BF2S Forums My thoughts on Iran

Alexanderthegrape wrote:

It eases the mind Slinga.
I don't really see any way but conflict until religion is removed from the equation.
Can it be that until aliens arrive and rearrange our view of God and the Universe there is no hope?

Thats exactly how I feel. Once you get rid of all the religious ideas and humbug. Things will be a whole lot easier to take care of.  In these kinds of situations, religion really creates a lot of issues. +1 to you!

Religion is a driving force behind this issue.  Not because everyone involved are religious zealots, but because religious zealots are exactly that: zealots.  People with open minds are much more willing to compromise and more tolerant.  I seriously doubt the head of the government (Ahmadinejad) really cares that much about Israel.  What he does care about are the radical Islam clerics that have a great amount of influence over the public, which in turn means the government.  The theocracy that Iran has for their government is the reason that Iran is such a hardline extremist country.  The President is more of a figurehead than anything else, because he has to pander to the Clerical Court.  Take away the Theocratic government of Iran, and you take away the religious issue.  A lot easier said than done.

One reason Arabs dislike Israel (and in turn Jews) is because of the aggression and disregard for human life that the Israeli government has shown to Arabs.  But it works both ways.  The governments of Iran and Israel play off each other, and the public listens, for the most part.

Any well-informed person knows already that Iran fully supports Hezbollah.  That is one reason why the US still has economic sanctions against Iran.  Iran is no doubt a player in these attacks against Israel out of Lebanon.  Iran gives them financial and logistic support, but most likely does not tell them what to attack and why.  So what do you do?  Cutting off financial support is not working, as the Iranian government just goes elsewhere for aid.  Applying political pressure works to a small extent, but I think it would be unrealistic to think that political pressure alone would get Iran to stop providing support to terrorist networks.  However, if the international community, including Arab states and a Palestinian majority, were to apply all and any pressure they could (political, social, and economic) things might start getting better in regards to Iran.  But I believe we are still a long way from that point.  The best expediant solution would be to immediately call for a cease-fire between Hezbollah and Israel.  If they don't want to agree, create a buffer zone encompassing southern Hezbollah controlled Lebanon, and let them fight.  If they cannot agree on any type of peaceful resolution, who are we to stop them from fighting.

JahManRed wrote:

mjgunner wrote:

first and foremost, i join the corp so i could go to war and fight for my country, but when your HERE AND THERE in different countries trying to do ur best so that no named ppl can have freedom, then off goes another war, it gets kinda old, agree to disagree? i dunno about any one else in this froum but i have served the usmc for 6 years, and it seems like all i do is fight for my life. and quite frankly the american ppl have nothing to worry about for the next year or so, than its surrpose to get nasty!!!! say what u wanna say about me, ur oppinon doesnt mean shit, thats why i fight for ur freedom of speech, and usually ppl in internet chat fourms not have no say in what goes on anywhere in the stand for freedom, simpley cause they arent the protector, or the fighter, JUST THE ABUSER.





and any one that thinks they can tear me down, just come on to jacksoniville nc, WHEN U MESS WITH A MARINE UR MESSING WITH THE LARGEST GANG IN AMERICA  u fucking squibs

Man you need to chill the fuck out!
I admire the fact that you are out there fighting for what you believe in and fight for your life. I know that men with there lives under threat become real close, real soon. I can understand why you are passionate. I would imagine 99% of the ppl on these forums would wish you the best in your future endeavors and hope you don't get a bullet. But you will find that roughly 50% of the ppl on these forums don't agree with your countries foreign policies. That is what we are debating. Do not misinterpreter an attack on your government as an attack on yourself, It ain't your fault that you are misinformed and controlled so much by your superiors, so much that you will believe every piece of propaganda fired at you by everything and everyone around you. Goes with being in the army I guess. Ive seen propaganda used my Pol I admire to ensnare young men, in my own country.

Now take a deep breath and try again please......

made no fucking sense?

ur gonna tell me cause ur from a different country u know how shit goes on here? like u really worry about not waking up in the morning, or killin 14 year old boys that have a weapon. COMBACT STRESS READ ABOUT IT. ive spent the last 3 of my birthdays and close to 4 christmas's in iraq, i damn sure dont need someone preaching to me telling me to calm down, i havent got a bullet because the way i am, yea me and my brother of the corp are close but how close can u get to someone when u dont know if they are gonna be here tom. im tired of catching fucking flak from ppl that have no right in the world to say shit about the USMC u  havent been thru half of what i have so just end the talk about my beliefs about my fucking country. cause quite frankly no one in this froum knows me or anything about me and if i dont post again u will just assume i was dead. if u wanna sit down and have a debate about my beliefs than do so

Last edited by mjgunner (2006-07-18 13:59:08)

Bubbalo wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Bubbalo I dont think Egypt will jump in.  Mubarek likes his power and hates the muslim brotherhood

That's my point: if Egypt jumps in, you can be sure everyone will.

