Next stop Iran..watch the falling bombs....KaahPowww

[Cheddar]

For the last week the has been sociopolitical protest and violence in Iran and by Iranians (specifically in Europe).
Now your man W is starting his WMD Iran sh*t.. (http://www.rense.com/general38/mustss.htm)

It seems as though we are taking the Mid East route in finding enemies..Create social problems, like there are defiant factions @ work...for another month call them terrorists until the world lemmings have it set in stone...then go in and take over...
REAL SIMPLE.

[Jolyon]

http://www.newstatesman.co.uk/nscoverstory.htm

[Cheddar]

That was deep as well.

[mdpm99]

The admistration is starting to use the same "key"
words they used with Iraq......

d

[jpsf]

it seems that it would be a hard sell. BushCo definately has it planned, but all his former arguements for war in Iraq fell through, so you'd think he couldn't get away with waging another war. but to me the most disturbing concept is that although his scandal has even made mainstream media, his popularity (approval rating) is still outstandingly high (i think around 70%). i think BushCo is just going to do what they can get away with.

Bush is a war criminal and should be impeached. I know i'm preaching to the choir but did you know that Iraq was one of the only mid-east countries where women could go to college or leave the country without a man's permission? now the women there can't go outside without being protected by men with guns. so much for freedom.

[danny webb]

I was trying to find the poll from yesterday (failed however), I think it was a poll of Europe that said 2/3's of Europe no longer trusts Bush, & it's all down to Iraq. (reported on yesterdays morning news in the UK)

Those of you with the power just get the monkey boy outta the Whitehouse.

[Cheddar]

Originally posted by danny webb:
I was trying to find the poll from yesterday (failed however), I think it was a poll of Europe that said 2/3's of Europe no longer trusts Bush, & it's all down to Iraq. (reported on yesterdays morning news in the UK)

Those of you with the power just get the monkey boy outta the Whitehouse. I think Americans should be concerned. Concerned about their safety. This one will take more (non)proof than Iraq. Expect the worst...because that is what it will take for you & I to go crawling to the Admin for safety. I dont believe that the rich within the Admin as well as on the periphery give a hoot about common folk.

[jpsf]

Originally posted by danny webb:
I was trying to find the poll from yesterday (failed however), I think it was a poll of Europe that said 2/3's of Europe no longer trusts Bush, & it's all down to Iraq. (reported on yesterdays morning news in the UK)

Those of you with the power just get the monkey boy outta the Whitehouse. Leave it to Bush to turn world oppinion from compassion and sypathy (because of 9/11) to disgust (because of warmongering). graemlins/jpshakehead.gif

[lyot]

after having invaded Irak, the stupidest thing BushCo could do is neglect Iran and let those suckers build their WMD ..Now he's got his army in there, it would be strategical nonsense to let the Iranese go ahead in the pursuit of nuclear weapons. In that case, the Iraq invasion would have been totally useless..(i ain't saying that it's a good deal at the moment, mind you..) But concluding on this stage that the pressure you now see being put on Iran is going to lead to another war is just premature.

[jpsf]

Originally posted by lyot:
after having invaded Irak, the stupidest thing BushCo could do is neglect Iran and let those suckers build their WMD ..Now he's got his army in there, it would be strategical nonsense to let the Iranese go ahead in the pursuit of nuclear weapons. In that case, the Iraq invasion would have been totally useless..(i ain't saying that it's a good deal at the moment, mind you..) But concluding on this stage that the pressure you now see being put on Iran is going to lead to another war is just premature. let those suckers build their WMD? i'm not sure if you're kidding or not. the US has caused more mass distruction than any of these countries, regaurdless of their means. face it, there is not a shred of evidence that any of these countries own any WMD. haven't you heard? you've been lied to.

i don't think that it is premature to discuss the propaganda advancements of BushCo. again, they are trying to sell their agenda to the people. they need the people's stamp of approval because it is the people's sons and daughters who are going to fight the war.

plain and simple...this is imperialism. unless you are one of the few owners (2%?) of the "company store" i cannot see any rational way you can condone it. it is detrimental to humanity.

but i think your post was sarcasm?

