Nuclear Scientist in Iran? You won't live too long!

wes · 11-01-2012 01:51PM

Iphonehelp wrote: »

Yeah its not like Iran has ever killed thousands of US Marines and Israeli soldiers through proxy terrorist organizations.... :rolleyes:

Interesting point, if it wasn't fiction......

Temptamperu · 11-01-2012 01:51PM

Iphonehelp wrote: »

Yeah its not like Iran has ever killed thousands of US Marines and Israeli soldiers through proxy terrorist organizations.... :rolleyes:

Yeah and both America and Isreal never lifted a fingr or hurt anyone :rolleyes:

KerranJast · 11-01-2012 02:08PM

wes wrote: »

Interesting point, if it wasn't fiction......

It's well established that Iran or more correctly the Revolutionary Guards have been supporting Shia factions in Iraq in an attempt to destabilise the country. That includes supplying insurgents with components for IEDs.

Even Russia has distanced itself at times from Iran's actions. Remember the Russian rockets that were launched at Israel from Lebanon in 2010? Those were sold to Iran by the Russians and *somehow* (magic perhaps :rolleyes:) found their way into Lebanon.

Unavailable for Comment · 11-01-2012 02:11PM

Temptamperu wrote: »

Dresden was only 25,000 civillians the firestorms in hamburg killed 50k, the immediate effects in hiroshima was 70k rising to 166k (some say 200,000) with 80K in nagisaki.

I cant believe i said only 25,000

Ah no, I didn't mean the worst because of numbers slain. I meant because it was a targeted attack on civilians. Military and major infrastructural facilities were ignored to better concentrate on the city centre which was known to be crowded with upwards of 500,000 refugees.

Also this is in the final months of the war as a flood of German civilians pour west so obviously casualty figures cannot be confirmed especially after a firestorm hot enough to melt steel that creates a 15 square kilometre moonscape were the city centre was.

Hamburg, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were more legitimate raids in that at least military targets were destroyed and certainly in Japan, civilians were warned by leaflet drop and sustained radio broadcast to abandon the cities in advance.

wes · 11-01-2012 02:33PM

KerranJast wrote: »

It's well established that Iran or more correctly the Revolutionary Guards have been supporting Shia factions in Iraq in an attempt to destabilise the country. That includes supplying insurgents with components for IEDs.

No, it was lie made up by the US, who also lied about why they went into Iraq. So, if by well established you mean, another piece of American fiction, then your spot on.

Also, if what say was even true, I think it rather hard to prove that Iran was responsible for 1000's of US deaths, so either way what you said was fiction.

KerranJast wrote: »

Even Russia has distanced itself at times from Iran's actions. Remember the Russian rockets that were launched at Israel from Lebanon in 2010? Those were sold to Iran by the Russians and *somehow* (magic perhaps :rolleyes:) found their way into Lebanon.

They were launched by Hezbollah, and if Iran is responsible for that, then the US is responsible for all attacks by people they sell weapons to as well, and I can tell you right now thats a big list, for example the Egyptian military who murdered innocent protesters, the same in Bahrain and so on. So if we are to blame Iran, then only fair to blame the other side.

Also, 1000's of Israeli soldiers were not killed in 2010 btw, so what you said is still fiction.

Iphonehelp · 11-01-2012 02:56PM

wes wrote: »

Interesting point, if it wasn't fiction......

Really? I must have imagined Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad. I must have also imagined the 1983 Beirut Barrack bombings, US embassy bombing in Beirut, the bombings in Argentina, Khobar towers. You are VERY naive in thinking Iran has no involvement in terorrism. I suggest you actually read up so you know what your talking about.

Once again you're very naive to think the civilians are in control in Pakistan. Everyone knows the military and the ISI are. The ISI have assasinated Pakistani prime ministers who dont tow the party line. The ISI wanted Musharaaf gone because he was becoming too unpopular, not because they arent actually in control.