Can you say WWIII, Newt did.

Bubbalo wrote:

a)  I meant the whole Middle East, not the whole world

b)  It could be (and has been, by a number of people) argued that WWIII has already been and gone, and we're in the throes of WWIV or WWV

ww3 hasnt began... its not the whole world fighting together... mainly america and england

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Anybody whos read a good amount of my post already probably knows how I feel towards Iran.  Honestly, what would the world do if there was irrefutible evidence of Iran being the major driving factor behind whats going on in Lebanon and Israel.


What should be done?  Nukes are out of the question.  I would never support a nuclear device being detonated in the middle east.  I feel strongly that other nations in the world should take the lead in dealing a new blow to terrorism in this region.  We all know if anything happens to Iran, oil is gonna rise. well its been 5 fucking days of the fight in Israel and Lebanon and oil is $80 barrel.  7 bucks up since last week. 


Im rambling, I gotta write an 8 page paper due tomorrow night, wtf am I doing checking through an internet forum.

i just wanna say that SCREW the president of Iran coz he is a treath against the whole world, he is ugly, looks like a dwarf with black hair, bomb his country coz they help Terror-organizations and that shit in Libanon and Syria. just bomb the place to hell and let him laugh when his country is gone. uncivilizited country!! stupid

Bubbalo wrote:

^^^^ He can't even spell and he called Iranians uncivilized

His first language probably isnt English.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/07/21/ … koppel.php



Gifts for Iran: Look what spreading democracy can do 
Ted Koppel The New York Times

Published: July 21, 2006


The United States is already at war with Iran; but for the time being the battle is being fought through surrogates.

That message was conveyed to me recently by a senior Jordanian intelligence official at his office in Amman. He spoke on the condition of anonymity, reflecting gloomily on the failure of the Bush administration's various policies in the region.

He reserved his greatest contempt for the policy of encouraging democratic reform. "For the Islamic fundamentalists, democratic reform is like toilet paper," he said. "You use it once and then you throw it away."

Lest the point elude me, the official conducted a brief tour of recent democratic highlights in the region. Gaza and the West Bank, where Hamas, spurned by the State Department as a terrorist organization, was voted into power last spring and now represents the Palestinian government; Lebanon, where Hezbollah, similarly rejected by the United States, has become the most influential political entity in the country; and, of course, Iraq, where the Shiite majority has now, through elections, gained political power commensurate with its numbers.

In each case, the intelligence officer reminded me, the beneficiary of those electoral victories is allied with and, to some degree, dependent upon Iran. Over the past couple of months alone, he told me, Hamas has received more than $300 million in cash, provided by Iran and funneled through Syria. He told me what has now become self-evident to the residents of Haifa: namely, that Iran has made longer-range and more powerful rockets and missiles available to Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. We'll come back to the subject of Iraq.

Only a couple of days after my meeting in Amman, I visited a then-superficially peaceful Lebanon, where I was introduced to Sheik Nabil Qaouk, the commander of Hezbollah forces in the southern part of the country. Qaouk, who also holds the title of general, wears the robes and turban of a Shiite religious leader. Indeed, he studied religion for more than 10 years in the Iranian holy city of Qom. He received his military training in Iran and his wife and six children still live there.

Qaouk portrayed Hezbollah as being a purely defensive, Lebanese entity. But the more than 12,000 missiles and rockets that the sheik said were in Hezbollah's arsenal were largely provided by Iran.

I asked about those newer, longer- range rockets mentioned by my Jordanian intelligence source. The sheik implicitly acknowledged their existence, but refused to talk about their capacities, with which the world has since become familiar. "Let our enemies worry," he said.

When Qaouk talked about Israel and Hezbollah, his organization's ambitions were not framed in purely defensive terms. There is only harmony between Hezbollah's endgame and the more provocative statements made over the past year by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's president. Both foresee the elimination of the Jewish state.

Are the Israelis overreacting in Lebanon? Perhaps they simply perceive their enemies' intentions with greater clarity than most. It is not the Lebanese who make the Israelis nervous, nor even Hezbollah. It is the puppet-masters in Tehran capitalizing on every opportunity that democratic reform presents. In the Palestinian territories, in Lebanon, in Egypt, should President Hosni Mubarak be so incautious as to hold a free election, it is the Islamists who benefit the most.

But Washington's greatest gift to the Iranians lies next door in Iraq. By removing Saddam Hussein, the United States endowed the majority Shiites with real power, while simultaneously tearing down the wall that had kept Iran in check.