[lyot]

Originally posted by jpsf:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by lyot:
after having invaded Irak, the stupidest thing BushCo could do is neglect Iran and let those suckers build their WMD ..Now he's got his army in there, it would be strategical nonsense to let the Iranese go ahead in the pursuit of nuclear weapons. In that case, the Iraq invasion would have been totally useless..(i ain't saying that it's a good deal at the moment, mind you..) But concluding on this stage that the pressure you now see being put on Iran is going to lead to another war is just premature. let those suckers build their WMD? i'm not sure if you're kidding or not. the US has caused more mass distruction than any of these countries, regaurdless of their means. face it, there is not a shred of evidence that any of these countries own any WMD. haven't you heard? you've been lied to.

i don't think that it is premature to discuss the propaganda advancements of BushCo. again, they are trying to sell their agenda to the people. they need the people's stamp of approval because it is the people's sons and daughters who are going to fight the war.

plain and simple...this is imperialism. unless you are one of the few owners (2%?) of the "company store" i cannot see any rational way you can condone it. it is detrimental to humanity.

but i think your post was sarcasm? </font>[/QUOTE]hey jpsf,

no, it was not meant in a sarcastic way.

mind you, i'm just stating what I think is logical from the US strategical position..Don't be misled and think that I agree with everything your governement does in the Middle East..

First of all, I didn't say that Iran owns WMD on this very moment.. I think it certainly does not. But what is critical is that the US can not , after waging war in Iraq, let Iran get into 'WMD building mode' ..I think there is genuine concern that Iran is willing to go down that road . This is the impression i have after reading several reports (and no, it's not CNN / Fox based media who tell me this). The reason why the US can not let this happen is that the whole Iraqi war is waged out of grand strategy reasons (basically, re-shaping of the whole region). Iran is one essential part of the big game. Letting it acquire WMD would be a very serious blowback to the US campaign, which is far from finished..

By the way, the Iranian rationale is quite logical : as soon as they get WMD, they are more or less safe from serious US interference in their policies.

My personal opinion is that WMD was critical to US's symbolism in the whole Iraq war, yet it was only marginal to it's substance. Likewise, it's not that Iran's WMD is essential as such, but it's the war on terrorism..


greetings,

[jpsf]

if i was a 3rd world country, i would want to aquire WMD. not to do any mass destruction, but it is essential for bargining power. have you seen the movie Dr. Strangelove? "the thing about the doomsday device is that it isn't effective unless you tell people about it." if you haven't seen it, go rent it now. absolutely brilliant and funny.

yes, stratigically, now would be the time for the US to strike. but the US is not attacking because of terrorism or WMD. i think it is part of a bigger ploy for world domination. kill your enemies, take their resources, set up your bases near the next target. neither iran or iraq were involved with 9/11. how does the US justify attacking another country for having WMD when the US is one of the few countries to actually use WMD.

on a personal level, the whole thing is very sad. my girlfriend is from iran and she has alot of relatives still there. many people will die.

mind you, when the Ayatollah took over in iran he had something like 30,000 people executed his first week. many people in iran HATE the hardcord religious government that has taken over power, but as ghandi said, he was not interested in ousting one currupt government for another. the truth is a revolution that is not by the people will not be for the people. the US will not improve the quality of life, rather they will push the country into further chaos and destruction.

the question is what give the US the right to destroy other civilizations? the answer is might is right. they do it because they can. but the irony is that the US is arguably the biggest terrorist nation in the world today.

and no one is doing anything to stop it.