The only way to describe your posts is horribly misinformed and incredibly naive. Although I havent looked through ALL of your posts I highly suspect your someone who is incredibly biased and likely a pro-palestinian (I am as well by the way) or Anti-American zealot. I look at things from an unbiased POV. I dont see America as the enemy or the savior. Similarly I condemn Israel probably more than I sympathize with them but all of your posts so far have been so misguided and biased.

Iphonehelp · 11-01-2012 02:57PM

Temptamperu wrote: »

Yeah and both America and Isreal never lifted a fingr or hurt anyone :rolleyes:

...I was responding to a post that said America and Israel also do that. I am well aware they do. You might want to actually read the thread before jumping in with a stupid comment.

11-01-2012 02:59PM

Iphonehelp wrote: »

Would you like to see America weakened?

If you want to live in a world where the major super power is China or Russia then be my guest. But it wont be pretty.

China and India will be the superpowers anyway.. And why won't it be pretty? Cause the west will be at the receiving end of the bullying?

Iphonehelp · 11-01-2012 03:04PM

wes wrote: »

They were launched by Hezbollah, and if Iran is responsible for that, then the US is responsible for all attacks by people they sell weapons to as well, and I can tell you right now thats a big list, for example the Egyptian military who murdered innocent protesters, the same in Bahrain and so on. So if we are to blame Iran, then only fair to blame the other side.

Also, 1000's of Israeli soldiers were not killed in 2010 btw, so what you said is still fiction.

Oh right. But the IRGC also train Hezbollah. So if thats the case then you must not believe that America were in anyway responsible for Guatamala, Nicaragua, Chile, El Salvador? Because otherwise you'd be a hypocrite.

So tell me if Iran arent responsible for training and supplying Hezbollah then are America responsible for what happened in Nicaragua, Chile, El Salvador and Guatamala?

Chuck Stone · 11-01-2012 03:11PM

You reply to a perfectly reasonable post by me with this...

Auvers wrote: »

complete and utter manure

... and yet you criticize this post..

Deleted User wrote: »

Such shíte. :rolleyes:

... with this..

Auvers wrote: »

that's some retort, something like a 12yr old would respond with

.. hypocrite much?

KerranJast · 11-01-2012 03:11PM

wes wrote: »

No, it was lie made up by the US, who also lied about why they went into Iraq. So, if by well established you mean, another piece of American fiction, then your spot on.
Also, 1000's of Israeli soldiers were not killed in 2010 btw, so what you said is still fiction.

Also confirmed by investigative journalists in the region and by the Iraqi Government but we won't let that interrupt your line. Also if you're going to quote me do it accurately. I never said anything about 1000s of Israeli casualties.

Iphonehelp wrote: »

So tell me if Iran arent responsible for training and supplying Hezbollah then are America responsible for what happened in Nicaragua, Chile, El Salvador and Guatamala?

It's never been disputed to my knowledge.

Sonics2k · 11-01-2012 03:12PM

Auvers wrote: »

I ain't defending American foreign policy, but keeping Iran nuclear free with this policy I agree completely

I trust Iran with Nuclear Missiles as much as I trust America with them, which isn't that much.

Let's not forget, to date, the U.S. is the only country to have used them. Twice!

wes · 11-01-2012 03:13PM

Iphonehelp wrote: »

Really? I must have imagined Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad. I must have also imagined the 1983 Beirut Barrack bombings, US embassy bombing in Beirut, the bombings in Argentina, Khobar towers. You are VERY naive in thinking Iran has no involvement in terorrism. I suggest you actually read up so you know what your talking about.

So Iran were directly responsible for all of those acts of terrorism, and are apparently in full control of both Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, and they are not themselves indepedent actors. Sorry, but trying to blame Iran on anything and everything is naive, and the US pull the same crap against Iraq in regard to 9/11 and guess what it was a lie.

Iphonehelp wrote: »

Once again you're very naive to think the civilians are in control in Pakistan. Everyone knows the military and the ISI are.

Just, because you claim everyone know the ISI and military are in control, doesn't make it so.

Iphonehelp wrote: »

The ISI have assasinated Pakistani prime ministers who dont tow the party line. The ISI wanted Musharaaf gone because he was becoming too unpopular, not because they arent actually in control.