According to the Jordanian intelligence officer, Iran is reminding America's traditional allies in the region that the United States has a track record of leaving its friends in the lurch - in Vietnam in the '70s, in Lebanon in the '80s, in Somalia in the '90s.

In his analysis, the implication that this decade may witness a precipitous American withdrawal from Iraq has begun to produce an inclination in the region toward appeasing Iran.

It is in Iraq, he told me, "where the United States and the coalition forces must confront the Iranians." He added, "You must build up your forces in Iraq and you must announce your intention to stay."

Sitting in his Amman office, he appeared to be a man of few illusions; so he did not make the recommendation with any great hope that his advice would be followed. But neither did he leave any doubts as to which country would benefit if that advice happened to be ignored.

Ted Koppel is a contributing columnist for The Times and the managing editor of the Discovery Channel.
The United States is already at war with Iran; but for the time being the battle is being fought through surrogates.

That message was conveyed to me recently by a senior Jordanian intelligence official at his office in Amman. He spoke on the condition of anonymity, reflecting gloomily on the failure of the Bush administration's various policies in the region.

He reserved his greatest contempt for the policy of encouraging democratic reform. "For the Islamic fundamentalists, democratic reform is like toilet paper," he said. "You use it once and then you throw it away."

Lest the point elude me, the official conducted a brief tour of recent democratic highlights in the region. Gaza and the West Bank, where Hamas, spurned by the State Department as a terrorist organization, was voted into power last spring and now represents the Palestinian government; Lebanon, where Hezbollah, similarly rejected by the United States, has become the most influential political entity in the country; and, of course, Iraq, where the Shiite majority has now, through elections, gained political power commensurate with its numbers.

In each case, the intelligence officer reminded me, the beneficiary of those electoral victories is allied with and, to some degree, dependent upon Iran. Over the past couple of months alone, he told me, Hamas has received more than $300 million in cash, provided by Iran and funneled through Syria. He told me what has now become self-evident to the residents of Haifa: namely, that Iran has made longer-range and more powerful rockets and missiles available to Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. We'll come back to the subject of Iraq.

Only a couple of days after my meeting in Amman, I visited a then-superficially peaceful Lebanon, where I was introduced to Sheik Nabil Qaouk, the commander of Hezbollah forces in the southern part of the country. Qaouk, who also holds the title of general, wears the robes and turban of a Shiite religious leader. Indeed, he studied religion for more than 10 years in the Iranian holy city of Qom. He received his military training in Iran and his wife and six children still live there.

Qaouk portrayed Hezbollah as being a purely defensive, Lebanese entity. But the more than 12,000 missiles and rockets that the sheik said were in Hezbollah's arsenal were largely provided by Iran.

I asked about those newer, longer- range rockets mentioned by my Jordanian intelligence source. The sheik implicitly acknowledged their existence, but refused to talk about their capacities, with which the world has since become familiar. "Let our enemies worry," he said.

When Qaouk talked about Israel and Hezbollah, his organization's ambitions were not framed in purely defensive terms. There is only harmony between Hezbollah's endgame and the more provocative statements made over the past year by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's president. Both foresee the elimination of the Jewish state.

Are the Israelis overreacting in Lebanon? Perhaps they simply perceive their enemies' intentions with greater clarity than most. It is not the Lebanese who make the Israelis nervous, nor even Hezbollah. It is the puppet-masters in Tehran capitalizing on every opportunity that democratic reform presents. In the Palestinian territories, in Lebanon, in Egypt, should President Hosni Mubarak be so incautious as to hold a free election, it is the Islamists who benefit the most.

But Washington's greatest gift to the Iranians lies next door in Iraq. By removing Saddam Hussein, the United States endowed the majority Shiites with real power, while simultaneously tearing down the wall that had kept Iran in check.

According to the Jordanian intelligence officer, Iran is reminding America's traditional allies in the region that the United States has a track record of leaving its friends in the lurch - in Vietnam in the '70s, in Lebanon in the '80s, in Somalia in the '90s.

In his analysis, the implication that this decade may witness a precipitous American withdrawal from Iraq has begun to produce an inclination in the region toward appeasing Iran.

It is in Iraq, he told me, "where the United States and the coalition forces must confront the Iranians." He added, "You must build up your forces in Iraq and you must announce your intention to stay."

Sitting in his Amman office, he appeared to be a man of few illusions; so he did not make the recommendation with any great hope that his advice would be followed. But neither did he leave any doubts as to which country would benefit if that advice happened to be ignored.

Ted Koppel is a contributing columnist for The Times and the managing editor of the Discovery Channel.

Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2006-07-21 21:36:40)