

Quote from Global Security Newswire

"The five permanent U.N. Security Council members and Germany could in a planned meeting urge Iran to relinquish its stockpile of 20 percent-enriched uranium and end production of the material, reducing the speed at which the Middle Eastern nation could generate fuel for a nuclear weapon, informed Western government personnel said in remarks reported by the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday (see GSN, March 6).
In exchange, the Persian Gulf regional power would receive medical reactor fuel and a pause to any movements toward new U.N. penalties while negotiations take place on further steps. "

http://www.nti.rsvp1.com/gsn/article/powers-could-push-revive-iranian-uranium-swap-plan/?mgh=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nti.org&mgf=1
____________________________________________________________

Fingers crossed....
If, they let the IAEA guys into Parchin
and that gets an all clear as merely an anomaly within the brackets of explosive research on a military site
PLUS IF the above deal concept is realised (and the subsequent end of major sanctions) and Israel and the US can no longer talk about the existence of too much 20% enriched Uranium at the Tehran research reactor (incidentally which the US organised for Iran years ago)
then - Israel (or the US for that matter) will have obviously feeble rationale for striking Iran.
This whole complex game is going to take some major turns in the next days and weeks..

If it all works itself out accordingly Iran will have proven it has major influence in the region and China and Russia will have Iran in their back pocket as far as oil contracts and nuclear technology contracts are concerned and Obama will be hailed as a peacemaker... and probably rightfully so (notwithstanding his continued merciless Drone war in Waziristan).

On the other hand, unfortunately any momentum in the right direction may actually force Israel's hand as they may believe their net security status won't benefit 'enough' even if the rest of the world are happy to make deals... so fingers crossed heads remain cool. I'm 32 and this is easily the riskiest moment in global order I've witnessed.

Border-Rat

Invaded by who? 80 million population. Even if someone had the economy and troops to do that, then what? The occupation would last about a week.

old_aussie

jackiebaron wrote: »

So please, don't insult our intelligence with your fake concern about the Iranian people.

Only the colossally stupid would believe the hypocrisy and lies vomiting forth from the Washington megaphone.

Could you kindly point out wher I mentioned anything about the US.

"Please don't insult our intelligence"....I'll leave that up to yourself.

geeman

Can't imagine Obama starting war with Iran in election year...

War with Iran is still years away...like 3-4 if it actually does go down.