The ISI killing a Prime Minister in the past, doesn't mean there in control today.......

Iphonehelp wrote: »

The only way to describe your posts is horribly misinformed and incredibly naive.

Oh please, you insist that Iran killed 1000s or US marines in Iraq, and 1000s of Isarel soliders, when they did not such thing, and then claim that the military is still in power in Pakistan, on the basis that everyone knows. Sorry, but you making stuff up, and are engaging in hyperbole, blaming Iran on and anything and everything that you can. I am not being naive not trusting someone engaging in fiction and hyperbole on a message board.

Iphonehelp wrote: »

Although I havent looked through ALL of your posts I highly suspect your someone who is incredibly biased and likely a pro-palestinian (I am as well by the way) or Anti-American zealot.

Oh please, pointing out that the US lies through its teeth is hardly being Anti-American, due to fact that they lie through there teeth and have done so repeatedly.

Iphonehelp wrote: »

I look at things from an unbiased POV. I dont see America as the enemy or the savior. Similarly I condemn Israel probably more than I sympathize with them but all of your posts so far have been so misguided and biased.

Oh please, everyone has a bias, and to deny it is silly imho.

KerranJast · 11-01-2012 03:14PM

Sonics2k wrote: »

I trust Iran with Nuclear Missiles as much as I trust America with them, which isn't that much.

Let's not forget, to date, the U.S. is the only country to have used them. Twice!

The advantage of having developed them first. Any other country in a similar situation would have acted in the same fashion.

There's no way Iran are stupid enough to nuke anyone so I trust them in that regard. I don't trust large factions within Iran with not passing nuclear material to terrorists groups however.

wes · 11-01-2012 03:18PM

KerranJast wrote: »

Also confirmed by investigative journalists in the region and by the Iraqi Government but we won't let that interrupt your line.

The same US media that reported on Iraqi WMDs, and the a puppet regime that was dependant on the US for its existence. Sorry, but I don't quite believe it. Having said that, I may very well be wrong in that regard. Nonetheless, what about all the other groups who killed US marines etc, its rather ridiculous to soley blame Iran, which is what the post I replied to basically did, when they said 1000s of deaths. Which is cleary fiction, as the Al Qaeda linked groups were also engaged in attacks.

KerranJast wrote: »

Also if you're going to quote me do it accurately. I never said anything about 1000s of Israeli casualties.

The post I replied to said that, and then you replied to me, so it wasn't you that said 1000's of Israeli and US deaths, it was the post I replied to, which is clearly fiction. If your going to reply to someone replying to someone else, than you can hardly ignored what I replied to in the first place, and perhaps you should have distanced yourself from the claims I replied to in the first place.

Even if we are to believe that Iran supplied Shia groups with weapons, we would have to believe that the Shia groups were essentially doing most of the attacks on US force, which is hardly true.

wes · 11-01-2012 03:20PM

Iphonehelp wrote: »

Oh right. But the IRGC also train Hezbollah. So if thats the case then you must not believe that America were in anyway responsible for Guatamala, Nicaragua, Chile, El Salvador? Because otherwise you'd be a hypocrite.

You have a link to back up that claim that Iran is actually training Hezbollah? From a source, that isn't the Israeli and US government, who are hardly trust worthy in that regard.

KerranJast · 11-01-2012 03:24PM

wes wrote: »

The same US media that reported on Iraqi WMDs, and the a puppet regime that was dependant on the US for its existence. Sorry, but I don't quite believe it.

1. The Iraqi government were elected.
2. *Everyone* believed Saddam had WMDs. Even the UN inspectors. Hell he bragged about having them up to the invasion. The only argument before the invasion in 2003 was whether to give the inspectors more time or not.
The singular problem was that all the main intelligence agencies (included in France and Germany who were against the invasion at the time) were being fed biased information from anti-Saddam contacts inside the country.
It was a massive intelligence failure no doubt.

wes wrote: »

Also, what about all the other groups who killed US marines etc, its rather ridiculous to soley blame Iran, which is what the post I replied to basically did, when they said 1000s of deaths.

