Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

[Eddo211]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

I would have thought just the constant threat of being attacked would be enough to try and acquire
the ultimate defence weapon.

In both Iraq and Libya the first stage was to eliminate any (possibility of a) threat of nuclear capability
while they were being outmanoeuvred and ultimately destroyed.

On the other hand despite flirting with the idea of regime change in North Korea, every time they back off.

Yes, in fact Iran has shown much tolerance.....she is surrounded by Nukes and being threatened to be bombed back to stone age. They have send no troops to any country and have not attacked anyone in 300 years.

Mos:
in regards to Israel not being critisized you are right......but I have a feeling this time they will not get away with it as easy.

[Mos]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Mos:
in regards to Israel not being critisized you are right......but I have a feeling this time they will not get away with it as easy.

And it's not like Israel is very popular around the world. In fact, it's a headache for most governments, including its allies, and the only reason they don't also criticise Israel is special interests. Israel is hypochondriac and paranoid. Though J3ws in general are like that also. Just read about the security on El Al airlines, the national airline of Israel, which is regarded as toughest airline security in world.

[arakeretzig]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

They have send no troops to any country and have not attacked anyone in 300 years.

What are you talking about? they've sent IRGC to help hizbullah several times, last example was in 2006 war, sent them to syria too, They've proxies all over Iraq, They have sent god knows how many missles to hamas, hizbullah and syria. They're a known terrorist supporter, how is that not "attacking anyone" ?

[retro]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

lol this is great. It shows even the very people that keep Israel in power hate Israel and only do it because they have to in order to be elected.

Well Sarkozy is a Jooz himself. However the bean counter Netanyahu is certainly a prevaricator and he is hardly especially personable. As for Obama, 87% of American Joozs voted for him and whilst he is lazy he can be counted upon to do what his masters tell him.

[retro]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

And it's not like Israel is very popular around the world. In fact, it's a headache for most governments, including its allies, and the only reason they don't also criticise Israel is special interests. Israel is hypochondriac and paranoid. Though J3ws in general are like that also. Just read about the security on El Al airlines, the national airline of Israel, which is regarded as toughest airline security in world.

That crowd are a pain in the ass.

Have you seen the film “Defamation” by Yoav Shamir?

[Eddo211]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

What are you talking about? they've sent IRGC to help hizbullah several times, last example was in 2006 war, sent them to syria too,

Iran is a regional power, a very strong regional power feared by many Arab states and Israelis, the temporary troops it might send is to protect its interests and influence in the area its nothing compared to her enemies built up in the area.

They've proxies all over Iraq, They have sent god knows how many missles to hamas, hizbullah and syria. They're a known terrorist supporter, how is that not "attacking anyone" ?

So by your logic Iran is a supporter of terrorists but when Israel supports/influenced PJAK again Iran it is not. Tell me, what is the difference between Iran helping Hezbollah or its proxies in Iraq compared to US support of Taliban/Al Qaeda during Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

Iran has been winning against the West since Ayatollah Khomenie brought the revolution.....there is no military solution to Iran. The only way is restore good relations and eventually the hardliners will not be needed anymore and the moderates will come to power. The more threats they put against Iran, the less chance of any green revolution or a friendlier Iranian Government. The West must know this, or they can wait until the current supream leader dies of old age, maybe the replacement will be more moderate (don't count on it).

Also consider this as an Armenian....if Iran looses, we loose badly. Northern Iran could be over runned by Turks and Azeris.

[Mher]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

What are you talking about? they've sent IRGC to help hizbullah several times, last example was in 2006 war, sent them to syria too, They've proxies all over Iraq, They have sent god knows how many missles to hamas, hizbullah and syria. They're a known terrorist supporter, how is that not "attacking anyone" ?

As Eddo said, the word terrorist is just a term used to label non-governmental organizations that don't cooperate with America and Israel, It means nothing. The Contras who were supported by the Reagan administration were responsible for the death of 40,000 people and all sorts of appalling human rights violations in the 1980's in Nicaragua. Yet you don't here much about that. Instead they were called freedom fighters. Why? Because they were willing to support Americas policies. Hell, the man you see in my avatar was listed as a terrorist by America. As far as I'm concerned, it's a complement to get that label.