[Moksha]

Election year coming up...time for a new war before people's stunted memories start forgetting the "support our troops" mantra. :rolleyes:

[ June 19, 2003, 05:05 PM: Message edited by: Orion ]

[lyot]

Originally posted by jpsf:
if i was a 3rd world country, i would want to aquire WMD. not to do any mass destruction, but it is essential for bargining power. have you seen the movie Dr. Strangelove? "the thing about the doomsday device is that it isn't effective unless you tell people about it." if you haven't seen it, go rent it now. absolutely brilliant and funny.i've seen it.. smile.gif I concurr with what you write there about bargaining power.. If your goal is total re-shaping of the Middle East, you can not allow Iran to become a nuclear power, because in that case, you can forget your whole re-shaping idea. Also, if you want to fight terrorism in particular, you are not at all blessed with a nuclear Iran..This is why I think the US will do anything to stop Iran from achieving WMD.



yes, stratigically, now would be the time for the US to strike. but the US is not attacking because of terrorism or WMD. i think it is part of a bigger ploy for world domination. kill your enemies, take their resources, set up your bases near the next target. neither iran or iraq were involved with 9/11. how does the US justify attacking another country for having WMD when the US is one of the few countries to actually use WMD.
I concurr the goal is world domination. In a sense, it's a kind of 21th century kind of colonilazation. Democracy is the new model, whereas in the past tribalisation, tyranny, religious fundamentalism were all seen as 'models' that could saveguard US'interest. Now, that time is over, and democracy is the new key word. It's not out of greed as such, but because the BushCo thinks going in the hard way is the only option they have to secure their vital interests in the longer run (cf. terrorism problem). The paradigm they use is in essence as simple as can be : in the contemporary anarchaic world, you will not get anything if you do not show your power and if people do not perceive you as being strongest.It's very basic real politics that form the basis of his policy;



on a personal level, the whole thing is very sad. my girlfriend is from iran and she has alot of relatives still there. many people will die.

mind you, when the Ayatollah took over in iran he had something like 30,000 people executed his first week. many people in iran HATE the hardcord religious government that has taken over power, but as ghandi said, he was not interested in ousting one currupt government for another. the truth is a revolution that is not by the people will not be for the people. the US will not improve the quality of life, rather they will push the country into further chaos and destruction.
the question is what give the US the right to destroy other civilizations? the answer is might is right. they do it because they can. but the irony is that the US is arguably the biggest terrorist nation in the world today.

and no one is doing anything to stop it.


I think the US is on this moment not decided at all on going to war with Iran. On the longer run, it might be an option, of course. Undoubtfully, the US governemnt is now in a process of putting diplomatic pressure and probing what they can achieve by bullying the country. That might already be sufficient to get what they want. Irani leaders aren't suicidal neither.. (although, that could be said of Hussein too) . I hope the Iranian people take their fate in their own hands in the upcoming months. It's clear that the Islamic Revolution Model in Iran lies in shatters, but the political situation hasn't been adapted to that reality yet, on this very own moment.

Morally speaking you are right by the way. No one gives the US the right to intervene.. But even though i would like to see it different, I think that inter-state behavior can not be seen through the prism of morality totally. We are far from such a stance on this moment.

greetings

[jpsf]

i don't think democracy is the new model as you say. but then, i do not believe that democracy can coexists with capitalism. and therefor because of things like media domination and campaign contributions there is no democracy in america. of course, this is even more evident in the last election which was hijacked. not letting voters in to the polls and making illegal decisions as to the recount are just overt statements on the lack of democracy. not to mention the existence of an electoral college.

so no, i do not think the democracy is the current model. i think facism is (sometimes you can even here the euphamism "unilateralism"). i think (and this is very much influenced by chomsky) that people calling the shots think it would be easier under facism than democracy. you can see the the destruction of the american constition under the homeland security act and it's scary. individual rights, and the system of checks and balances on the government are being stripped away. key word here is disenfranchisement...slowly taking away what has been given to the people so that by the time things have gotten completely out of control the people are too poor to do anything about it.

this is what the US embargos on iraq have done to the iraqi people and this is what has been done to the black community in the US.

i'm not exactly sure what you mean by "I think that inter-state behavior can not be seen through the prism of morality totally" could you explain?