Who's solely blaming Iran? I said they (or rather factions inside Iran, Quds force, Revolutionary Guard etc) were supply Shia factions in Iraq with weapons and IEDs which were killing NATO troops. I never said they were responsible for *all* Coalition deaths.

wes wrote: »

The post I replied to said that, 1000's of Israeli and US deaths, which is clearly fiction, even if we are to believe that Iran supplied Shia groups with weapons, we would have to believe that the Shia groups were essentially doing most of the attacks on US force, which is hardly true.

Again you're either misquoting me or replying to my posts when you should be replying to someone elses.

Wompa1 · 11-01-2012 03:27PM

I guess if Ron Paul gets presidency with his supposed agenda it would appease people on Boards as America would become more isolationist. Obama has already started initiatives to get American companies to try and bring jobs back to America so lets see how we do without American multi-nationals in Ireland and less exporting to them. At least we'll be free from the current tyranny right? Maybe the Iranian multi-nationals will come in and give us jobs building their nukes for them.

Iphonehelp · 11-01-2012 03:27PM

wes wrote: »

So Iran were directly responsible for all of those acts of terrorism, and are apparently in full control of both Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, and they are not themselves indepedent actors. Sorry, but trying to blame Iran on anything and everything is naive, and the US pull the same crap against Iraq in regard to 9/11 and guess what it was a lie.

Considering Iran trained the Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah, supplies them with weapons, logistics and explosives to carry out the attacks then yes I do hold them directly responsible.

Just, because you claim everyone know the ISI and military are in control, doesn't make it so.

How about Pakistan's own government?

''ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Dec. 22 2011 (UPI) -- The Pakistani Ministry of Defense told the country's highest court it had no operational control over the military or the country's intelligence agency.

The federal government, through the Ministry of Defense, conceded before the Supreme Court that it had no operational control over the armed forces as well as the Inter-Services Intelligence," the report read. "A one-page reply by the Defense Ministry said it was not in a position to submit any reply on behalf of the armed forces and the ISI.''

The ISI killing a Prime Minister in the past, doesn't mean there in control today.......

Considering no one has been prosecuted it means that Pakistani leaders are well aware that they can be killed if they stray.

Oh please, you insist that Iran killed 1000s or US marines in Iraq, and 1000s of Isarel soliders, when they did not such thing, and then claim that the military is still in power in Pakistan, on the basis that everyone knows. Sorry, but you making stuff up, and are engaging in hyperbole, blaming Iran on and anything and everything that you can. I am not being naive not trusting someone engaging in fiction and hyperbole on a message board.

241 US Marines killed in Beirut barack bombing, 58 US killed in Beirut embassy bombings, 29 Israelis killed in embassy bombing, 95 Israelis killed in Argentina bombing, 19 US marines killed in Khobar bombing, 150 Israeli soldiers killed in Lebannon by Hezbollah.

How many US soldiers were killed in Iraq by the Iranian funded and backed Al-Sadr brigade? Hundreds is the answer. How many Israeli soldiers were killed by the Iranian trained Hezbollah?

Yep, Iran has been responsible for thousands of deaths of Israeli and US soldiers.

Oh please, pointing out that the US lies through its teeth is hardly being Anti-American, due to fact that they lie through there teeth and have done so repeatedly.

Where did I say the US didnt lie? You seem to think that Iran has no terrorist proxies. Big LOL to that.

Oh please, everyone has a bias, and to deny it is silly imho.

I dont, certainly not on this issue. For example I think Israeli is completely in the wrong in Palestine and that America was wrong for Guantanamo. I feel the Iraq invasion was wrong. But I deal with FACTS you deal with your anti-american BIAS. thats the difference. Also you are uneducated about this subject as is clear from your posts so far.

Chuck Stone · 11-01-2012 03:31PM

KerranJast wrote: »

2. *Everyone* believed Saddam had WMDs.

If by *Everyone* you mean the 'sexed up' US and UK intelligence, much of which was based on the lies of an Iraqi defector, then maybe that is correct. But then you should not say *Everyone*

Even the UN inspectors.

Proof?