[Mher]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Iran has been winning against the West since Ayatollah Khomenie brought the revolution.....there is no military solution to Iran. The only way is restore good relations and eventually the hardliners will not be needed anymore and the moderates will come to power. The more threats they put against Iran, the less chance of any green revolution or a friendlier Iranian Government. The West must know this, or they can wait until the current supream leader dies of old age, maybe the replacement will be more moderate (don't count on it).

Also consider this as an Armenian....if Iran looses, we loose badly. Northern Iran could be over runned by Turks and Azeris.

You can argue the Iraq war that was kept up for 8 years by the support of the U.S was the reason the mullas are in power right now. My dad, who fought in the war would tell me that without the war, the mullas would have been overthrown in the early 1980's as they were never meant to come to power. But with the war, they had an excuse to keep the masses quite in the name of patriotism until they were entrenched in power.

And to add to the earlier comment, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran and the Kurds causing untold amounts of suffering, but the U.S prevented the UN from speaking of this, then 15 years later, they used that excuse to invade Iraq. I mean really, and they dare to label Iran as dangerous and as terrorists?

[Mos]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

maybe they are getting a reality check:

A leading Israeli investment firm said on Thursday any military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities would exact an economic price too high for the world to accept, and as a result, it would likely acquiesce to a nuclear Iran.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/10/us-iran-nuclear-israel-economy-idUSTRE7A93W920111110

[Mher]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

9 November 2011 Last updated at 14:45 ET
Russia rules out new Iran sanctions over nuclear report

Russia has ruled out supporting fresh sanctions against Iran, despite a UN report that says Tehran may be trying to develop nuclear weapons.

Britain, France and the US all said they would pursue new sanctions against Iran in the wake of the IAEA report.

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu said the report showed the need for the world to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons.

The US and its allies suspect Iran of trying to develop a nuclear bomb, which Tehran denies.

The Iranian government insists that its nuclear programme is for peaceful means.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov told Interfax news agency that extra sanctions "will be seen in the international community as an instrument for regime change in Iran".

"That approach is unacceptable to us, and the Russian side does not intend to consider such proposals."

The Russian foreign ministry later issued another statement saying that the report "does not contain fundamentally new information".

However, Mr Netanyahu accused Iran of endangering world peace.

"The significance of the report is that the international community must bring about the cessation of Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons which endanger the peace of the world and of the Middle East," he said in a statement.

"The IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] report corroborates the position of the international community, and of Israel that Iran is developing nuclear weapons," Mr Netanyahu added.

The IAEA said it had information indicating Iran had carried out tests "relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device".

The report - published on the Institute for Science and International Security website - says the research includes computer models that could only be used to develop a nuclear bomb trigger.

It documents alleged Iranian work on the kind of implosion device that would be needed to detonate a nuclear weapon.

On Wednesday, a defiant Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said his country would not budge "one iota" from its nuclear programme.

He said the report was based on "empty claims" provided by the US.

"Why do you damage the [UN] agency's dignity because of America's invalid claims?" he said in a televised speech.

Addressing the US he added: "We will not build two bombs in the face of your 20,000. We will develop something that you cannot respond to, which is ethics, humanity, solidarity and justice.

"You should know that no enemy of the Iranian people has ever tasted victory."
'Additional pressure'

Britain and France voiced their "utmost concern regarding the military dimension to Iran's nuclear programme in the light of ... [the] IAEA report".

In a joint statement, the two governments "made clear their determination to seek new powerful sanctions if Iran refuses to cooperate".

"Our goal remains to ensure that Iran fully adheres to its international obligations," it added.

Earlier, French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said the seriousness of the report warranted a meeting of the UN Security Council.

"If Iran refuses to conform to the demands of the international community and refuses any serious co-operation, we stand ready to adopt, with other willing countries, sanctions on an unprecedented scale," he told French radio.

A senior US official said Washington would consult with partners on "additional" pressure and sanctions on Tehran.

"We don't take anything off the table when we look at sanctions. We believe there is a broad spectrum of action we could take," the official said, quoted by AFP news agency.

The EU said the report "seriously aggravates" existing concerns.

"Overall these findings strongly indicate the existence of a fully-fledged nuclear weapons development programme in Iran," said a spokeswoman for EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton.

Baroness Ashton represents six world powers - the UK, China, France, Germany, Russia and the US - in stalled negotiations with Iran over its uranium enrichment programme.

The BBC's Kim Ghattas in Washington says China is also unlikely to support further sanctions against Iran.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15659311