Iphonehelp · 11-01-2012 03:31PM

wes wrote: »

You have a link to back up that claim that Iran is actually training Hezbollah? From a source, that isn't the Israeli and US government, who are hardly trust worthy in that regard.

Are you actually serious? Hezbollah were set up during the Ayatollah revolution in Iran! Read up on Lebannon. The politicians in Lebannon consistently condemn Iran's involvement in the country through Hezbollah.

God, Im done here you literally dont know anything. Good luck with that. Argentina courts have also recently found that IRGC was responsible through its proxies for the bombing there.

IvySlayer · 11-01-2012 03:34PM

Iphonehelp wrote: »

Considering Iran trained the Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah, supplies them with weapons, logistics and explosives to carry out the attacks then yes I do hold them directly responsible.

How about Pakistan's own government?

''ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Dec. 22 2011 (UPI) -- The Pakistani Ministry of Defense told the country's highest court it had no operational control over the military or the country's intelligence agency.

The federal government, through the Ministry of Defense, conceded before the Supreme Court that it had no operational control over the armed forces as well as the Inter-Services Intelligence," the report read. "A one-page reply by the Defense Ministry said it was not in a position to submit any reply on behalf of the armed forces and the ISI.''

Considering no one has been prosecuted it means that Pakistani leaders are well aware that they can be killed if they stray.

241 US Marines killed in Beirut barack bombing, 58 US killed in Beirut embassy bombings, 29 Israelis killed in embassy bombing, 95 Israelis killed in Argentina bombing, 19 US marines killed in Khobar bombing, 150 Israeli soldiers killed in Lebannon by Hezbollah.

How many US soldiers were killed in Iraq by the Iranian funded and backed Al-Sadr brigade? Hundreds is the answer. How many Israeli soldiers were killed by the Iranian trained Hezbollah?

Yep, Iran has been responsible for thousands of deaths of Israeli and US soldiers.

Saudi Arabians kill more Americans than Iranians.

Biggins · 11-01-2012 03:36PM

KerranJast wrote: »

...I don't trust large factions within Iran with not passing nuclear material to terrorists groups however.

That is for me - and I suspect many others - the MOST important bit!
I was waiting till someone brought it up.

Lets be as honest as we can here.

1. Iran is NOT in all probability not going to start firing nuclear missiles of any range (even if they did have them) for they know (if they have ANY kop-on) that their country would be destroyed in 24 hours by retaliatory similar action from one or many opposing sides.

2. Like it or not - there is an extreme probability that factions in Iran has been helping others with similar ideology or outsiders (the enemy of my enemy could be my friend?) to be equipped with arms and ground-mines etc already.

3. A smuggled in dirty-bomb would be far easier to let off with less ramifications (due to lack of clear quick proof, etc in order to counter-react) and would see possibly less people killed in the country that the bombers might be from.

4. Britain, USA and Russia alone, have all said at some recent stage - its not a case of "IF..." but "WHEN..." one of these things might be let off - so they fear for the worse.

5. Given the current instability in a number of surrounding states in the Arab region - no one is sure 100% what can happen politically and/or religiously in such countries that appear a lot of the time, to be constantly also roaring from podiums about "down with the capitalist imperialists" or words to that effect, etc

6. NO ONE on ANY side has clean hands. All in some way, have possible innocent blood on their 'hands'.

7. It should be pointed out that the reason for America letting off two nuclear bombs, was connected to one specific reason.
That reason alone today, no longer might exist due to the invention of modern technology.
Yes, America under one man and his motivations, the pressure he was under at his time and what he was facing then, allowed two nukes to be exploded - but that was then - this is now and a lot has changed in awareness of the cost of today firing such things, a lot has changed in the tactics of war and how some methods are just realistically not workable and how the guarantee of M.A.D. is acknowledged around the world and rightly feared.

Nodin · 11-01-2012 03:38PM

KerranJast wrote: »

............
2. *Everyone* believed Saddam had WMDs. Even the UN inspectors. Hell he bragged about having them up to the invasion. The only argument before the invasion in 2003 was whether to give the inspectors more time or not.
The singular problem was that all the main intelligence agencies (included in France and Germany who were against the invasion at the time) were being fed biased information from anti-Saddam contacts inside the country.
It was a massive intelligence failure no doubt.

.........

If that was the case why did Cheney set up an alternative intelligence office to bypass the CIA?

Iphonehelp · 11-01-2012 03:39PM

IvySlayer wrote: »

Saudi Arabians kill more Americans than Iranians.

Saudi backed idealogy does. I really don't see how that is relevant here though. The Saudi government doesn't back terrorist organizations who kill Americans, it backs Wahhabis that will ensure that the Al-Saud family remain in power. The wahhabis produce a form of Islam that produces an awful lot of extremists but Saudi Arabia is trying to promote a more moderate brand after they themselves became targets.

Although I dont see how this is relevant here. The discussion is about Iran.

IvySlayer · 11-01-2012 03:39PM

Mutual Assured Destruction.

This is why America/Russia wouldn't fire nukes one ach others during the Cod War...but a suicide bomber won't care about any of that. I would be uncomfortable with Iran producing nuclear weapons/materials if they would sell it.

Jaafa · 11-01-2012 03:40PM

wes wrote: »

You have a link to back up that claim that Iran is actually training Hezbollah? From a source, that isn't the Israeli and US government, who are hardly trust worthy in that regard.

In fairness wes, I'm from Lebanon and everyone knows Iranian funds and once trained Hizbollah. However the majority don't mind as the majority support or don't have a particular problem with Hizbollah. Hence why Lebanon always backs Iran in the UN.

wes · 11-01-2012 03:42PM

KerranJast wrote: »

1. The Iraqi government were elected.

Sure, and the Iraqi government is trying to have other political leaders arrested on trumped up charges.

KerranJast wrote: »

2. *Everyone* believed Saddam had WMDs.

Yes, due to lies from the US and UK governments. Stuff like the dodgy dossier come to mind. Also, the invasion was done without UN sanction, so I don't think everyone was completley convinced of such a weapons program.

KerranJast wrote: »

Again you're either misquoting me or replying to my posts when you should be replying to someone elses.

I never said you said any of that. You jumped in the middle of an argument with someone else, when you directly replied to me. My point were specifically made against what someone else said, and not what you said. Again, someone else who I was replying to made those claims, and my replies were in regards to that. Ignoring the context of why I said what I said, is making things confusing.

KerranJast · 11-01-2012 03:42PM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

If by *Everyone* you mean the 'sexed up' US and UK intelligence, much of which was based on the lies of an Iraqi defector, then maybe that is correct. But then you should not say *Everyone*

Everyone= NATO, UN Inspectors, hell even the Russians and Chinese didn't dispute that Saddam probably had remnants of his stockpiles somewhere. You have to remember he was using the supposed existance of WMDs as a deterrent to the US deposing him. Saddam was either delusional or the worlds highest stake poker bluffer.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Proof?

http://articles.cnn.com/2003-01-27/us/sprj.irq.blix.report_1_iraqi-scientist-hans-blix-iraqi-documents?_s=PM:US

I'm not going to spend my time posting reams of articles from 2003 but the main point of disagreement after UN Resolution 1441 was not whether Iraq had WMDs or not but whether the inspectors should be given more time to find them as it was assumed by most parties at the UN (including a lot of Saddam's Arab neighbours) that they were in the country somewhere.

I have my own disagreements with the decision to invade, the amount of forces deployed to do the job properly and the subsequent monumental mess the Coalition made of the transition but you can't rewrite history to suit your agenda.

Iphonehelp · 11-01-2012 03:42PM

Jaafa wrote: »

In fairness wes, I'm from Lebanon and everyone knows Iranian funds and once trained Hizbollah. However the majority don't mind as the majority support or don't have a particular problem with Hizbollah. Hence why Lebanon always backs Iran in the UN.

I genuinely couldn't believe that he didnt know that. I thought he might have been knowledgable but just completely misguided by his bias but after that comment I don't think I'll engage with him again tbh.

Nuclear Scientist in Iran? You won't live too long!

Comments